L'ange pervers

One of the best films I have yet seen. (Then again it helps if you have lived a life in strong coincidence with the lives portrayed; and not merely a commentator, a mere critic of film)

This film was my first introduction to Ms. Novak, and yes I admit I was, am, smitten. Ms. Novak brings great depth to her role, a woman seemingly comprised of true grit, this only serving to hide her truths, truth which she never admits to herself.

Love will always be an ever-spring subject, and morality tales their best method to ambitiously telling the nature of human pain and suffering, of which there is much of in this film. The tale of a woman always lost, a woman whose redemption lies solely with the only man that would ever truly Love her.

Love can be a grand thing, though so often, Love disposes of people with nary a backwards glance.

Not-bad third version of W. Somerset Maugham's depressing story about a sluttish waitress in London and the sensitive future doctor who becomes obsessed with her. Ravaged by critics upon its release (and thought bannable for a time for Kim Novak's suggestive scenes), this remake isn't a classic, nor does it improve on the Bette Davis version, but it does have something. Novak is just fine; Laurence Harvey also good as the smitten medico. The biggest problem is the screenplay's faithfulness to Maugham's plot, which by 1964 standards was pretty creaky. Why couldn't they have updated it just a bit? For all the talk about this version being "too shocking", the movie disappoints by not shocking at all, by playing it too safe. A soap opera, to be sure, though a handsome and interesting one. Novak-diehards will love the film, and her. **1/2 from ****

It is unfortunate that the 1934 version of this film has become the precedent by which all following adaptations seemed to be judged. This version does not try to imitate the "classic" and is an entirely different animal (making up for many of the flaws in the original).

Whereas Bette Davis portrayed Mildred as an over-the-top shrew, Kim Novak gave her an almost childlike naivety. It is not that Mildred wants purposely to hurt men but rather that she simply does not know how to behave better. Novak's interpretation gives Mildred the much needed humanity that was absent in the first version. Since Mildred now has genuine moments of kindness, it is much easier to see how Philip (Laurence Harvey) becomes obsessed with her.

Harvey, however, is greatly miscast in this film. As a crippled young man who likes art and helping people through medicine, Philip has a great deal of sensitivity (as seen through Leslie Howard's performance in the original). But Harvey, the actor who relished in being unlikable, is completely unable to deliver this. He fared much better in grimy roles ("Walk on the Wild Side," "Darling") and so he is only convincing in the scenes where he yells and slaps Mildred. (Given the reports that Harvey and Novak loathed each other, it is easy to see why these scenes are the most convincing). He is terrible, however, at looking smitten.

Performances aside, this version is refreshingly modern. Rather than glaze over the seedier bits to appease the censors, you will actually hear words like `whore' and `syphilis.' The final scenes are quite touching too, thanks in part to Novak's humility (she truly looks decrepit towards the end). The score cascades a little too loud and often though in all the pivotal scenes and this version would have benefited greatly from a more realistic approach.

This is a must see if you are a fan of the story and Kim Novak. Somerset Maugham supposedly adored Novak's interpretation of Mildred and it truly is a refreshing take on Of Human Bondage.

Those are the words to describe this movie. And that honor belongs mostly to Kim Novak who brings absolute realism to the role as Mildred Rogers. The music is great and Kim Novak is so beautiful and completely believable as Maugham's character. Just a movie not to miss. I loved it and have seen it many times and I have the same opinion over and over. The other players are adequate and just as believable but the real reason for this movie is Kim Novak. She is excellent and superior in this movie. And did I say beautiful.....and she still is today as well. A movie not to be missed. A story that will hold your attention as the character of Mildred Rogers evolves.

I've not seen a version with Eleanor Parker in the lead made in the Forties, but the version in 1934 with Bette Davis and Leslie Howard set an impossible standard that sad to say Kim Novak fell short of as the acid tongued amoral Mildred Rogers in Of Human Bondage.

W. Somerset Maugham's classic of a scheming woman of the low classes is one of the great works of literature in the past 150 years, The role takes a great actress to perform it. Kim was quite a bit out of her depth as compared to Davis and Parker.

Lawrence Harvey is the club footed and socially unskilled Philip Carey, a medical student who becomes completely infatuated with a woman of the lower classes whom he first meets when she waits on he and his medical school peers in a restaurant. Harvey who in real life was quite the lady killer really took a part so totally opposite his nature. The role he got an Oscar nomination for, Joe Lampton in Room At The Top was far closer to the real Harvey. Still he does pull it off.

There are a lot of similarities to the other Maugham classic Rain, in fact Of Human Bondage is almost a looking glass version. Both concern very moral and straight forward men degrading themselves over a woman of easy to non-existent virtue. The difference is that in Rain the protagonist Reverend Davidson does destroy himself and Carey pulls himself back from the abyss.

A couple of other performances of note are Robert Morley in a serious part as Harvey's medical professor and Roger Livesey as a patient who has a daughter who's a nice girl who takes an interest in Harvey. But for the moment he's enthralled with Novak.

Kim has the beauty for the role, but there is really only one Bette Davis.