La magnifica bambola

I stumbled across this movie in a rather old presidential quiz book. Already knowing a great deal about Dolley Madison before I bought the movie wondering how they were going to dramatize one America's most beloved first ladies. I started the movie with mixed emotions and finished it feeling the same.

Ginger Rogers was a great actress but she doesn't pull off a convincing Dolley Madison-there's something missing. I don't know what it is, but it just isn't there. I did manage to overlook Rogers performance and applaud David Niven who was perhaps my favorite character. He pulled off the scheming Aaron Burr to perfection. From the beginning as a senator, to the tie with Jefferson in the election of 1800, to the treason trial that forced him into obscurity. It was Aaron Burr who introduced Dolley to James Madison in the first place. Reading the box I knew Burgess Meredith would play James Madison it was a shock to see him (I'm dating myself here when I say the first time I saw him was in Grumpy Old Men). I liked him second, his smallness (after all James Madison is still our shortest president at 5'6') and his quiet way made it easy to understand why Dolley Madison choice him instead of Aaron Burr.

After watching this movie I had rather hoped that Hollywood would find someone to redo this movie. I think Dolley Madison's life is just as interesting as Thomas Jefferson's. Maybe if they do choose to redo this movie they could show that she had two sons (in the movie it only mentions one son who died in the yellow fever epidemic but actually she had one older that lived). The elder son, named Payne Todd, from Dolley's first husband who died in the Philadelphia yellow fever epidemic of 1794, is the one who caused many heartaches in Dolley's later years even though she didn't admit it. He was a drunkard and a scoundrel and spent money lavishly.

To get back to the movie, overall it wasn't bad. If you like period pieces and good verses evil you'll enjoy this movie. It wasn't the best movie I've seen but wasn't the worst. The acting was good; especially David Niven and Burgess Meredith did an okay job. They played a little bit with Dolley's life but you can't expect Hollywood to get it right all the time.

David niven, ginger rogers, burgess meredith. This is the love triangle of dolly payne, james madison, aaron burr. A little united states history, told from dolly's point of view. Probably not the best choice, as it's all quite stuffy and stilted. Dolly spouts sayings, mottos, aphorisms all the way through. Burr is chasing after dolly, but she finds madison attractive. If you know murrican history, you'll know how it turned out! It moves pretty slowly... the script needed some zinging up. No real magic between all these stars, it's mostly fighting over political ideals. Slavery, north versus south. And apparently burr had designs on taking leadership of the united states by force, rather than by election. B meredith is quite lucid in this one. In some, he slurs and mumbles. It's okay. Directed by frank borzage. He had already won his two oscars already. Written by irving stone. He had also written lust for life, about van gogh.

Ostensibly set in the late eighteenth century, MAGNIFICENT DOLL is a biopic of Dolley Madison (Ginger Rogers), who is forced into marriage with her first husband John Todd (Horace McNally); suffers a bereavement due to the plague, and encounters dashing senator Aaron Burr (David Niven). The two of them fall in love, but Dolley discovers to her cost that Aaron is not quite the romantic hero she first assumed. His ambition often gets the better of his reason, so much so that he is prepared to flout the constitution to achieve his ends. Eventually Dolley marries Senator James Madison (Burgess Meredith) and condemns Aaron to a life of perpetual isolation - a free man yet with no one to support him either politically or personally.

Released in the year immediately following the end of World War II, Frank Borzage's film underlines the importance of the constitution, especially the parts focusing on freedom, the rule of law and social equality. There are long sequences involving Madison, Dolley and Aaron which discuss such topics: sometimes it seems that the film has sacrificed plot-development for propaganda. Aaron is a superficially attractive character, but he believes in despotic rule in which everyone should submit to his will. He needs to be ousted in order for the American way of life to continue.

Stylistically speaking, MAGNIFICENT DOLL oscillates between love- scenes involving Dolley and Aaron (with H. J. Salter's lush score appearing somewhat intrusive), and sequences of political intrigue and/or debate. Dolley's first supper-party is impressively staged, with Dolley and Madison sat at either end of a long table, flanked by congressmen and their spouses. Borzage's camera intercuts between the two protagonists, making us aware of their burgeoning relationship which was both personal and political in scope.

David Niven was a highly versatile actor who often seemed to be typecast in romantic leading roles. By the mid-Forties his career as a leading man was on the skids, due in no small part to his military service in the British army. As Aaron, he has the chance to demonstrate his capacities, especially when he tries (and fails) to conceal his frustrations both in love and politics. Meredith makes a convincing Madison; the kind of person whom everyone can trust and hence an ideal presidential candidate. Rogers doesn't have much to do, except for a climactic speech delivered at the end of the film to the Virginian people where she emphasizes the importance of the rule of law. This she delivers with élan.

MAGNIFICENT DOLL is a watchable film, even if its didactic purposes sometimes get in the way of its dramatic development.

Except for those Vice Presidents who ended up as President (14 of them)only one is remembered as a distinct personality: Aaron Burr. And it is for some questionable reasons. His ambitions were on the scale of Napoleon Bonaparte, aimed (supposedly) not only towards the U.S. but also Mexico, and against Spain (and supposedly willing to use French or British assistance). He managed to show that Thomas Jefferson, for all his brilliance as party leader and politician, could be momentarily thrown for a loop by a clever, unforeseen loophole. He helped destroy Alexander Hamilton's political career, and then ended Hamilton as well. And, despite facing political ruin, he managed to leave his political chief's political projects in ruins. To 90% of the American public, mention Burr and the word "traitor" or "unscrupulous" pops up.

There are those who deny this view of Burr. Jefferson and Hamilton were grown men, who played hard ball politics with each other and with each other's supporters. Burr was no different from them. Jefferson was willing, as John Adams' Vice President, to forget his old friendship with Adams and concentrate on derailing his chief's policies and aims (as Burr did towards Jefferson). Hamilton hit Burr pretty well in the New York Gubernatorial race of 1804, helping to defeat Burr in that election (and in the process so insulting Burr as to lead to Burr's challenge and their duel in Weehauken). As for the treason against the U.S., it is now questioned if Burr was really planning to overturn U.S. government control over the western states, or just jumping the gun on westward expansion (Burr died in 1836, and lived long enough to see the fall of the Alamo and the creation of the Texas Republic - he made some sharp and cutting comments that one age's treason was another age's patriotism, which seems well called for). But in any case, Hamilton had played around with similar expeditions in Latin America in the late 1790s. But he never went as far as Burr did, involving the ranking general of the U.S. Army as a co-conspirator. So Hamilton's actions are forgotten today but Burr's actions are not.

One day a creative script on Burr's career will be created, and a Scorsese director will handle it. Until then, the only film dealing with Burr's career (aside from a television version of "The Man Without a Country" made in the 1970s)is this odd little film that concentrates on the career of Dolly Payne Todd Madison, the wife of the "father of the Constitution", our 4th President James Madison. Ginger Rogers and Burgess Meredith play the Madisons (and give good performances), but the film is stolen by David Niven. Niven's darker side was rarely noticed in his climb to stardom, but when he played a figure with frailties (the Major in "Seperate Tables", or the scoundrelly heir in "Tonight's the Night") he actually gave his best performances. Here he played Burr as the ambitious politico who nearly stole the 1800 election from Tom Jefferson (but for Alex Hamilton's action to keep enough Federalists from supporting Burr), and as Hamilton's slayer turned into super traitor - who got acquitted in the treason trial of 1807 (the film does not show how poor the government's case against Burr really was). Unrepentent at the end, he manages to maintain our fascination, although the audience feels it was a blessing that he failed in the end. In reality, given his commitment to immigrants, abolitionism, and feminist rights (which neither Adams, Jefferson, nor Hamilton were fully committed to), one wonders if it would have been such a bad thing had he become President in 1800.

Bizarrely cast and talky historical drama about the romantic and political involvement of the titular Southern belle (Ginger Rogers) with the then-U.S. Secretary of State James Madison (Burgess Meredith) and misguidedly ambitious Presidential nominee Aaron Burr (David Niven). Given that Niven ends up losing both the girl and the candidature (to Thomas Jefferson), he is understandably glum throughout – but the tragic fact that the beloved British actor had just lost his wife in a freak accident at home surely cannot have aided his countenance any! As usual, my fondness for films depicting political machinations perhaps made this appeal to me more than it would have otherwise but, while everybody concerned was clearly seen at a better advantage elsewhere, it must be said here that the narrative certainly wasn't a familiar one and, consequently, it held my interest throughout.