Le chant du Danube

British romantic drama from Gaumont and director Alfred Hitchcock details the events surrounding the 1866 writing of "The Blue Danube Waltz" by Johann Strauss II (Esmond Knight). Strauss lives in the disapproving shadow of his famed father (Edmund Gwenn), and the younger man hopes to make a name for himself with his own compositions. He's cheered on by baker's daughter Resi (Jessie Matthews), and he also catches the eye of Countess Helga (Fay Compton). Also featuring Frank Vosper, Robert Hale, Charles Heslop, Hindle Edgar, and Marcus Barron.

Hitchcock described this film as "the lowest ebb of my career", and it's arguably the least-shown of his sound films, and the only one that I had not seen until now. It's not as bad as I expected, but it won't find too many fans, either. Despite some of Hitchcock's directorial flourishes popping up now and then, this movie still resembles many British productions of the time, which all seem to have a certain indefinable remoteness to them. Perhaps it's the lack of close ups or a certain flat lighting technique or just the style of acting, but I find myself rarely becoming engaged in the onscreen action. As I said though, I didn't find this movie to be a complete bore or waste of time, as some of the shooting is inventive, the costumes and sets are good, and there's the music, of course.

This is a fairly entertaining pre-War cheaply made British musical comedy which sadly fails in a number of ways: it was the 3rd film with Jessie Matthews and Edmund Gwenn, and definitely the least satisfying of them; it was Hitchcock directing a non-thriller with his heart not in it; Hitchcock and Matthews didn't get on, and it showed in his screen treatment of her - Britain's top singing and dancing star at the time; and a ridiculously fictitious plot. Hitch thought it was the worst film he'd ever made and Jessie thought it was "perfectly dreadful".

It was an adaptation of a London musical stage play which apparently ran for over a year: Johann Strauss II played by Esmond Knight wants to be a composer like his father, I (Gwenn), who is arrogantly dismissive of his talents throughout. I'm afraid I won't see Gwenn as Santa quite the same again. II eventually succeeds spectacularly with the help of Countess Fay Compton (was she ever anything but elderly and wistful?) and barmaid girlfriend Matthews - incidentally Robert Hale who played her father was her real-life father-in-law. Jessie was as usual good to look at (personally speaking) but unfortunately didn't really get to sing much, and Hitchcock was excellent as usual but didn't get to show off much. Most people will be disappointed with the latter, but for myself it was with the lack of Jessie's beautiful singing voice in what was after all billed as a musical, and with her name over the title. On the other hand, Hitchcock seemed to be mining the One Hour With You stylistic vein a lot of the time albeit in a cheaper but still pleasant British way, there were some nice sets and of course there was Louis Levy's orchestrations for The Blue Danube to admire when it arrived. The less said about how II was supposed to have composed it here, the better!

It's a pleasant enough 76 minutes for someone like me who isn't a Hitchcock completist, but probably will be a real chore if you are.

It is not his best, not even close, but his worst film is Juno and Paycock with Jamaica Inn and Champagne not far off. Number 17, Under Capricorn and Topaz are also towards the bottom. Waltzes from Vienna does look lovely, sumptuous sets and costumes, good photography and some nice visual flourishes. The music sparkles with beauty and energy throughout, while Edmund Gwenn gives a great performance, Jessie Matthews is charming enough and there's also the Blue Danube scene which is by far the highlight of the film. Esmond Knight does look uncomfortable and can have a tendency to over-act, while Fay Compton under-characterises. The direction has its moments but there is a sense that Hitchcock wasn't particularly interested in the project. The comedy scenes are rather forced and are played too broadly, while the story has a little charm but can be a little dull and silly, with some underdeveloped characters and relationships- that of Johann and Rasi is rather un-engaging- and sub-plots that serve little point and the script is on the talky side. Overall, one of Hitchcock's weakest but not his worst like he considered it to be, of the films of his personally seen there are at least 6 or 7 that are worse. 5/10 Bethany Cox

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)

Not Hitchcock's best but very nice and good.

It is a fictionalised account of Johann Strauss Jr and his composition of the Danube: how the lyrics were (according to this film!) written by an upper-class countess, and how this collaboration made his girlfriend Resi jealous and how he very nearly gave it all up for her. (She wanted him to join her confectionery business because she felt left behind by his music fame.) There is also a subplot about his father - Johann Strauss Sr - refusing to countenance his work, but relenting at the end, realising that "youth marches forward".

A perfectly satisfying, nice, interesting slice of history. I wouldn't say it's a fantastic HITCHCOCK film, but it is a good film. There are some witty moments ("your mother didn't let me kiss her until six months after our wedding!", says Resi's father. "Now I know why you were 50 when you had me.")

And there's a lovely moment at the end when a young girl asks Strauss Sr for an autograph and he is genuinely humbled. He calls her back to sign "Senior", accepting that he is not the only Strauss but he does still have fans!