Marie Walewska

Goodness, I can't believe, I'm saying this, but Garbo is good in ''Conquest''...... Here I was, complaining the other day, about Garbo's ''Inspiration'', and saying the only good performance she ever gave was in ''Ninotchka''...... I take that back now, so far, her good performances are given in both ''Ninotchka'' & ''Conquest''...... Garbo & Boyer displays well blend chemistry together...... (a surprise, since this is their only movie together) However, it's Boyer who carries off, and holds the movie together, w/ his charm & wit...... (during some flat spots) You could see, that Garbo is responsive to Boyer's performance/character, unlike her usual ''I want to be alone'' self...... What's more stunning, is Garbo smiles in this movie..... (more than once too!) That's enough good shock for me...... We do see a rare, lighthearted Garbo here, just like in ''Ninotchka''...... I would even say, that Boyer is Garbo's best co-star so far..... Charles Boyer & Melvyn Douglas......

This movie has two halves to evaluate. The first half is brilliant, among the best scenes ever put on film. Boyer gives the performance of his life as the "Little Corporal" trying to woo an obscure (and obscurely beautiful) Polish Countess. Sadly, once she is wooed the movie is lost in a muddle of syrupy sentiment and questionable history lessons.

Boyer is outstanding all the way through the movie. This is the role he was born to play. He is funny, abrupt, insane, and believeable. He puts his whole body into this role. But Garbo - *sigh* - she's better at portraying melancholy than happiness. When she's in love in this movie, it's irritating. Excepting her scene with Dame May Whitty as Napoleon's mother, I just can't stand it.

The second half is just mush. It's plodding, for the most part uninteresting, and sheds no light on Napoleon as a historical figure. Maybe the first half of the movie had so much energy that it was impossible to sustain. In any case, I recommend this movie, if only for Boyer's performance and the opening sequence.

Halfway through this film, I started thinking how it almost seemed like the kind of film George Cukor would direct, with fussy attention to detail. Instead, CONQUEST is directed by Clarence Brown, a workmanlike craftsman who also tended to dwell too long on intimate and wordy scenes that lack enough spark.

However, he does elicit fine performances from Garbo and Charles Boyer. Garbo is radiantly photogenic as the married woman, wife of an elder man (Henry Stephenson), who for the sake of her country gives herself to Napoleon (Boyer). And Boyer is every bit as convincing as the man destined for his Waterloo, acting the part with every bit of his abilities and often stealing the show.

But what really steals the show is the lavish production MGM gave this story. The sets are opulent, majestic and large, looming over every frame of the film with no expense spared. The artful B&W cinematography captures every elegant detail of costumes and sets with breathtaking results.

And the supporting cast is a sturdy one, including Dame May Witty, Reginald Owen, Maria Ouspenskaya, Alan Marshal and Leif Erickson.

Garbo is livelier than usual, even smiling more often for her "gayer" moments when enthralled with being in love, and the chemistry between her and Boyer is evident from the start.

It's too bad the film wasn't fully appreciated as one of her best films when it opened, but time has been kind to it. Despite some slow moments amid a longer than necessary running time, it's an historical romance played out in the Golden Age tradition of opulence expected from MGM.

What was Greta Garbo's greatest film? I suppose most people would opt for CAMILLE, ANNA KARENINA (the sound version), QUEEN Christina, or NINOTCHKA. But I feel that CONQUEST may be the only major film in her career that she ended up being dominated by her co-star. It isn't that she doesn't act, or that Clarence Brown (her favorite sound film director) did not do what he could to show her to advantage. It is that Charles Boyer is a very fine actor, and he is playing one of the leading figures of history. Boyer is Napoleon Bonaparte, and he is fantastically good in the role, showing the childlike hesitation and fascination with simple things that mingled with his military and political genius (and growing egomania). My favorite moment in the film is when Boyer first dances with Garbo, and his clumsiness is actually quite charming.

Garbo could not compete with this character. Marie Walewski may have sacrificed all for her Poland (briefly Napoleon did create a Duchy of Warsaw out of fragments of the Poland that had been destroyed by Prussia, Austria, and Russia), but she did not do all that badly as the Emperor's mistress. She did not succeed Josephine as Empress (she could give no political advantage to Napoleon if they had married) but what advantage did Napoleon's second wife, Marie Theresa of Austria, get out of it - they married in 1809, had one sickly son (who died in 1831 as Duke of Reichstadt), and in 1815 the Emperor was defeated for the second and final time - her husband's empire was finally gone. So we are left looking at that fascinating man of destiny. He at least keeps our attention.

One problem that I have with the film - Reginald Owen is very good as Talleyrand, but in 1815 (at the time of Waterloo) he was not an adviser of Napoleon. In fact, with Joseph Fouche, they were doing their best to undermine the Emperor's attempt to return to power. He certainly would not have supported the creation of a new grand army to confront the Bourbons and the Allies. Yet even with this error, I have to admit that one of my favorite moments in the film is when Napoleon, after a discussion of military strategy with Talleyrand, throws his pen down on the table on a map, and it ("miraculously") lands pointing on the portion of the map where Belgium is, at Waterloo. A corny bit of business, but quite well done.

Ever since I first saw "Conquest" back in '38, I've been convinced that the first half of the film is a magnificent production, while the second half is terribly slow,as Clarence Brown's films always tended to be. The magnificent opening, with the cossacks invading the Walewski Palace, is typical of the best Clarence Brown, even if reminds you of Josef von Sternberg's "The Scarlet Empress". The trouble with the picture is that it starts telling the story or Marie Walewska, and in the middle leaves Walewska (and Garbo!) behind to tell us the political and military fall of Napoleon, which it does very badly. It is typical of this Garbo film, that its best scene omits her, and is a verbal duel between Charles Boyer and Maria Ouspenskaya. Garbo is magnificent, but Boyer was a more talented performer, and is the only actor ever to "steal" a picture from her. Magnificent production, a screen play that has no unity, and a direction that drags, conspire to make you admire Garbo, Boyer and Ouspenskaya during the first half, and sleep through the second.