A Dama das Camélias

When you think of the lavish 30s films of MGM, Camille is near the top of the list. Great story and flawless production here boasting perhaps the most shimmering of Greta Garbo's ethereal performances as Marguerita Gautier (Camille). Familiar and much filmed story, this is nevertheless the best of them all. Matching Garbor is the hopelessly romantic Robert Taylor in his best 30s role. Also good are Lionel Barrymore, Henry Daniell, and Jessie Ralph as the maid. Great comic relief is provided by Laura Hope Crews (Prudence)and Lenore Ulric (Olympe)--what a pair of vultures! But the center of this gorgeous film is Garbo. She is so frail looking, her voice so soft. Garbo plays Marguerite as a frailty incarnate. She never overacts the part as most do with the endless coughing and fainting. One of George Cukor's triumphs. Rex O'Malley and Elizabeth Allan are dull but have small parts. I also spotted Eily Malyon and Zeffie Tilbury, and Joan Leslie is listed in the credits. I think this is Garbo's best performance, but she lost the Oscar to Luise Rainer for The Good Earth. Also nominated that year: Irene Dunne (The Awful Truth), Barbara Stanwyck (Stella Dallas), and Janet Gaynor (A Star Is Born). Wow----how could you choose just one?

"Perhaps it ill be better if I live in your heart, where the world can't see me. If I'm dead, there will be no staying of our love."

The novel/play by Alexandre Dumas Fils LA DAME AUX CAMELIAS has attracted a lot of artists. Verdi wrote his opera LA TRAVIATA basing its content on this play. The film industry have also made a lot of adaptations of the play from the period of silent era up till modern times. However, if one hears a movie title CAMILLE, what usually comes to one's mind is the film by George Cukor with Greta Garbo and Robert Taylor. Why? There is something magical about this version that made it stand a test of time, something that helped it be appreciated for almost seven decades. Is it performances, cinematography, or Garbo's presence that make it so enchanting to watch? The answer is not so easy because the movie is a masterpiece of beauty at multiple levels.

The performances are absolutely outstanding. It is difficult to say if Garbo gives her best performance in CAMILLE or GRAND HOTEL. I think that it is more a matter of personal preferences. One thing is sure - she does something more than acting. She totally feels the role, every movement, every gesture is extremely natural as if you were watching reality not a movie. As a result, Garbo achieves something really outstanding in CAMILLE, some kind of the ultimate masterpiece of performance. Robert Taylor very well fits to the role of Armand Duvall. He manages to stress the most important feature of his role - delicacy and sincerity. Henry Daniell is a perfect choice for Baron De Varville - cruel, unemotional, cynical, and very selfish. I shall never forget the scene when Marguerite plays a lyrical piece on the piano expecting Armand's visit. However, it is Baron who comes unexpectedly. While Armand is trying to get to the house, Baron plays the piano and Marguerite has to behave as if she wasn't expecting anyone. The scene ends with hysterical laughter of them both and a magnificent acting. Laura Hope Crews also gives a lovely performance as Prudence Duvernoy stressing her frivolity and extravagance. Consider her performance at the party at the mansion. Yet, Lionel Barrymore, though not given much time on screen, is memorable, particularly in the scene of his meeting with Marguerite. What a lovely presentation of two different world views! Not a better or a worse view but DIFFERENT views - Marguerite attached to love and emotions and Monsieur Duval to social ties and reputation.

The cinematography is superb. Almost each scene has a "soul" which makes watching the movie a real admiration of beauty. The most memorable decorations are in the scene in a candle-lit boudoir filled with delicate lighting and shadows. Marguerite is looking at her reflection in the mirror and suddenly notices Armand from behind. A delicate classic musical piece is being played in the background. UNFORGETTABLE! The film's gorgeous imagery is a very strong point for the movie.

Perhaps, you will wonder why I praise this movie so much. But if you asked me if I can ever forget CAMILLE, my answer would be "never" because the imagery of this movie and the effect it has on a viewer is endless. How is it possible to forget a beautiful scene of Marguerite's first meeting with Armand? Is it also possible to skip a lovely idyllic pastoral sequence with sheep and flowering trees? How to forget a touching moment when Gaston, Marguerite's true friend, is putting a beautiful bunch of camellias at her side while she is lying ill in bed? Finally, the touching final shot and Marguerite's beautiful words that I entailed at the beginning of my review. These words, which purely refer to spiritual love, are the last words that Marguerite says.

Yes, CAMILLE is a masterpiece, one of the very few movies that promotes real beauty. It is not only a tearjerker. It is not only a story of love. It is a movie that teaches high respect for precious values in life. 10/10!

Camille (1936)

This melodramatic tale of true life in the face of the strictures of social reality is tried and true. You feel for both the male lead (Robert Taylor, who is quite good) and the female (Grate Garbo, of course, who is excellent). That's the whole point. These are two people who are not quite appropriate because they come from different social levels, but there is a sense they could make it work if they wanted to.

But outside forces get in the way. Chief among them is the man's father, who wants to save his son from a marriage that will ruin both husband and wife. This is a key role in the film, and a critical if brief 10 minutes or so. The father is played, importantly, by Lionel Barrymore, who does little else int he movie. But here he makes his case to the Garbo with amazing force. It's a great scene, even if you wish Garbo would leap up and say, no, no, I'm going to follow my heart.

But exactly what happens is what the movie is about. The rules of the culture of the time (1800s France) prevent an honest sense of two people marrying out of simple love for one another. In a way, that's the whole point of continuing the old Dumas story, which has resonated for decades into the Hollywood era. I'm not sure it would work now, except as an historical drama. This is set in the period (around 1850) and feels legit. Unlike the curious (and not bad) 1921 silent version, which sets it in a 1920s culture, this one transports us back to the original. Fair enough!

There is a contrived quality to the plot, for sure, partly because of its origins. While this doesn't ruin the whole enterprise, there is a slight feeling of being led along the whole time. Garbo and Taylor are both terrific, however, and we feel some honesty to their feelings for one another. It's on that basis that the movie works. And it really does, even through the over the top drama in the last scene. Moving and beautiful overall.

Most Greta Garbo fans rank this as her finest work--and it probably is. Not only is she highly competent in the title role, but the supporting cast shines just as brightly--everyone from Laura Hope Crewes to Henry Daniell to Lionel Barrymore. And Robert Taylor is the ideal romantic hero at the peak of his darkly handsome good looks. He and Garbo make a wonderful pair.

George Cukor's direction is full of richly observed details of behavior, never flinching from the occasional coarseness of the characters. All of the technical work is above reproach and those familiar with the story of the Lady of the Camelias will not be disappointed. Lionel Barrymore makes a brief but effective appearance midway through the film. His scene with Garbo is delicately played and gives added credence to Garbo's nobility in letting her lover go.

Biggest drawback is the film's pace--some editing may have helped--but the final result is still impressive.

Maybe it helps to be a romantic. But for my money, this is the greatest romance that was ever put on film. It has the perfect stars. Greta Garbo was the star of the age--any age--still beautiful and absolutely created to act in films. Even in silent films, her acting is measured and understated. She never falls prey to exaggeration nor pretense. I think that is the secret to her effectiveness. Allow me an example: after accepting money from Baron de Varville for a disguised outing with her lover Armand (which the Baron already suspects), she kisses him gently on the cheek only to be reviled with a harsh slap from the baron, who then departs. The camera moves in on that incomparable face. The head slowly lowers, the lips slightly part, a low moan expresses the guilt, shame and humiliation which momentarily consume her. Then she spies the money clutched tightly in her hand. Recognizing she now has the means to escape with her lover, a slight smile emerges reflecting her change of mood and restored joy. It is a scene like no other.

As for her co-star, Robert Taylor was castigated as being too callow for the role. In fact, most critics today realize he was exactly what Dumas intended: young, impressionable--and certainly irresistibly gorgeous in his dewy youth. That beauty often caused the young Taylor undeserved venom from the critics. He was a very capable actor and probably set the standard for the contemporary romantic leading man we see even today. Rumors that Garbo dismissed him as unimportant are not true. She liked him very much and was greatly impressed after he sent her mother flowers when they all attended the premiere of CAMILLE in Stockholm.

CAMILLE? A great movie with a great cast, including the marvelous Henry Daniell, whose Baron de Varville is very Jekyll and Hyde. I encourage anyone to see it. It is one of the finest films of the 20th Century.