Torrent

Greta Garbo's first American movie dealt with a torrential rainstorm. In her Hollywood February 1926 debut, "Torrent," based on a Vicente Ibanez story, Garbo's a Spanish peasant woman who becomes a popular opera singer in Paris. She returns home to rekindle a relationship with an old flame, only to experience a massive flood in her native town. Under Monta Bell's direction, Garbo, who was initially disappointed in not acting under her friend Mauritz Stiller's guidance, was introduced favorably to American audiences. Not as warmly received by the critics as "The Temptress," Garbo attracted a sizable fan-base to turn a tidy profit for MGM. The two movies combined assured the studio it had a new star under its tent. Garbo would go on to appear in eight more silent films before her first speaking role in 1930.

Greta Garbo has always struck me as a wonderful actresses, very rightly regarded as a screen legend. First saw her in 'Camille' over ten years ago and she captivated and moved me then. She was my main reason in seeing 1926's 'Torrent', most interesting for it being her first American film. It is based upon source material written by Vicente Blasco Ibanez (not read it on a side note), one of the most popularly adapted novelists at the time and also has Ricardo Cortez top billed in one of not many times somebody else was billed above Garbo.

'Torrent' is not one of Greta's best films overall, but it is to me among her best early films and already there are clear signs of what made her such a wonderful actress that would become even more refined with each film. Not every film Garbo did was great, 'Torrent' though is one of them, but bad performances from her were next to rare. Her performance here is a long way from bad, quite the opposite in the best of ways, and a vast majority of her performances were captivating.

My only quibble with 'Torrent' is some histrionic acting in the supporting roles, other than that the film is a winner and quite underrated today.

Visually, the film looks beautiful. The settings are sumptuous and don't look static or claustrophobic and the lighting isn't too dim. The star in this regard though in the cinematography, those close ups of Garbo are more often than not stunning and truly enhance her expressive face. The music implemented doesn't have a tacked on feel and isn't at odds with the tone.

It is sympatheritically directed by Monta Bell, who doesn't try to do too much while not seeming disinterested. The script is thought provoking, flows well and doesn't ramble or sound too flowery. The story is a slight one, but is also very charming and poignant. With the tension being subtly edge of the seat and the romantic element easy to get behind, even with Rafael being an unsympathetic character for much of the film.

Cannot say anything negative about Garbo, who is touching and riveting in even the smaller moments where expressions speak louder than words. Some may find her casting improbable, not to me. Cortez shows early on how good he was in playing unsympathetic characters, though the roles he went on to play were even smarmier and much more villainous. Martha Mattox is suitably formidable in the domineering mother role.

Overall, great. 9/10

THE TORRENT (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1926), titled "Ibenez' Torrent," a Cosmopolitan Production directed by Monta Bell, taken from novel by Vicente Blasco-Ibanez, stars Ricardo Cortez in a melodramatic story about lost love. As his co-star is Greta Garbo making her American screen debut. A native from Sweden with "Peter the Tramp" (1922), "The Story of Gosta Berling" (1924) and "The Street of Sorrow" (1925) and a few others to her screen credit, Garbo's introduction to the American screen casts her as a Spanish peasant girl with operatic talent. It is she who makes her screen presence prior to Cortez's introduction, wearing beret, riding his horse like a dashing hero, but by the film's end, it would be Garbo whom audiences and critics remembered best of all. With first impressions being vital for newcomers to the screen, TORRENT became the turning point for an actress whose name would become legendary.

Opening title: "Spain - Springtime under the blue skies of Valencia - cobbled streets and hanging balconies - hot sunlight and orange blossoms - the soft air drenches with sweetness." Leonora Moreno (Greta Garbo), a young girl instructed how to sing by Cupido (Lucien Littlefield), the town barber and singing master, loves Don Rafael Brull (Ricardo Cortez), and he in love with her. His mother, Dona Bernarda (Martha Mattox) has other plans for her son, none having to do with his proposed marriage to Leonora. Because she holds a mortgage on the Moreno farm, Bernarda arranges for Don Andres (Tully Marshall) to have Leonora and her parents, Pedro (Edward Connelly) and Dona Pepa (Lucy Beaumont). Homeless ("Thank God for tragedy. It forces us to go forward," replies Pedro), Leonora relocates to Paris with her father while her mother remains behind, earning a living scrubbing floors. Before leaving, Leonora sends a note for Rafael to meet with her, but his mother, who doesn't want her to disgrace the family name, forbids him to ever see her again, an argument that forces Rafael to tear up Leonora's note and throwing it into a pig sty. As for Leonora, she learns the truth and leaves without saying goodbye. Years later, Leonora, whose father has since died, has become the renowned opera singer La Brunna, the idol of Paris, with Salvatti (Arthur Edmund Carewe) as her mentor, while Rafael rises from deputy to a political career with Remedios Matias (Gertrude Olmstead), a new romantic interest whom mother approves. Longing to return to her old village and see her mother, Leonora meets with Rafael once again, leading to further developments including a disastrous rain storm, a dam burst leading to a severe flood causing destruction to the town, and worse, the interference of Rafael's mother in keeping the two lovers apart by demeaning her good name.

Ricardo Cortez, reportedly born Jacob Kranz in Vienna, Austria, is quite convincing as a Spaniard, though one wonders what current heart-throb Rudolph Valentono might have done with his role in this MGM production? There are times Cortez resembles Valentino, which was probably intentional. Interestingly, as Cortez's character is allowed to age through the passage of time, the one of Garbo's does not, at least not much. Their characters, very much in love, equally balanced with ambition to succeed, only to realize success means nothing in their separate lives. The flood sequences midway through the story is well constructed for its time, but unlike other disaster movies, this one doesn't up enough time to turn this 88 minute production into a two hour spectacular.

For Garbo's initial Hollywood role, her physical presence appears more like the current style of either Norma Shearer or a Carol Dempster. Regardless of hairstyle and trend, the Garbo technique is evident, especially during its latter part of the story.

Others members of the cast include Mack Swain (most notable for his work opposite Charlie Chaplin in 1925s THE GOLD RUSH) as Olmstead's father, "the pork king" who loves his hogs; Lillian Leighton as Isabella; and Mario Carrillo as The King of Spain.

Seldom shown since its initial premiere, THE TORRENT was finally brought back in circulation when cable television's Turner Classic Movies premiered this rare find on June 8, 1997, with new score composed by Arthur Barron. The orchestration is fine, depicting the culture and background of Spain, but not something one's accustomed to by way of organ or piano accompaniment, which really isn't a bad thing in this case, though. THE TORRENT may not live much to its title, but Garbo certainly lives up to her promise as MGM's latest addition to its cavalcade of stars. (***)

I was given the opportunity to see this 1926 film in a magnificently restored theater that was once part of the extensive Paramount chain of vaudeville houses. This Paramount has a ‘Mighty Wurlitzer' organ – also magnificently restored -- that was used to accompany the silent films of the day.

We were fortunate enough to have Dennis James, a key figure in the international revival of silent films at the Mighty Wurlitzer playing appropriate music and thematic compositions fitting to the action on the film. The print was a nearly perfect digital copy of the rapidly decaying nitrate negative and the entire experience was a once-in-a-lifetime chance to see a silent film as it was meant to be seen.

This was Greta Garbo's first American film. She was only 20 years old but already had 6 Swedish films in her repertoire.

It is somewhat ironic that this is a silent film about an opera star; even though the Mighty Wurlitzer added immensely to the mise-en-scene, it was necessary to leave much to the imagination.

Modern audiences, for the most part, do not understand silent films… Acting was different then, with expansive gestures and broad facial expressions. Therefore audiences laugh at inappropriate times – the acting is seen as ‘hammy' and over-done – but it was simply the style of the period.

Garbo, with all her subtlety, did much to usher in the new age of acting: she could say more with a half-closed eye and volumes could be read into a downward glance or a simple shrug. She exemplifies the truism that `a picture is worth a thousand words.'

Even though this is Garbo's first American film it is pretty obvious the studio knew what they had on their hands: This was MGM filmmaking at its best. The sets and costumes were magnificent. The special effects – which by today's standards are pretty feeble – were still electrifying and amazing.

The script by Vicente Blasco Ibanez (from the novel by Entre Naranjos) would seem to be tailor made for Garbo; it showcases her strengths, magnifies her assets and there is no pesky language problem to deal with: a Swedish actress can play a Spanish temptress with no suspension of disbelief on our part.

Her co-star was MGM's answer to Rudolph Valentino: Ricardo Cortez. He does an admirable job and did something that few romantic stars of the day ever would have done in a film: allow himself to look unnactractive, appear foolish and to grow old ungracefully.

There are some fairly good character parts that are more than adequately acted – especially when you consider the powerhouse that was Garbo. Notable among them are Lucien Littlefield as ‘Cupido' and Martha Mattox as ‘Doña Bernarda Brull.'

This is when the extraordinary cinematographer, William H. Daniels, met Garbo – they went on to make 20 films together. (He was the cinematographer on 157 films and his career spanned five decades!) He was able to capture her ethereal beauty and it was his photography that was primarily responsible for the moniker by which she became known: The Divine Garbo. Without his magnificent abilities she would not have been the success that she was.

Seeing this film is an all-too-rare opportunity: if you ever have the chance, do not miss it.

I have to preface the review by saying that I have been a very big Garbo fan ever since I saw her in ANNA KARENINA in which she gives one of the finest and most gripping performances ever captured onscreen. In certain films like GRAND HOTEL she veers too much towards an artificial and contrived style of acting, when she plays certain types of characters like the ballerina there (overdoing and overstating the "prima donna" aspect), but still overall I have always included her in my Top 10 list of Classic Hollywood Actresses.

In this film however - the very first she made in America - she is QUITE DISAPPOINTING on the whole, and no her "beauty" alone cannot save her AT ALL here despite what some apparently think. Her facial expressions are sometimes really bizarre, and as the story progresses, she keeps "breaking out" into the SAME quasi-disdainful, quasi-sardonic kind of LAUGH (during her scenes with one particular central character) which becomes SO REPETITIVE AND INSINCERE as to seem both *AMATEURISH* and *BORING*. Surely either she or the director Monta Bell could have come up with different ways to convey her psychological reactions in all those scenes. It might have worked if this was a farcical kind of comedy PERHAPS, but it is NOT that kind of film.

It is also painfully obvious that she is not really singing AT ALL, especially towards the very beginning, but merely moving her lips with ZERO engagement of her body (which is a vital plot point here considering the fact that her character has operatic aspirations). This was a silent film, so she could have just sung something for real, without worrying about what it would "sound" like. Even Audrey Hepburn looks like she's really singing in MY FAIR LADY, and had clearly observed Marni Nixon closely for some physical verisimilitude.

In fact, for much of the film, Garbo looks like she is JUST FAKING IT. There are of course a few scenes where we see glimpses of what would become a terrific actress IN THE YEARS TO COME, but overall she is shockingly GREEN AND RAW and kind of wrong here. Her hand movements look almost laughable in a few scenes that are supposed to be emotionally climactic, completely undercutting the pathos or poignancy meant to be conveyed in those moments. And in the scenes where she keeps laughing that fake He-Man and Skeletor type of laugh from the old Filmation animations, her character comes across as VERY UNLIKEABLE and UNSYMPATHETIC - to the point where the character that we are SUPPOSED to be against emerges in a much more sympathetic and genuinely human light.

I know Garbo was not exactly a very "human" kind of star/actress, but what we see here is not a Sphinx but rather someone who seems almost MISCAST! I swear that Joan Crawford could have done a vastly better job here, or even Norma Shearer for that matter......Constance Bennett, or most other stars-in-the-making that MGM had. Once again, Garbo's mere "look" CANNOT salvage an epic story like this. I wanted so much to fall in love with her from the time she first appeared onscreen as a peasant girl praying in the garden, but she kept making it ever more difficult. I don't want to give away any spoilers, but by the end of it all, I thought she DESERVED her emotional fate (because of the way she played the role) although that's arguably not what the audience is supposed to feel.

By stark contrast, in ANNA KARENINA almost a decade later, she MADE my heart go out to her even though she was playing a selfish adultereress who walked out on her son. I guess she really really needed TIME and a more genius type of director to bring out the kind of performances that would make her an enduring legend.

All this being said, the REST of the cast is PRACTICALLY PITCH PERFECT!!!!! Everyone else is 1000% committed to their characters, and brings out all the psychological and emotional dimensions of their roles to such a degree that Garbo looks like they cast her ONLY for the way she "looked" and not for any acting capabilities she had at the time. The actress who plays Dona Bernarda acts with a superlative degree of NATURALISM for instance, which makes you feel like you're watching something made decades into the future!!!!! That's just one example. The entire supporting cast WORKS WONDERS to make the story come to life and make you believe the illusion that this is really a Spanish village and not just an MGM production!!

The special effects and the torrent sequence are also *ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT*. I imagine it must have struck the 1926 audience as the TITANIC OF ITS TIME.

Hats off to MGM who did not always do this kind of film.......it really does hold up even a century later EVEN THOUGH the leading lady here shockingly turned out to be the WEAK LINK. I don't blindly "worship" any star, however much I may like and admire them overall, and so I will repeat that Garbo is A DISAPPOINTMENT here as an actress. Doesn't matter what she looked like. I don't watch films to see models on display after all!

But it's a MUST SEE film for all classic film buffs. I had to deduct 4 stars for Garbo's performance but it's a REALLY SOLID film in and of itself.......if it was made today it would doubtless be 2 hours or even 2 and a half hours long because of the story's SHEER SCOPE, but for a silent film, it leaves you wanting more which is actually a good thing. Most silent films of the time spanned 60-70 minutes, and even though this is 90 minutes long, it really does leave you yearning for more story. :) It will make you think a lot about the decisions human beings make, and the way we navigate through the vicissitudes of life.