Mayerling

I first saw this movie about 20 years ago in SBS Channel in Sydney, Australia. The movie was in the French language so I had to read the subtitles. It is a very old movie in B&W but it was a very enchanting movie. Danielle Darrieux was perfect for the role of the beautiful Anna Vetsera. Her acting was also perfect (for an innocent girl madly in-love with her prince). Whether the real Anna Vetsera was as innocent is beside the point. The movie was based on the true story of the love affair between the Archduke Rudolf (heir to the throne of Austria- Hungary) and his young mistress Baroness Anna Vetsera. They committed a suicide (or murder-suicide?) in 1889 in the Archduke's hunting lodge in Mayerling. Afterwards the title of Archduke passed on to the emperor's nephew, Franz Ferdinand (who became heir). Franz Ferdinand was assassinated in July 1914 in Sarajevo in Bosnia-Herzegovina which sparked the First World War. This movie has a very sad ending, with both lovers dying in the end. But the implications for the real world in that era was most terrible. It is a great wonder today whether there would have been war in 1914 had Rudolf lived and remained heir.

Recently, I was able to obtain a copy of the this movie and saw it again after 20 years. The movie did not disappoint and I can say that it is one of the best movies ever. It must have been such a sensation when first released in 1936.

The story of the perceived (other conspiracy theories are available!) double-suicide of Archduke Rudolph of Austria and his teenage lover Baroness Marie Vetsera at Mayerling in 1889 is one of the great royal dynastic tragedies of the 19th Century and has even been named a contributory factor in the outbreak of the First World War some 25 years later.

In this French-language version by Ukranian director Anatole Litvak, we get a highly-romanticised version of the story with Charles Boyer and Danielle Darrieux as the star-crossed but ill-fated lovers.

The direction throughout is stylish and tasteful, Litvak impressing in his recreation of the Viennese Court with its surface splendour barely concealing the jostling for position and rumour-mongering beneath the facade. Boyer and Darrieux are excellent in their lead roles, his character the reforming, rebellious heir to the throne, unhappy in his arranged marriage and she the youthful, highly-impressionable innocent caught up in the first great passion of her life.

The concluding climax is sensitively and humanely depicted too with my only major criticisms of the film being an over-reliance on the use of the no-doubt in-vogue montage sequences and a tendency to slightly overstay the camera's welcome in certain scenes.

Nevertheless, this was a fine retelling of the notorious scandal and it's no surprise that its artistic and commercial success lured director Litvak to Hollywood where he enjoyed a distinguished career for many years.

Joseph Kessel and Marcel Achard turned the book of Claude Annet "Mayerling" into a strong script with time to overlook the political situation in the Austrian Empire at that time. The costumes of Annenkov are impressive and the music of Arthur Honegger "Musique Nouvelle" goes well with the pathetism of this flamboyant movie. The Austrian emperor Joseph (Jean Dax) is historically correct and Marie Vetsera (Danielle Darieux) and Rudolph of Habsbourg (Charles Boyer) form a convincing couple with much love but without future.

In my reviews of the 1968 Terence Young version,I've already told my thoughts on the historical facts.There's no need to get back on it:suffice to say the true story was not as romantic as sensitive people still thinks so today.

Anatole Litvak does not pass over in silence Rudolph's dissoluteness, as two orgy scenes testify.Besides,Charles Boyer is a much better archduke than Omar Shariff.Ditto Danielle Darrieux who was about 20 (whereas Catherine Deneuve was nearing 25 when she played Mary),thus a more credible baroness Vetsera .Both versions,it's important to notice ,are from Claude Anet's NOVEL.It's not a historian's work and it should be not looked upon so.

However,Litvak is a better director than Terence Young.With a much smaller budget,and of course without the 1968 technical aids ,he works wonders :the tiny church where Rudolph meets Mary in half-light creates a mystical and heathen atmosphere at once.The night at the opera house is dazzling.To conclude the scene of the ball at the German embassy ,the artist uses a stunning tracking out which leaves the swirling twirling dancers,then stops on a glass door adorned with the Habsburg emblem.Rudolphe ,firing at his reflection in a mirror is an adequate metaphor.

A minor flaw:Gabrielle Dorziat is completely miscast as Sissi ,Rudolph's mother:she was one of the most beautiful women of her time (we can see the magnificent Winterhalter portraits at the beginning of the movie).At fifty,when the Mayerling tragedy occurred,her beauty was still incomparable.She had nothing to do with the aging dowager we see on the screen (in Young 's version,it's Ava Gardner!)

And hats off to Danielle Darrieux who ,sixty-four years after "Mayerling" ,recently triumphed in "8 femmes",a blockbuster in France.Any advance?

Film lovers of a certain age will remember the cine-clubs and cinema societies where we cut our teeth on so many of the great classics. And, in this age of digital restoration and director's cuts, they will remember with ghastly fondness the `beater print'-a worn 16mm reel with hard-to-read subtitles, muddy greys, and blown-out whites. Well, here we have it. `Mayerling' is a beautiful film. Boyer (someone I'm not a fan of) is perfect as the impetuous, passionate prince. Darrieux has less to do but is so adorable you don't mind. Litvak's direction is superb, flitting in amongst the Viennese crowds to find the isolated lovers, the courtly grandeur of a 500-year-old empire, and the little touches that turn a good film great. But `Mayerling' is only available from Timeless Video of North Hollywood, CA. And it's an awful video. Half of the subtitles are below the screen, the scenes are mud, and the sound is so distorted you'd think you were watching a 1929 film. What to do? First off, don't buy *anything* from Timeless Video. Then wait for someone to realize a truly beautiful DVD of this great movie. Watching it in its current shape would merely spoil it for you.