AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
7,2/10
3,6 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaA woman and her husband take separate vacations, and she falls in love with another man.A woman and her husband take separate vacations, and she falls in love with another man.A woman and her husband take separate vacations, and she falls in love with another man.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória no total
Ivan Lebedeff
- Prince Vladimir Gregorovitch
- (cenas deletadas)
Leonard Carey
- Barker's Footman
- (não creditado)
Louise Carter
- Flower Woman
- (não creditado)
Phyllis Coghlan
- Maria's Maid
- (não creditado)
Gino Corrado
- Assistant Hotel Manager
- (não creditado)
George Davis
- First Taxi Driver
- (não creditado)
Duci De Kerekjarto
- Violinist
- (não creditado)
Herbert Evans
- Lord Davington's Butler
- (não creditado)
James Finlayson
- Barker's Second Butler
- (não creditado)
Bobbie Hale
- News Vendor
- (não creditado)
Avaliações em destaque
Lubitsch is recognized as one of the great directors of the 30s, and yet this wonderful film is not on any of the usual critical lists of notable films. Perhaps it was too modern for its time. It is perhaps Dietrich's best English performance (though even here she could be a bit more subtle), but the real star is the director, shining in the shots he composes and performances he coaxes from his actors. Lubitsch is a master of subtlety, and when he places important moments off-screen, it is in such a way as to heighten their impact. Since the censorship code is in effect, the sexual elements are cleverly concealed. For example, Halton and Barker discover that in Paris they both visited the same... seamstress. The naive Hays Office must have thought that was the joke, but the real joke is on them for it is clear--at least today--that the two did not visit her to get their sewing done. The sophistication of the film is unusual for its time.
Pages could be written about this film. Suffice it to say that if you like 30s film at all, see this. In certain moments, it feels perfect. Probably one of the top 25 of the decade.
Pages could be written about this film. Suffice it to say that if you like 30s film at all, see this. In certain moments, it feels perfect. Probably one of the top 25 of the decade.
Ernst Lubitsch was an incredibly talented director, who to me rarely made a dud, with his best films even being masterpieces. Even his lesser films are worth a look, even if just once, and better than a lot of directors at their worst.
'Angel' is not among his best films, being not in the same league as 'The Merry Widow', 'Ninotchka', Heaven Can Wait', 'The Shop Around the Corner' and especially 'Trouble in Paradise'. It is however, for all its imperfections, one of his more overlooked films. Some may say 'Angel' is a gem, others may say it's a rare dud. To me, it's neither but is much better than its reputation suggests.
By all means it could have been better. It does lag in places, not helped by a story being a bit thin for the running time, with some of the romantic melodrama laid on too thickly at times. Herbert Marshall, who is more capable of giving a good performance but has also given some dull ones, is rather somnolent in his role. A few of the secondary roles are underwritten, Edward Everett Horton while still being very funny in particular is under-utilised.
With those being said, while just lacking the famous "Lubitsch touch", being on subdued form and lacking the risqué edge, Lubitsch does direct with his customary class and subtlety. He also has some beautiful visual touches, in a lovingly photographed and designed film that clearly loves Marlene Dietrich, judging by now positively luminous she looks.
Music is appropriately whimsical in places while also sweeping without being overbearing. The script does have some sparkling humour in the supporting roles and typically sophisticated with a warm charm. The story is less than perfect but has some fun and charming moments.
Dietrich is as aforementioned luminous, has a class and elegance and gives her character good comic timing and pathos. In the supporting roles, Horton and Ernest Cossart are particularly entertaining with their back and forth standing out of the comedy.
In conclusion, could have been better but overlooked. 7/10 Bethany Cox
'Angel' is not among his best films, being not in the same league as 'The Merry Widow', 'Ninotchka', Heaven Can Wait', 'The Shop Around the Corner' and especially 'Trouble in Paradise'. It is however, for all its imperfections, one of his more overlooked films. Some may say 'Angel' is a gem, others may say it's a rare dud. To me, it's neither but is much better than its reputation suggests.
By all means it could have been better. It does lag in places, not helped by a story being a bit thin for the running time, with some of the romantic melodrama laid on too thickly at times. Herbert Marshall, who is more capable of giving a good performance but has also given some dull ones, is rather somnolent in his role. A few of the secondary roles are underwritten, Edward Everett Horton while still being very funny in particular is under-utilised.
With those being said, while just lacking the famous "Lubitsch touch", being on subdued form and lacking the risqué edge, Lubitsch does direct with his customary class and subtlety. He also has some beautiful visual touches, in a lovingly photographed and designed film that clearly loves Marlene Dietrich, judging by now positively luminous she looks.
Music is appropriately whimsical in places while also sweeping without being overbearing. The script does have some sparkling humour in the supporting roles and typically sophisticated with a warm charm. The story is less than perfect but has some fun and charming moments.
Dietrich is as aforementioned luminous, has a class and elegance and gives her character good comic timing and pathos. In the supporting roles, Horton and Ernest Cossart are particularly entertaining with their back and forth standing out of the comedy.
In conclusion, could have been better but overlooked. 7/10 Bethany Cox
The Lubitsch touch is omnipresent in this relatively unknown but extraordinary romantic comedy. The theme of a potential marital infidelity of a disaffected upper class wife (a gleaming Marlene Dietrich) is dealt with unusual sophistication and insight, building up slowly to a brilliant denouement, while the core dilemmas and the predicament of the main character are continuously and subtly underscored. The confrontations between the characters are a delight of restrained pathos, whereas Lubitsch, unsurprisingly, perfectly recreates a confined world of rigid social norms that suppresses any emotional profusion. All the performances are top notch, the secondary characters are equally memorable and the whole film is pervaded by the genius of one of cinemas most charismatic directors, Ernst Lubitsch. One wishes that modern romantic comedies had only maintained even a fraction of the wit and incisiveness that Lubitsch established as a norm in the 30s.
Fans of Lubitsch have always been disappointed in this 1937 film, the last one Marlene made under her Paramount contract and a failure at the box office. Perhaps because it is not one of the director's champagne comedies, although it has its occasional comic moments. It is, unlike most of the director's later works, a serious drama about a neglected woman, dutiful wife of a workaholic English diplomat, who has a brief fling in Paris with an attractive American playboy and chooses to forget about it until... Marlene is absolutely superb in this demanding psychological role, radiantly beautiful and flirtatious at times, glacially cold at others. The men, Herbert Marshall as the stiff upper class Brit, and Melvyn Douglas as the frivolous Yank out for pleasure, are exactly right as men of the world without the slightest notion of what a woman might be. Films like this about adultery were rarely made after the Pre-Code era and, as to be expected, Lubitsch displays his genius for erotic suggestion. He never shows us what he knows we can imagine. Filmed entirely on the Paramount Hollywood lot in the golden age, it is filled with gorgeous sets and furniture, Dietrich in Travis Banton gowns, underscoring by Fredrick Hollander, and glamorous back-lighting by Charles Lang-all dedicated to creating a world of sophistication that never existed other than in Hollywood. This is a major Lubitsch film, among his most complex efforts.
10danland2
Wonderful Lubitsch comedy about a distracted husband, a neglected wife and an ardent suitor that has all the magic, humor, romance of the directors previous work. Dazzling camera work by Charles Lang make Deitrich look positively luminous. All the cast are perfect. The audience I saw this with at the LACMA Museum screening were utterly entranced by this neglected masterwork. Kudos to UCLA for restoring this treasure to its original splendor and to LACMA programer Ian Birnie for giving us the opportunity to see this little gem in all its glory. A 10 out of 10.........
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe last film for Marlene Dietrich at Paramount under her seven-year contract with the studio. It was not renewed due to a series of recent flops for her films.
- ConexõesFeatured in Le cinéma passe à table (2005)
- Trilhas sonorasAngel
(1937) (uncredited)
Music by Friedrich Hollaender
Lyrics by Leo Robin
Played during the opening and end credits
Played on violin by Duci De Kerekjarto (as Duci Kerekjarto)
Played on piano by Marlene Dietrich and by Melvyn Douglas
Played as background music often
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Angel?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Tempo de duração1 hora 31 minutos
- Cor
- Proporção
- 1.37 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente