Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaWhen a nobleman murders his best friend, a lawyer becomes a revolutionary with his heart set on vengeance.When a nobleman murders his best friend, a lawyer becomes a revolutionary with his heart set on vengeance.When a nobleman murders his best friend, a lawyer becomes a revolutionary with his heart set on vengeance.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 2 vittorie e 1 candidatura in totale
Otto Matieson
- Philippe de Vilmorin
- (as Otto Matiesen)
George Siegmann
- Danton
- (as George Siegman)
Bowditch M. Turner
- Chapelier
- (as Bowditch Turner)
James A. Marcus
- Challefou Binet
- (as James Marcus)
Edwin Argus
- King Louis XVI
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Sibylla Blei
- Maid of Honor
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
J. Edwin Brown
- Monsieur Benoît
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Louise Carver
- Member of Theatre Audience
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
Had I never read the original novel "Scaramouche" by Rafael Sabatini and had I never seen the amazing Stewart Granger film of the 1950s, then I probably would have loved this silent movie. However, the book was so good and the Granger film so perfect that I found myself forever comparing this silent epic to the others and it usually came up short. In a way, that's sad, because it IS a very good film--especially compared to other films of the day.
The basic plot is set in the days just following the French Revolution of 1789. For a few short years, the country had still not slipped into radicalism and the country was ruled by a coalition of the old elite and young upstarts. Eventually, of course, most of the elite would be executed or run off to exile, but this film is set during the last gasps of the nobles--who STILL exercised some of their old clout.
Andre (Ramon Novarro) is an orphan who hobnobs with the upper crust but is definitely not one of them. When his best friend is murdered by an evil nobleman (Lewis Stone), he vows revenge and soon becomes a very outspoken critic of the rich. However, because of his outspokenness, he is marked for death and so he hides with a traveling theater company. He becomes very successful for the plays he writes as well as his rendition of the classic "Scaramouche" character. During this time, he also practices with the sword in the hopes of one day killing Stone. Eventually, his fame on stage increases so much that he is invited to serve in the Parlement. Plus, they want him because his swordsmanship is so good they figure he'll be able to protect himself--as the nobles are always dueling with their opponents killing them (a great way to deplete the non-elite class in Parlement).
All this leads to the expected ultimate showdown with Stone, though it ends differently than the Granger film and more like the original novel. In some ways, this isn't bad, but what is missing is the great sword fight between Novarro and Stone--it ends almost as soon as it begins! In the Granger version, the fight is the longest and best sword fight in film history and something you can't miss.
Apart from the fight that just fizzled, the film does have excellent sets, cinematography and musical score (something many silents do NOT have when shown today). It's good,...but I just can't help but prefer the sumptuous and more entertaining remake. This is one of the few cases when I do prefer a remake--so it just goes to show you how wonderful Stewart Granger's version is. If you only want to see one version of the film, see that one.
The basic plot is set in the days just following the French Revolution of 1789. For a few short years, the country had still not slipped into radicalism and the country was ruled by a coalition of the old elite and young upstarts. Eventually, of course, most of the elite would be executed or run off to exile, but this film is set during the last gasps of the nobles--who STILL exercised some of their old clout.
Andre (Ramon Novarro) is an orphan who hobnobs with the upper crust but is definitely not one of them. When his best friend is murdered by an evil nobleman (Lewis Stone), he vows revenge and soon becomes a very outspoken critic of the rich. However, because of his outspokenness, he is marked for death and so he hides with a traveling theater company. He becomes very successful for the plays he writes as well as his rendition of the classic "Scaramouche" character. During this time, he also practices with the sword in the hopes of one day killing Stone. Eventually, his fame on stage increases so much that he is invited to serve in the Parlement. Plus, they want him because his swordsmanship is so good they figure he'll be able to protect himself--as the nobles are always dueling with their opponents killing them (a great way to deplete the non-elite class in Parlement).
All this leads to the expected ultimate showdown with Stone, though it ends differently than the Granger film and more like the original novel. In some ways, this isn't bad, but what is missing is the great sword fight between Novarro and Stone--it ends almost as soon as it begins! In the Granger version, the fight is the longest and best sword fight in film history and something you can't miss.
Apart from the fight that just fizzled, the film does have excellent sets, cinematography and musical score (something many silents do NOT have when shown today). It's good,...but I just can't help but prefer the sumptuous and more entertaining remake. This is one of the few cases when I do prefer a remake--so it just goes to show you how wonderful Stewart Granger's version is. If you only want to see one version of the film, see that one.
Those who are familiar with the well-known 1952 remake of "Scaramouche" might find it difficult to recognize it in this 1923 silent version. The story in this earlier and seldom-seen version is quite different in many respects. Many of the plot points are different, the names of some of the principal characters are not the same and some of the principal characters in this earlier version do not even appear in the remake. The earlier version is also quite different in tone, being rather more in the nature of Historical-Melodrama or Historical-Fiction than the later version, which is much more of a mere swashbuckler. However, the fact is that this earlier version is actually much more faithful to the original book than the remake.
Don't be put off by the fact that this is a silent film produced 100 years ago, because it's production values are excellent. Clearly no available expense was spared to make this production as lavish and authentic to the period (France during the French Revolution), as possible. The director, Rex Ingram, was about as good as one could find at the time.
The cast also features some first rate performers, including perennial MGM favorite Lewis Stone, who was probably with the studio longer than any other actor, so long that he appeared in the 1952 remake. The title role is played by Ramon Navarro, who was a major star in the 1920s. Like Rudolph Valentino, Navarro was a major leading man in the films of the 1920s, and had the title role in the silent version of "Ben Hur". However, unlike Valentino, who died young, Navarro continued to work for many years, though his career as a leading man waned after talkies came in. Navarro's problem in talkies was that he happened to be Mexican, and spoke with an accent.
All in all, "Scaramouche" comes off as a lavish and well produced melodrama set against the background of the French Revolution. The plot points and tone are so different that it should be rated alongside, rather than above or below, the better-known swashbuckling remake. This film is very well worth a look, especially to the many fans of the 1952 version.
Don't be put off by the fact that this is a silent film produced 100 years ago, because it's production values are excellent. Clearly no available expense was spared to make this production as lavish and authentic to the period (France during the French Revolution), as possible. The director, Rex Ingram, was about as good as one could find at the time.
The cast also features some first rate performers, including perennial MGM favorite Lewis Stone, who was probably with the studio longer than any other actor, so long that he appeared in the 1952 remake. The title role is played by Ramon Navarro, who was a major star in the 1920s. Like Rudolph Valentino, Navarro was a major leading man in the films of the 1920s, and had the title role in the silent version of "Ben Hur". However, unlike Valentino, who died young, Navarro continued to work for many years, though his career as a leading man waned after talkies came in. Navarro's problem in talkies was that he happened to be Mexican, and spoke with an accent.
All in all, "Scaramouche" comes off as a lavish and well produced melodrama set against the background of the French Revolution. The plot points and tone are so different that it should be rated alongside, rather than above or below, the better-known swashbuckling remake. This film is very well worth a look, especially to the many fans of the 1952 version.
Hats off to Rex Ingram. Scaramouche, like his other gorgeously mounted adventure sagas The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, The Prisoner of Zenda, or Ben-Hur (which he co-directed) illustrate clearly how the art of cinema took a body blow with the coming of sound, recovery from which took several years. The kinds of stunning compositions and environmental detail that were possible before the soundtrack era had to be jettisoned just for the sake of miking, so we lost much of this intensive artistry. Visually this film is every bit as impressive as Selznick's A Tale of Two Cities, or Korda's The Scarlet Pimpernel, both made well into the sound era over a decade later. Ingram was a visionary, right up there with Griffith, Stroheim and early DeMille. This film is beautiful right down to the title cards.
In this tale of the French Revolution we are treated to large doses of "The Masses," as in the later Selznick Tale of Two Cities. In fact, these masses are so vividly presented that one suspects that Selznick borrowed some of his imagery from Ingram. Like The Scarlet Pimpernel, Scaramouche is a participant in the events of the era. But whereas the Pimpernel used ingenious disguises and impersonations to save selected aristocrats from the guillotine, Scaramouche uses his position as popular comedic stage actor and skilled swordsman to rouse the masses to revolutionary action and successfully duel to the death with reactionary members of the National Assembly. Ramon Novarro, who plays the title character, was second only to Valentino as a heartthrob of the silent era but his countenance and manner were gentler. Lewis Stone, best known for his stern but benign elder patriarch roles in talkies, was once the dashing, chiselled-featured leading man on display here. Alice Terry as the love interest reminds us of how cinematic standards of beauty have changed. Her costuming and coiffure notwithstanding, there is a pre-20th-century quality to her, as if she stepped out of a painting or daguerrotype.
In this tale of the French Revolution we are treated to large doses of "The Masses," as in the later Selznick Tale of Two Cities. In fact, these masses are so vividly presented that one suspects that Selznick borrowed some of his imagery from Ingram. Like The Scarlet Pimpernel, Scaramouche is a participant in the events of the era. But whereas the Pimpernel used ingenious disguises and impersonations to save selected aristocrats from the guillotine, Scaramouche uses his position as popular comedic stage actor and skilled swordsman to rouse the masses to revolutionary action and successfully duel to the death with reactionary members of the National Assembly. Ramon Novarro, who plays the title character, was second only to Valentino as a heartthrob of the silent era but his countenance and manner were gentler. Lewis Stone, best known for his stern but benign elder patriarch roles in talkies, was once the dashing, chiselled-featured leading man on display here. Alice Terry as the love interest reminds us of how cinematic standards of beauty have changed. Her costuming and coiffure notwithstanding, there is a pre-20th-century quality to her, as if she stepped out of a painting or daguerrotype.
Ramon Novarro stars as André-Louis Moreau. Lewis Stone is Moreau's enemy, the Marquis de la Tour d'Azyr. And, Alice Terry is the woman they both love, Aline de Kercadiou. The story is set during the time of the French Revolution. The film begins with Mr. Stone as the Marquis de la Tour killing Mr. Novarro (Moreau's) best friend, which makes them great enemies. Enemies usually like the same woman; in this case, the coveted Ms. Terry (as Aline) creates the additional animosity.
This is a well-produced spectacle, from director Rex Ingram; the film obviously cost a fortune, and the money was well spent, creating a beautiful looking film. Mr. Ingram does a great job of pacing the approximately two hours of film; it retains much of its pace today, relative to other 1920s epics. Ingram's cinematographer John F. Seitz and star Ramon Novarro are indispensable. Mr. Seitz' photography is great, from the windmilly opening until the final conflicts. Some of the spectacular scenes are still terrific; but, some do look like they were staged to fit the movie screen, where everyone gathers for "Action!"
Mr. Novarro's lead performance is excellent; though, it might have been wise to let him use more of the ahead-of-their-time skills that are clearly evident. But, what's left is fine - best are the "looks" from the performers, which are not overacted (mostly). Lewis, Terry, and most everyone performs well. Novarro must join an acting troupe, by the way, while on-the-run - he becomes "Monsieur X" and play acts clown "Scaramouche", giving the film its title. Watch for the relationship between Novarro and a woman from the troupe, and the reason he finally rejects her (it parallels the major love triangle). Also, watch for two of the characters to startlingly look exactly like/alike the "shocking" second revelation at the end of the film.
******** Scaramouche (9/15/23) Rex Ingram ~ Ramon Novarro, Lewis Stone, Alice Terry, Lloyd Ingraham
This is a well-produced spectacle, from director Rex Ingram; the film obviously cost a fortune, and the money was well spent, creating a beautiful looking film. Mr. Ingram does a great job of pacing the approximately two hours of film; it retains much of its pace today, relative to other 1920s epics. Ingram's cinematographer John F. Seitz and star Ramon Novarro are indispensable. Mr. Seitz' photography is great, from the windmilly opening until the final conflicts. Some of the spectacular scenes are still terrific; but, some do look like they were staged to fit the movie screen, where everyone gathers for "Action!"
Mr. Novarro's lead performance is excellent; though, it might have been wise to let him use more of the ahead-of-their-time skills that are clearly evident. But, what's left is fine - best are the "looks" from the performers, which are not overacted (mostly). Lewis, Terry, and most everyone performs well. Novarro must join an acting troupe, by the way, while on-the-run - he becomes "Monsieur X" and play acts clown "Scaramouche", giving the film its title. Watch for the relationship between Novarro and a woman from the troupe, and the reason he finally rejects her (it parallels the major love triangle). Also, watch for two of the characters to startlingly look exactly like/alike the "shocking" second revelation at the end of the film.
******** Scaramouche (9/15/23) Rex Ingram ~ Ramon Novarro, Lewis Stone, Alice Terry, Lloyd Ingraham
Actor Ramon Novarro was coming off his biggest role yet in his young acting career as a villain in 1922's 'The Prisoner of Zelda,' when friend and director Rex Ingram offered him the lead as the hero in February 1923's "Scaramouche." The French Revolution swashbuckler proved to be Novarro's breakout role, catapulting him to become one of Hollywood's most popular screen performers in the early 1920's.
"Scaramouche," based on the 1921 Rafael Sabatini best seller, was a massive undertaking for its production studio, Metro Pictures. Ingram, also the producer, spent several months assisting in adapting the unwieldy novel's plot into a cohesive two-hour movie. He also oversaw elaborate sets duplicating late 18th-century Paris and hiring 1,500 extras, expenses that caused delays and over budgeted costs .
Metro's marketing publicity department saved the day. Knowing the box office appeal of rival sex-symbol actor Rudolph Valentino, the studio recognized that in its very own Mexican actor Novarro, it had an equally handsome male counterpart. Casting him as the hero in "Scaramouche," Metro benefited from his screen charisma. Ingram's multiple close-ups on his actors, especially with Novarro, highlighted Hollywood's new Latin lover's distinctive facial lines, guaranteed to send female fans swooning. The sword fights adapted from the novel, highlighted by Novarro's one with his arch nemesis, Marquis de la Tour d'Azyr (Lewis Stone), has been cited as one of cinema's first realistically-performed fencing duels. The lush sets, especially in the second half with teeming crowds hungry for revolution, created a movie rivaling the year's best epics.
"Scaramouche," with a prodigious roadshow, eventually recouped it's enormous outlays. The movie was 1923's fourth highest box office hit in the United States, and it broke ticket sale records in Paris and London. The lavish film was benefited by having one of Hollywood's sexiest male actors in Novarro driving scores of women to the movie theaters to view his eye-catching close-ups.
"Scaramouche," based on the 1921 Rafael Sabatini best seller, was a massive undertaking for its production studio, Metro Pictures. Ingram, also the producer, spent several months assisting in adapting the unwieldy novel's plot into a cohesive two-hour movie. He also oversaw elaborate sets duplicating late 18th-century Paris and hiring 1,500 extras, expenses that caused delays and over budgeted costs .
Metro's marketing publicity department saved the day. Knowing the box office appeal of rival sex-symbol actor Rudolph Valentino, the studio recognized that in its very own Mexican actor Novarro, it had an equally handsome male counterpart. Casting him as the hero in "Scaramouche," Metro benefited from his screen charisma. Ingram's multiple close-ups on his actors, especially with Novarro, highlighted Hollywood's new Latin lover's distinctive facial lines, guaranteed to send female fans swooning. The sword fights adapted from the novel, highlighted by Novarro's one with his arch nemesis, Marquis de la Tour d'Azyr (Lewis Stone), has been cited as one of cinema's first realistically-performed fencing duels. The lush sets, especially in the second half with teeming crowds hungry for revolution, created a movie rivaling the year's best epics.
"Scaramouche," with a prodigious roadshow, eventually recouped it's enormous outlays. The movie was 1923's fourth highest box office hit in the United States, and it broke ticket sale records in Paris and London. The lavish film was benefited by having one of Hollywood's sexiest male actors in Novarro driving scores of women to the movie theaters to view his eye-catching close-ups.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizAn army of workmen built a whole French village that covered sixty acres and was faithfully reproduced down to cobblestone streets and shop windows filled with actual wares. Hundreds of thousands of yards of muslin, satin, brocade, and velvet were required in the making of the gorgeous costumes worn by the cast.
- Versioni alternativeOn 5 December 2000, Turner Classic Movies broadcast a 124-minute version with a new musical score written by Jeff Silverman and played by the Janacek Philharmonic Orchestra, Ostravia, Czech Republic, conducted by Hugh Munro Neely. It was the first time the film was shown on television.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Hollywood (1980)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- Скарамуш
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 858.723 USD (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione2 ore 4 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.33 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Scaramouche (1923) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi