Ana Bolena

This is a strange piece: a tale of late-medieval English history, made at a German studio, entirely produced and acted by Germans (plus one Swiss and one Norwegian). While we in the UK are quite used to Hollywood rewriting our history for us (Braveheart etc.) we don't expect it so much from our fellow Europeans. But back in the early 1920s the UFA studio in Berlin really was the Hollywood of Europe, and for a few years they had the cinematic prowess to tell whatever stories they liked.

The director here is Ernst Lubitsch, who later became well-known in the US for his sophisticated comedies, and back then he was primarily a comedy director too. Anna Boleyn sees him turning his many comical tricks to more dramatic effect. A favourite comedy technique of his was the pull-back-and-reveal, as used for example in the opening shot of The Oyster Princess (1919) to show the bloated Oyster King surrounded by his lackeys. That shot is duplicated here with the introduction to Henry VIII, the look slightly more realistic but just as revelatory of the character. And although Lubitsch's pictures are in a very different category to those of his fellow UFA luminaries Fritz Lang and FW Murnau, he shares with those directors a fascination with décor and architecture. He constantly composes shots in depth, looking down corridors or through into larger rooms, from the early moments at the harbour where a set of doors are opened onto a bustling street, to the haunting final view of the scaffold. This was a common way of emphasising a large space before the days of widescreen, but it also gives the whole thing a sense of dread and inevitability, as characters advance upon us from the distance or spy on each other into a room beyond.

Lubitsch also reveals himself to be a master of pacing within a sequence. For example after a handful of busy shots at the spring festival the scene, everything becomes slow, simple and a shade darker as Anna encounters Norris on the outskirts of the merrymaking. Throughout the picture the director encourages steady, measured performances, making some scenes move at a glacial pace but endowing them with atmosphere and fascinating detail, such as the eerie depiction of Anna and Henry's wedding night. Playing the king, the talented Emil Jannings is uncharacteristically restrained, giving us a menacing, moody king very different to Charles Laughton's flamboyant 1933 portrayal. Henny Porten is not quite as good in the title role, her performance consisting mostly of looking extremely disturbed. However she is able to make a good account of herself in the final few minutes, when it really matters. An honourable mention must also go to Paul Biensfeldt as the jester, who makes the most of his close-ups and gives us a sincere and dignified portrayal of this deceptively simple character.

Anna Boleyn is all in all a rather stunning feature, and actually somewhat better than most of the historical dramas coming out of Hollywood at the time. It seems that, during this crucial period when the full-length motion picture was beginning to grow up and things like screen acting and set design were becoming serious professions, the Germans had the edge with their strong theatrical, operatic and artistic traditions, upon which their cinematic industry was built. Lubitsch, Jannings, and almost every other member of the crew and cast had a background on the stage, as oppose to the technicians and entrepreneurs who were running Hollywood. In Germany they knew very well how to tell stories visually, how to merge production design and performance into a complete form of expression, and they had a large pool of people with the necessary experience. The supremacy of UFA would continue until the Americans gained the technological edge in the late 20s (not to mention poaching much of Germany's creative talent), but during this short period it was the most competent movie-making factory in the world. Anna Boleyn is not even the finest output of its time and place, and yet is still made with that powerful blend of storytelling knowledge and cinematic inventiveness, and is a drama of considerable stature and elegance.

Continuing with the exclusive film programme about complicated relationships in some European courts, last night in the Schloss theatre was shown "Anna Boleyn", a film directed by the great Teutonic film director Herr Ernst Lubitsch. The film depicts the terrible story of the Queen consort of the British King Henry VIII. She was executed by her husband ( well, not exactly, the King ordered the executioners to do his dirty work) not to mention that this marriage caused an important political and religious historical event, the English Reformation.

The film stars Dame Henny Porten, Germany's first screen superstar during those early years and Herr Emil Jannings, Germany's fattest actor in that silent era. Both play their characters in a suitable way; Dame Porten as an innocent aristocrat who becomes progressively interested in the power that the court offers her and Herr Jannings as the unscrupulous, whimsical and womanizing British monarch, a character very suitable for this German actor who overacts appropriately, given the extravagance and excessive personality of the character himself.

In the early film period Herr Lubitsch was known for his outstanding costume films, colossal productions with big budgets ( "Anna Boleyn" cost about 8 million marks, a fortune even for this German count ) taking great care in magnificent decors as can be seen during the coronation procession in Westminster Abbey scene which employed 4.000 extras ( idle Germans of that time were used, causing revolutionary workers to create a fuss when German President Friedrich Ebert visited the set during filming).

Besides the spectacle, one of the most important aspect of this and every film of Herr Lubitsch, even during his epic period, is the complex relationship between the main characters. We experience a game of different interests, double meanings, and the complicated art of flirting but what is treated lightly at first ends in tragedy. The importance of those historical facts is brought to bear in an effective way but Lubitsch is really more interested in the changing relationship between Henry VIII and Anna Boleyn.

And now, if you'll allow me, I must temporarily take my leave because this German Count must take care that one of his fat and rich heiress doesn't lose her head for this Teutonic aristocrat.

Herr Graf Ferdinand Von Galitzien http://ferdinandvongalitzien.blogspot.com/

In those years when the cinema had no voice it was truly an international medium. Stories from other lands could be brought to the screen by the movie industry of another country. One of Greta Garbo's sound films for MGM had her playing an English lady. And here Emil Jannings whose inability to speak the King's English and forced him to return to Germany plays that most English of monarchs Henry VIII. In this Jannings joined a great pantheon of English speaking players like Charles Laughton, Montagu Love, Charlton Heston, and Robert Shaw who all played the monarch who changed wives like some change underwear.

Jannings is an impressive looking and acting Henry VIII. A man whose pleasures mingled with his impassioned search for a woman to bear him a male heir and the politics of Europe. Henny Polen whose career spanned five decades in the German cinema plays the luckless Anne.

By the way another reviewer thought her not sexy enough to leave a king panting. In fact director Ernst Lubitsch must have seen Tudor era portraits of Anne because Polen look a lot like Boleyn.

The Lubitsch touch which everyone talks about in his talkie Hollywood films is not here as such. But Lubitsch was quite detailed in his sets and costumes in what must have cost many marks in post war Germany. They look very much Tudor England and compare them with those of Warner Brothers The Prince And The Pauper where Montagu Love was Henry VIII.

This is worth a look.

This movie earns a 7--because, for its time, it was a heck of a movie. The sets and costumes (mostly which were from the proper period--though some, to the trained eye, were not) are quite impressive. It's obvious that director Ernst Lubitsch was given a huge budget to create this film--and it's better looking than the Hollywood productions of the same period. In fact, today few would realize that the some of the most incredibly complex and expensive productions of this time were German--not American. It was only in the mid to late 1920s that the American films became the best-known and best made. You just can't find a film from 1920 or so that looks better.

Unfortunately, looks alone do NOT make a great film. For someone who wants the truth behind the second marriage of Henry VIII, this is NOT a great film--as many of the facts were clearly wrong. Despite what the movie shows, Anne was Henry's mistress for some time before he got around to marrying her AND the process by which the English separated from the authority of the Pope was NOT the quick process you see in the film--it took years. As a history teacher, this film isn't terrible historically--but it still should have been a lot better. And, if you are going to play fast and loose with the facts, then why not at least make the film more interesting? Overall, the film lumbers during its two hour air time and more recent films (NOT "The Other Bolyne Girl"--which was also a mess historically-speaking) such as "Anne of the Thousand Days" and "The Six Wives of Henry the Eighth" are more accurate and interesting.

Decent but far from as good as it could have been its sumptuous treatment. Plus, while a Lubitsch film, there's little trace of his famed "Lubitsch touch" here in this pretty but rather dull film.

Considering this movie is now 104 years old my first thought while watching it was that it's held up well, and whatever work of restoration/preservation was done to it was done very well because it's a very impressive looking movie. I also thought that both technically and based on the performances from its cast it's actually a better movie than most of what the early Hollywood silent film industry was putting out. This is a German production, telling the story of Anne Boleyn, beginning with her return to England from France through to her execution (although the beheading isn't actually depicted - she's just shown walking from her cell towards her fate.) Anne was played by a German actress named Henny Porten - unknown to me, but who had quite a long career, extending far beyond the end of World War II. Porten was quite effective in the role, but the movie really was stolen by Emil Jannings' performance as King Henry VIII. I'm familiar with Jannings as a name although a quick look at his filmography doesn't reveal anything I would have seen him in. But I thought his performance as Henry was very good. He portrayed Henry - not inaccurately - as a glutton and a lech who was also desperate for a male heir. The film takes us from his marriage to Catharine of Aragon to his budding marriage to Jane Seymour, following Anne (as the title implies) from being the "other woman" in Henry's first marriage to being supplanted by another "other woman."

The movie was directed by Ernst Lubitsch, who had already had a long career in the German film industry and who not long after "Anna Boleyn" made the move to the United States, where he became a very successful director. His abilities as a director are on display here.

I found it interesting that the German movie industry would produce such an "English" movie. I'm just speculating but I wonder if its release not very long after the end of World War I was almost a poke at the English, by offering this story (a very historically loose version, mind you) centering around the excesses of England's most notorious king - a king who long pre-dated the coming of the Hanovers as England's German royal dynasty.