A Doll's House

Although there have been MANY versions of this Ibsen play (his most famous), this one seems to come closest to doing justice to it. The cast is a great one and includes: Claire Bloom (as Nora); Anthony Hopkins (as Torvald); Ralph Richardson (as Dr. Rank); Denholm Elliott (as Krogstad); Anna Massey (as Krisine Linde) and Dame Edith Evans (as Anne-Marie). Everyone in the cast is well-known as British stage actors and most have done their share of Shakespeare.

This film version was made before Anthony Hopkins was so well known on the screen, and he doesn't stand out here as we are used to seeing him now. But, Claire Bloom dominates the final scene as Nora.

Had never seen this play, although had a very rough idea what it was about.

I feared that a 1973 filmed version might be somewhat dated almost 50 years later. But not so. The dialogue is often oblique - up until the denouement, when Nora speaks plainly - but the viewer is never in doubt about the underlying meanings. Even a century and a half after Ibsen wrote this, it is esp. Relevant. But it is compelling not only at the level of "women's liberation", but of "human liberation" - nobody is wholly exempt from the bonds of social convention, and so the question is always: when is enough, enough? Or when, is it time to break out from them, and what are you willing to sacrifice to do so? The cast and directing (imho) are great.

"A Doll's House" is a very serious drama and is not a play to see when one wants to get the "warm and fuzzies." The plot is a fairly straight forward. Nora and Torvald are a seemingly happy couple who love each other dearly. Nora proves her love when she goes out on a limb to save Torvald's life without him knowing and she winds up in financial trouble. The past comes back to haunt her as the man who lent her money demands she save his job or her reputation will be ruined. Such a favor Nora tries to accomplish as she is desperate to keep her secret from Torvald. Nora has the law against her and she runs a high risk or ruining not only her reputation but also that of Torvald.

The set takes place for the most part within Nora and Torvald's house. This allows the viewer to get an intimate look at the intricacies of the house and what it might be like to live there. Not many props are used. The objects generally used consist of such things as food, letters, and clothing. The women were only ever seen wearing dresses with high collars and the men wore old fashioned jackets with vests.

The lighting was very dim, but this dimness allows for a special type of dramatic effect because characters could hide back in the shadows and be revealed in the dramatic spotlights when it was an important scene.The camera work was very good because it only took the most intimate of shots. The camera was always right in the middle of the action and sometimes it almost seemed as if the viewer was involved in the conflict themselves. Special effects did not really occur except with the dramatic use of lighting and some sound effects.

Music was not a large part of the play but given the setting was during Christmas there were a few Christmas sounding jingles.

Clair Bloom's work as Nora was heart-wrenching and drew sympathy from the viewer. Anthony Hopkins' work as Torvald was equally as riveting while his portrayal of the controlling husband makes the viewer feel he has wronged Nora. Denholm Elliott as Krogstad was as slippery and unlikeable a character as he was supposed to be and matched perfectly with Anna Massey as Mrs. Linde. The director, Patrick Garland, made a classic masterpiece.

A Doll's House In the play A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen took place in the late 19th century a woman named Nora Helmer starts off the story buying Christmas presents for her family. But a year before this Nora committed a forgery on a loan in order to save the life of her husband. She was then blackmailed the man she took the loan from. He wanted her to convince her husband to allow him to keep his job. When Nora wasn't able to convince her husband, the man sent him a letter in the mail explaining how Nora owed him money that she borrowed from him a year before. Nora went a whole say trying to stop her husband from opening the letter, but when the truth comes out, Nora is shocked to learn where she really stands in her husband's esteem.

This play depicts how a woman in the 19th century was a controlled by her husband. Nora was treated just like every other woman during this time. Woman had little to no say with anything other than house work. They were forced to do whatever their husbands told them to do and they weren't allowed to handle money unless it was given to them by their husbands. This shows that the world back then was against woman being their own person and they were controlled and used as property more instead of treated like an equal human being.

Yes, Clair Bloom, Anthony Hopkins, and Denholm Elliot are great, as is Sir Ralph Richardson as Dr. Rank. This first-rate acting, extended from Ibsen's wonderful realist play, is what holds our eyes on the screen. The play has been abridged for the movie, but having read the play, I wouldn't say I felt that I missed the deleted material.

The snow outside emphasizes how cold it gets inside, with Nora (Bloom) realizing that her fairy-tale marriage to Torvald (Hopkins) is a sham, that Torvald only wants his wife to be his little "squirrel" and not meddle in their family affairs. Nora will not take it anymore; she is an intelligent woman with influence, and cannot be confined to one house, one man, or one way of life. She becomes free, and Torvald is left wondering how he had ever been such a fool to think she would be with him forever.

Denholm Elliot drips with sleaze as Korgstad, Nora and Torvald's nemesis, and Richardson conveighs the appropriate frailty and senality as Dr. Rank.

One complaint: the film is static. There is almost no action set outside of the house (and the building) which, I suppose, gives us an effective claustrophobic feeling. The audience feels as trapped as Nora and Torvald do. But, film is a visual media, and this is essentially just a filmed play. The director does move his camera around a little, giving us close-ups, master-shots, composition of objects in the foreground/background, ect. But, the average viewer may fall asleep, just because the play is all talk. There is not much movement by the characters; there is nothing going on outside of their insulated lives. The movie does not open us up to the world outside of the Helmer household; it tells us that what matters is what is going on inside. Okay, I guess the static quality of the film works, but this is not a wholly cinematic film, it is more a play on film.

Maybe in the future, other directors will work to open up the play, and give us viewers other things to chew over besides the great acting and dialogue.