User reviews

One of the two versions of this play filmed in 1973, this 'Doll's House' has a strong cast and looks like filmed theatre - not always a bad thing, and it works well enough here to keep the viewer interested.

Anthony Hopkins, prickly as Torvald; Claire Bloom, delicate and confused as Nora; with Ralph Richardson striking just the right note as Dr Rank. Anna Massey and Denholm Elliott complete the cast and are both very good indeed.

Not really cinema, but perhaps the best of the three versions of Ibsen's powerful play I've seen. In comparison with David Warner and Trevor Eve, Hopkins is just as effective; while Claire Bloom's Nora is sufficiently different from Jane Fonda and Juliet Stevenson to attract our interest and empathy.

"A Doll's House" is a very serious drama and is not a play to see when one wants to get the "warm and fuzzies." The plot is a fairly straight forward. Nora and Torvald are a seemingly happy couple who love each other dearly. Nora proves her love when she goes out on a limb to save Torvald's life without him knowing and she winds up in financial trouble. The past comes back to haunt her as the man who lent her money demands she save his job or her reputation will be ruined. Such a favor Nora tries to accomplish as she is desperate to keep her secret from Torvald. Nora has the law against her and she runs a high risk or ruining not only her reputation but also that of Torvald.

The set takes place for the most part within Nora and Torvald's house. This allows the viewer to get an intimate look at the intricacies of the house and what it might be like to live there. Not many props are used. The objects generally used consist of such things as food, letters, and clothing. The women were only ever seen wearing dresses with high collars and the men wore old fashioned jackets with vests.

The lighting was very dim, but this dimness allows for a special type of dramatic effect because characters could hide back in the shadows and be revealed in the dramatic spotlights when it was an important scene.The camera work was very good because it only took the most intimate of shots. The camera was always right in the middle of the action and sometimes it almost seemed as if the viewer was involved in the conflict themselves. Special effects did not really occur except with the dramatic use of lighting and some sound effects.

Music was not a large part of the play but given the setting was during Christmas there were a few Christmas sounding jingles.

Clair Bloom's work as Nora was heart-wrenching and drew sympathy from the viewer. Anthony Hopkins' work as Torvald was equally as riveting while his portrayal of the controlling husband makes the viewer feel he has wronged Nora. Denholm Elliott as Krogstad was as slippery and unlikeable a character as he was supposed to be and matched perfectly with Anna Massey as Mrs. Linde. The director, Patrick Garland, made a classic masterpiece.

This is a good Claire Bloom/Anthony Hopkins version from the classic play written by playwright Henrik Ibsen about an independient woman's quest for freedom in 19th-century Norway . Nora Helmernn (Claire Bloom) , years earlier , committed a forgery in order to save the life of her bossy husband, Torvald (Anthony Hopkins) . Now she is being blackmailed by Krogstad (Denholm Elliott) and lives in fear of her hubby finding out and the shame such a revelation would bring to his job . But when the truth comes out, Nora is shocked to learn where she really stands in her husband's esteem . As the subjugated 19th-century housewife breaks free to establish herself as an individual.

This is a typical filmed play , and rather stagy , it fills in scenes only referred to in Henrik Ibsen's text . Claire Bloom's performance is interesting in that her Nora displays a self-awareness of the role when she is confronting to her husband, which makes her final scene quite believable . However , Bloom's overall manner is too contemporary for a 19th Century wife. If Greta Garbo hadn't retired, her hoped-for version would have proved unassailable . Worth a look for Claire Bloom's acting , giving an awesome performance of a 19th century liberated woman , along with Anthony Hopkins as her authoritarian husband and similarly other actors also shine . All of them give thoughtful interpretations . Still , the words are there and the play is a strong statement about women's and all people's rights to be human beings. As the rest of the cast is very decent : Anthony Hopkins as Torvald Helmer , Sir Ralph Richardon as dying Dr. Rank, Denholm Elliott as the blackmailer , Anna Massey as Kristine Linde and veteran Edith Evans. Well based on the play by prestigious Scandinavian playwright Henrik Ibsen . In 1878 Ibsen moved from Norway to Rome where he lived for seven years. There he started writing the circle of his 11 last plays that made him classic; A Doll's House (1879), Ghosts (1881), An Enemy of the people (1882), The Wild Duck (1884), Rosmersholm (1886), The Lady from the Sea (1888), Hedda Gabler (1890), The Master Builder (1892), Little Ejolf (1894) John Gabriel Borkman (1896) and his last one When We Dead Awaken (1898).

Another version, and with Jane Fonda in the "Nora" role, was released a year later , a moderately successful cinematic adaptation, including gorgeous settings deep in the Scandanavian snow. A Doll's House (1974) by Joseph Losey with Jane Fonda as Nora , Edward Fox as Krogstad , Trevor Howard as dying Dr. Rank , Delphine Seyrig Kristine and David Warner. Filmmakers were correct in assuming moviegoers might not be interested in seeing this material twice. Although Fonda was a relatively good box office draw and magnificent actress; howevever, emerging some controversy regarding her interpretation , as this version misses the target, and was sent directly to US television.

A Doll's House (1973) , rating : 7/10 . Well-worth watching, and, This 'Doll's House' is just as interesting as any filmed play, and sits well thanks to Claire Bloom/Anthony Hopkins , alongside the Jane Fonda/Losey rendition.

Yes, Clair Bloom, Anthony Hopkins, and Denholm Elliot are great, as is Sir Ralph Richardson as Dr. Rank. This first-rate acting, extended from Ibsen's wonderful realist play, is what holds our eyes on the screen. The play has been abridged for the movie, but having read the play, I wouldn't say I felt that I missed the deleted material.

The snow outside emphasizes how cold it gets inside, with Nora (Bloom) realizing that her fairy-tale marriage to Torvald (Hopkins) is a sham, that Torvald only wants his wife to be his little "squirrel" and not meddle in their family affairs. Nora will not take it anymore; she is an intelligent woman with influence, and cannot be confined to one house, one man, or one way of life. She becomes free, and Torvald is left wondering how he had ever been such a fool to think she would be with him forever.

Denholm Elliot drips with sleaze as Korgstad, Nora and Torvald's nemesis, and Richardson conveighs the appropriate frailty and senality as Dr. Rank.

One complaint: the film is static. There is almost no action set outside of the house (and the building) which, I suppose, gives us an effective claustrophobic feeling. The audience feels as trapped as Nora and Torvald do. But, film is a visual media, and this is essentially just a filmed play. The director does move his camera around a little, giving us close-ups, master-shots, composition of objects in the foreground/background, ect. But, the average viewer may fall asleep, just because the play is all talk. There is not much movement by the characters; there is nothing going on outside of their insulated lives. The movie does not open us up to the world outside of the Helmer household; it tells us that what matters is what is going on inside. Okay, I guess the static quality of the film works, but this is not a wholly cinematic film, it is more a play on film.

Maybe in the future, other directors will work to open up the play, and give us viewers other things to chew over besides the great acting and dialogue.

This is actually a very good play. I watched this movie in order to use it as a source for a school paper and in the re-writing, the person responsible for adapting it to this movie format left out a great deal of dialogue, instances do not come to mind at the moment, but it took something away from the movie.

Anthony Hopkins was wonderful in the movie but by the time I was halfway thru the movie, I wanted to choke Nora, so cloying was she. Her voice became fingernails on a chalkboard to me.

I would recommend, academically, the version with Jane Fonda starring in it. It's a significantly better version and not as boring. When I was finished watching this version, I wanted to sue the production company for the hour and a half of my life I lost.

A Doll's House/***(G) Movie Review May 4th, 1973 With the voices of: Nora Helmer: Claire Bloom Torvald Helmer: Anthony Hopkins Dr.Rank: Ralph Richardson Krogstad: Denholm Elliott Kristine Linde: Anna Massey Anne-Marie: Edith Evans

By Kyle Thompson Film Critic

A Doll's House, a play taking place in the household of Torvald Helmer, Nora Helmer, and their three kids, is set during Christmas time in 1879. Being set in the late 1800's, it is a time in which men were dominant over women, and it was socially acceptable for them to be.

As the play starts with a happy, cheerful family, it soon takes a turn for the worst. I believe that it is difficult for people in our era today to understand how things were in that time, and that adds to the opinion I have on the play. I think it is a well filmed, and well thought out play, but I do believe that there are scenes in which the characters act a bit too dramatic for what would actually in those situations.

The play begins to unfold when Nora is called out on forging her rich father's signature in order to receive a loan to pay for her sick husband's trip to Europe in order to recover. The man who wants to bring Nora down, wants his job back at the bank, (Torvald is the higher up at the bank) and wants Torvald to give him his job back, and then some. Nora admits to the forgery, and tries to persuade her husband to give Krogstad his job back. Torvald does not take the bait, and this leads Krogstad to blackmail Nora about the forgery, which is a criminal act she has committed. The play then gets very dramatic when Torvald finds out the motives of his wife, and the climax of the play takes place.

The music, clothing, and speech of the characters is all fit to how they dressed and spoke in the 1800's, which adds a human element to the play. I thought the characters filled their roles well, and engulfed themselves within the play to become the character that they truly were. The camera angles are very good for when the play took place, but the lighting sort of fits to the mood of the play, which is somber and argumentative. Overall, A Doll's House is a very dramatic film that depicts the ideals of marriage in the 1800's in a very realistic way.

372 Words http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069987/reviews-enter

Although there have been MANY versions of this Ibsen play (his most famous), this one seems to come closest to doing justice to it. The cast is a great one and includes: Claire Bloom (as Nora); Anthony Hopkins (as Torvald); Ralph Richardson (as Dr. Rank); Denholm Elliott (as Krogstad); Anna Massey (as Krisine Linde) and Dame Edith Evans (as Anne-Marie). Everyone in the cast is well-known as British stage actors and most have done their share of Shakespeare.

This film version was made before Anthony Hopkins was so well known on the screen, and he doesn't stand out here as we are used to seeing him now. But, Claire Bloom dominates the final scene as Nora.

Had never seen this play, although had a very rough idea what it was about.

I feared that a 1973 filmed version might be somewhat dated almost 50 years later. But not so. The dialogue is often oblique - up until the denouement, when Nora speaks plainly - but the viewer is never in doubt about the underlying meanings. Even a century and a half after Ibsen wrote this, it is esp. Relevant. But it is compelling not only at the level of "women's liberation", but of "human liberation" - nobody is wholly exempt from the bonds of social convention, and so the question is always: when is enough, enough? Or when, is it time to break out from them, and what are you willing to sacrifice to do so? The cast and directing (imho) are great.

I found a wonderful picture of me in the film as an extra, i played a little girl singing by the fire in the howling snow (which actually was a snow machine). I remember the day well at Elstree Film Studios, on the back lot, it was so cold I did wonder why we didn't naturally have snow....but hey I was a kid. My brother played a small boy singing as well, and under his hat were a few of his toy cars to keep him occupied between shots (as set ups can be boring). My father worked on the film hence how I became an extra, but remember everyone in the cast was sooo lovely. My father was in the industry for over 50 years, until he died in 2014.

Little did I know at the age of 12 that my future would be in Film & TV, behind the camera working with many different Production teams on many films around the world.

I wish I could post the picture of the set with my brother and I in it.

My personal memories, Dawn Heath (nee King)

A Doll's House In the play A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen took place in the late 19th century a woman named Nora Helmer starts off the story buying Christmas presents for her family. But a year before this Nora committed a forgery on a loan in order to save the life of her husband. She was then blackmailed the man she took the loan from. He wanted her to convince her husband to allow him to keep his job. When Nora wasn't able to convince her husband, the man sent him a letter in the mail explaining how Nora owed him money that she borrowed from him a year before. Nora went a whole say trying to stop her husband from opening the letter, but when the truth comes out, Nora is shocked to learn where she really stands in her husband's esteem.

This play depicts how a woman in the 19th century was a controlled by her husband. Nora was treated just like every other woman during this time. Woman had little to no say with anything other than house work. They were forced to do whatever their husbands told them to do and they weren't allowed to handle money unless it was given to them by their husbands. This shows that the world back then was against woman being their own person and they were controlled and used as property more instead of treated like an equal human being.

If you want to watch a movie, A Doll's House is for you. The movie is just about a word for word interpretation of Henrik Ibsen's play of the same name, only varying when it serves the movie to break up scenes. There are no liberties taken with the source, no Romeo + Juliet like shenanigans. The play takes place in 19th century Sweden and so does the movie. Costumes and settings are entirely as you would picture from reading the play. I wish they would have taken some risks with this film, but I suppose it's better to be safe and not bad than risky but awful. If you have read the play, then you know exactly what to expect from the movie. If you haven't, then you probably shouldn't expect from the movie. Mildly interesting and decently acted, A Doll's House sets no expectations from which it could fulfill. I started this film expecting a movie form of a play, and that is exactly what I received. No part really stood out to me, though Claire Bloom's performance was memorable. This could simply be because the rest of the movie was not. If you have an afternoon to kill, and you've already seen your entire Netflix queue, then I suppose I suggest this film. This movie is no must-see, but it's also not absolutely horrible (looking at you G.I. Joe: Retaliation). One thumb mildly raised, stream it from Netflix if you have nothing else to do. The only thing you have to lose is about 90 minutes, which will be spent in a sort of entertained state.

Just as two competing films about Oscar Wilde came out in 1960, so in the spirit of the early seventies a rival version of Ibsen's play with Jane Fonda came out almost immediately after this.

Less cinematic and packing far less star power this is probably the more satisfactory of the two for preserving for posterity a performance of feline intensity by Claire Bloom at it's centre. The cast ironically includes Ralph Richardson who was also in the lesser of the two Wilde films.

As the new generations come into this world, it is important for them to understand how society has evolved. It's important to know how long it took for various races and individuals to earn their credibility with its community. I was always told how women were treated centuries ago. Much of it was through reading articles and other author's personal experiences. But it was not until I saw this film that I realized in ninety minutes how a woman was regarded solely as an asset and/or eye candy. And that's what this film does; give an accurate feel for how much power women had in society.

The story is about a woman, Nora Helmer, who takes a gamble to try and help her husband and ends up having it backfire on her. Actress Claire Bloom plays Nora Helmer. From start to finish, I liked her performance and how the attitude of her character gradually changed over time. Anthony Hopkins plays Nora's husband, Torvald. There's no doubt that the acting in this film is good. Anthony Hopkins is a very proficient actor. Any character that I've seen him portray is always interesting to watch and from what I've observed, he keeps the audience glued to the screen.

What surprised me the most was how other female characters in this story talked about how they "needed" to serve others. In my opinion, it was almost as if they had been brainwashed. An example of this was the character of Kristine Linde played by actress Anna Massey. The personality of Linde is almost callous in nature. I felt this vibe when she explained to Nora, why she did not care that her husband passed away. Seriously? And then she has the nerve to say that she is depressed because she has no one to work for. I have an idea, why don't you go out into the world and find yourself a job. Why get married, so all of one's possessions can be taken away, again?! Centuries ago, a female's main job was to take care of the house and watch the children. A woman could not persuade her husband to do anything because this would jeopardize his masculinity. My question is how? No one will know what made the man of the house change his mind if the persuading happened behind closed doors. It's not like they had security cameras back then or anything. I understand how it could make a man look bad but it's not a life or death situation. Note that I am not criticizing the film, I am criticizing the society of that time.

One component I think that could have been improved in this film was the music. This movie is not an action film so I don't expect a whole lot but I did expect some sort of musical theme. I barely heard anything at all and John Barry composed this music! I really like Barry's work as a musical composer. He has made so many memorable tunes in different films. He also is the creator of all the 007 movie soundtracks. Surely I thought Barry, of all people, would have created something a little bit more intriguing. I guess composers aren't always inspired to make truly unforgettable works.

Finally, my favorite scene is the ending when Nora talks with her husband about her life and what initiatives she has decided to take upon herself. Everything she said made total sense and what's funny, in weird way, is that it made Torvald so confused, that he didn't know how to react. It was great listening to Nora's words because if men in general, just listen to what women have to say, a door of new perspective will open. Women are not just another object in life. They are human beings. It's important that everyone realizes they deserve everything a man deserves.

It doesn't have enough music to effectively initiate emotions that are supposed to be created, but as a whole, this film plays out very well with its transparent controversial agenda. It's nostalgic view on life for a woman of its time, will give the audience something to ponder about in the long run.