Le chant du Danube

Biography of the Strauss boys set in Vienna in mid 19th century. The stars are Jessie Matthews as Rasi, the daughter of a confectioner, Esmond Knight as Strauss Jr., and Edmun Gwenn as Strauss Sr. Also notable are Fay Compton as the countess, Frank Vosper as the count, and Robert Hale as the confectioner.

What makes this film notable is that the director is Alfred Hitchcock. Alma Reville is listed as one of the writers.

From the opening scene, the film is unusual. The film starts with a closeup of a fire team racing to a fire in a confectioner's shop. The scene is obviously fake because of the background and the fake horses. The actors jostle about and spout wisecracks. At the scene of the fire, we see a madhouse of onlookers and employees. The employees are taking tables and chairs out of the shop and setting them up in the street to avoid losing customers. The confectioner is in a panic as he tries to save a huge wedding cake. Smoke billows from the building but upstairs there is music and singing as Strauss and Rasi go through one of his compositions. The sequence is manic, full of pratfalls and sight gags.

At a dress shop across the street the countess is trying to buy a dress but the models are all watching the fire. When a bumbling fireman carries Rasi down a ladder, she tears her dress off and must run to the dress shop for clothing. She meets the countess who is asking to meet the man playing that piano. Thus begins the triangle.

Almost as a subplot, we get the adversarial relationship between the father and son since the film really focuses on the "love story." Although Hitchcock always thought this film his worst, there is much to enjoy. The pacing is brisk. The dramatic story is lightened by comic episodes. The direction is very fluid (if not florid) like the music, and the music is terrific, especially the climactic "Blue Danube" number.

Also notable are the sets. You would expect very fussy, claustrophobic rooms filled with furniture and ponderous draperies but the sets are mostly spartan, white, softly lit. In one scene the countess sits having coffee in a huge white room before huge curtainless windows. Not what you'd think of for 1850s Vienna.

The acting is uneven, with Matthews and Knight overacting and Gwenn and Compton underacting. The comic scenes are very broad and involve pratfalls into cakes, slapping, falling down stairs, etc. Yet it all seems to work.

Matthews hated this film and Hitchcock. England's premiere musical star of the time doesn't get to dance and only warbles here and there. She definitely takes a backseat to the Strauss music, but she's at her prettiest in this film. Esmond Knight's character reminded me of Marius Goring's manic composer in THE RED SHOES right down to the hair cut. Gwenn, for all his billing, gets less screen time than Matthews, Knight, and even Fay Compton.

In 1933 Hitchcock found himself without a picture to direct and signed on for this unlikely choice of a musical just so he could keep working. That being the case, it probably helps explain why it doesn't seem to have a Hitchcock feel to it or any of the elements you might otherwise expect from the master of suspense. I don't think his heart was really in it. The term musical is a little loosely used as really there are only the Strauss's waltzes for music as there was no money in the budget for any other music. So no one breaks out into song for no reason in this picture. Other than the fact it doesn't seem like a Hitchcock movie, it's a nice little story about the younger Strauss struggling for the respect of his father with a nice bit of romance and jealousy thrown in on the side. The most amusing scene for me was when the younger Strauss was coming up with the music for his waltz at the bakery. I also enjoyed the opening scene of the fire brigade racing to a fire and the "rescue" of the damsel. Apparently there wasn't much of a budget for special effects, because we never actually see the fire. A pleasant enough film, just not very Hitchcockian.

*** (Out of 4)

This musical comedy must be one of Hitchcock's most obscure movies (not even reviewed in Leonard Maltin's guide until the latest edition!). It has very little dramatic interest, and not much in the way of notable visuals either, but the production does have a certain opulence (including some enormous sets), and of course the Strauss music is a pleasure to listen to, particularly in the concert sequence. Apparently Jessie Matthews was one of Britain's biggest musical stars around this period, but you'd never know it from this picture - she sings only once and never dances. ** out of 4.

Jessie Matthews hated this film and if you're foolish enough to watch it, you can understand why. The story, the script and the characters are so utterly frivolous and light that they'd get blown away by your snoring.

It was the brainchild of a theatrical impresario called Tom Arnold who thought turning a popular musical into a film would be a good idea....it wasn't. By persuading Gaumont-British to back him, he secured the services of Jessie Matthews but the role she was given was woefully insubstantial. It didn't give her any opportunity to show her comedic skills let alone her singing or dancing - she did not enjoy this at all.

Not only was her role dreadful but her co-star had zero charisma and worst of all she didn't get on with the director. She was a huge star and knew it. Hitchcock with about 20 films under his belt believed that he was the best director in the country but having just been 'let go' from BIP, the industry in 1934 didn't particularly agree. There was therefore a huge ego battle going on here which didn't make for a happy set.

Although it's not good, it's not entirely awful. Despite the insane underutilisation of Miss Matthews, ('the dancing divinity' or 'the diva of debauchery' depending on your choice of 1930s newspaper), it is reasonably well made as of course you'd expect from Hitchcock but you can tell that nobody's heart is in this. She didn't want to make it, Hitchcock didn't want to make it and although Gaumont-British were a wealthier and classier studio than Hitchcock's former studio BIP, from the look of the cheap shabby sets, it looks like even G-B didn't want to make this either.

This is neither a Jessie Matthews film nor an Alfred Hitchcock film. Being the most beautiful girl in the world she still looks lovely but she's not really Jessie Matthews and because Hitchcock wasn't involved in the writing, there's none of his characteristic dark humour. When it tries to be funny it is just embarrassingly silly. Avoid this!

'Waltzes from Vienna' is Alfred Hitchcock's only musical and he directed this because he didn't have any other projects to choose from, and by that time he was still under the contract with British International Pictures. Although being peculiarity in Hitchcock's filmography 'Waltzes from Vienna' includes quite many Hitchcockian moments, including his usual trademark humor. The story itself is by the numbers affair coupled with few musical numbers, but it is masterfully orchestrated by genius conductor. The film is probably most notable of the use of combining the editing with the flow and rhythm of the music.

Sweet little movie which proves that masterful director can turn quite shallow script into somewhat enjoyable entertainment.