Sur les marches d'un trône

Mary Tudor (Marion Davies), younger sister of King Henry VIII, as was the custom of the day for noblewomen, is to have an arranged marriage with a king in a foreign land to help cement alliances with England. But Mary falls in love with the captain of the king's guard, Charles Brandon. Ultimately she is pledged to old King Louis of France. She and Brandon escape with Mary disguised as a boy with the king and his men in hot pursuit - William Randolph Hearst liked Marion dressed as a boy and that is likely why this part is even in the film. Will they ever be together or will statecraft win the day? Watch and find out.

It sags dreadfully in the middle, and then near the end picks up the pace with a rousing and even humorous conclusion. It is reported to be the most expensive film made to date the time, and they get the period costumes just right. And although the story is close to historically correct, King Henry VIII is portrayed as he looked in a portrait by Hans Holbein that was painted in 1536 when Henry was 45 and obese. He was in fact only five years older than his sister Mary, but then audiences would likely not recognize or accept a slender and athletic young Henry VIII as he looked at the time this story takes place.

This was William Powell's second film appearance, and he turned out to be a very effective and menacing villain. And that's with me knowing what a warm and charming voice that he had, so I can just imagine how he impacted audiences of the day. Strangely enough this was both William Powell's and Gustav von Seyffertitz's next film after 1922's Sherlock Holmes.

Knights in Flowery Dresses is a masterfully costumed and filmed romp through the Court of the Crimson King. But it proves that as far back as 1922 William Randolph Hearst was spending lavish amounts of money trying to prove to the world Marion Davies could act.

Don't get me wrong. Davies was a gifted physical comic actress and mimic. When she's allowed to display those talents in movies, the movies are hugely entertaining. When Daddy Warbucks puts her in costume dramas, her complete lack of talent as a dramatic actor shines through.

I mean, if this is a drama, Davies doesn't act like she's in one. And if it's a comedy it's very unfunny. I know for sure it's not an epic because it barely leaves the castle.

Although the set design is elaborate and expensive, the film failed to hold my interest. Except for King Henry VIII's eyes, which appear to be made of chunks of coal. Very creepy.

What can be said about at the time the most expensive movie ever made with cost an estimated at $1.8 million. The pet project of the famous media magnate William Hearst, it is the tale of a woman, sister who defies all royal conventions, especially one; she falls in love with a commoner - Knight Charles Brandon - while bethrothed not of her choice, of course, to King louis XII of France. Action ensues as the forces of tradition conspire to keep them apart. The sets are very good and Marion davies is extremely good. When I watch a silent movie and I wish to hear what the actor is saying, then the performance is classic. Everyone else is adequate and passable. The director who isn't very good throws in a lot of gothic subtext and an unusual editing style of what I'll term "flash cutting" is used. Cinematography is especially wonderful. Deeper meanings or detailing beyond the obvious social strata innuities and foresight castigations of a by-gone era, is pitifully missing. Entertaining yes, action-packed - agreed but a bit quaint, unlike Robin Hood released around the same time but which holds up much better. (It alsao looks as if it cost more; it did not). But Garbo, Shearer and Dietrich did this too and theirs are better. Worth watching but watch out for sappiness in many moments. Just as a note, this movie was the biggest hit of the 1922-23 movie season, ahead of Robin Hood and Safety last.

I was quite impressed with the restoration of Marion Davies's breakout picture When Knighthood Was In Flower. For its time the film is quite lavish and an awe inspiring spectacle. I wouldn't be surprised if William Randolph Hearst made sure that Paramount had whatever financing it needed to bring his Marion's breakout film to the big screen. The only thing that surprised me was that he didn't get Cecil B. DeMille to direct. But more than likely DeMille did not want to be second guessed by WR Hearst.

With or without DeMille this film is the definition of spectacle. Many of you have probably seen the Disney classic film The Sword And The Rose made during the 50s that starred Richard Todd as Charles Brandon and Glynis Johns as Mary Tudor with James Robertson Justice as Henry VIII. Marion Davies is Mary Tudor, sister of Henry VIII and a pawn in the power play game of medieval Europe.

Lyn Harding is Henry VIII and this is back in the day before he became changing wives like underwear and beheading a pair of them. He's married to Catherine of Aragon aunt of the Hapsburg Emperor Charles V whose many titles also included King of Spain and ruler of the Netherlands as well as all that German and Eastern European territory. Henry VIII thought that if he could get sister Mary hitched to the aged Louis XII of France he'd have things all sewed up alliance wise.

But Mary has a mind of her own. Marion Davies catches one look at Charles Brandon at jousting tournament and she decides this is the guy I want and I don't care if he's not noble.

The long forgotten Forrest Stanley is Charles Brandon. I'm sure WR Hearst didn't want a leading man getting all the attention in Marion's film. Time and the coming of sound have erased our memories of most of the cast. But William Powell plays Francis I of France who succeeded Louis XII when he died. This was Powell's second film and he's properly sinister as Francis. Not that Francis was any more or less bad than any of the other monarchs of the day including Henry VIII in real life. But Powell in his silent years played swarthy sinister villains and Francis I is done in the best Snidely Whiplash tradition.

Historically accurate its not. Anne Boleyn makes a brief appearance here as a girl Henry VIII was beginning to check out. Anne was a mere 13 when all this action is taking place and was not drawing Henry's or anyone else's attention yet.

It's been remarked that Davies's strong suit was a gift for comedy and she has a great old time fleeing from the king with her lover and going to a tavern in male drag. She has a great old time in this part of the film, you could tell Davies was enjoying herself.

I'm glad this film is now restored and we can see both Marion Davies and William Powell in their salad days.

By 1922, it was an open secret that one of newspaper's most powerful publishers, William Randolph Hearst, was not only having an affair with one of Hollywood's top actresses, Marion Davies, but actually living with her. One aspect of the relationship raising eyebrows was his current marriage to Millicent Hearst, mother to their five sons. The illicit liaison didn't seem to impair Davies' public career; in fact, her popularity appeared to have thrived on the 'scandal:' she was voted number one actress by theater owners in 1922 for her marque value, bringing in the most viewing customers of any female film star.

Hearst, a mentor and handler to the actress, produced a number of Davies' movies. One motion picture where he financially went all in on was September 1922's release of "When Knighthood Was In Flower." The actress' role of King Henry VIII's sister forced under a treaty to marry the old French king was a departure from her normal comic ingenue parts. Davies had to display a certain amount of athleticism, not known for her physicality in the past. To prepare for one sword fighting sequence, she spent days learning how to fence. Additionally, her dramatic skills were put to the test when her character falls in love with a commoner, going against what a highly volatile Henry expressedly commanded.

No expense was too great for Hearst when he underwrote the film's production based on a 1898 best selling novel by Charles Major. The newspaper mogul was a stickler for authenticity: he constructed a large-scale medieval village complete with elaborate costumes for his hundreds of extras. For the short scene in the beginning where Davies arrives at King Henry's abode, he had built in Bridgeport, CT, a replica of a 16th-century boat. In all, Hearst spent a record $1.5 million on 'Knighthood,' including the most expensive marketing campaign ever seen in cinema to that time. He rented 650 billboards throughout New York prior to the film's release as well as 300 subway advertising sites. Souvenir books were sold by the thousands, and a huge electric sign with dazzling lights was set up in busy Times Square.

Hearst knew how to sell product, and to prove it, "When Knighthood Was In Flower" was a beneficiary of his pre-publicity campaign. The movie became the second highest box office winner for 1922, trailing only Douglas Fairbanks' 'Robin Hood.' The movie also earned praise with film critics, with even one British art dealer effusive about the motion picture, commenting it's "the most stupendous reproduction of Henry the Eighth court life that has ever been achieved - a marvelous piece of artistry."