Maison de poupée

When I first watched this movie, it was with my mom, and she brought up a good point. While not condoning Torvald's attitude (personally, I couldn't stand him), she said that he couldn't treat Nora like a woman when she acted so much like a child. While it's true, he seemed to prefer it that way, the fact remains that if she had behaved like a mature woman, a wife and mother of two young children, he would have been forced to acknowledge that and most likely wouldn't have referred to her in front of company as "my little songbird", and the like.

Too often Nora comes off as silly, like when she's showing off the clothes she's going to wear on her trip with Torvald to her friend, Kristine, it comes off more as a kid sister showing off her dress for the dance, than two friends of around the same age having a talk. Later, when the family physician, Dr. Rank, whom Nora regarded as an uncle (again showing her little girl persona), reveals his love for her (as a woman, not a niece), she can't handle it and wants to pretend it doesn't exist. She wants nothing to upset her applecart.

The apples are forced to tumble when she's confronted by how Torvald really feels about her actions, which were done out of love, but he refuses to give her a break, to even try to understand. Suddenly, the little girl has to grow up.

I would have liked the story better if the children had been Torvald's from a first marriage, so Nora wouldn't actually be leaving her own children, and this to me weakened the story. Unless it's meant to show that Nora was so childlike that she didn't have actual maternal feelings for her children, they were just sources of amusement, like toys.

My real interest in this movie was the relationship between Nils and Kristene. Nils starts out as the villain and ends up as the lovelorn hero. Kristene was seen to have made a heartbreaking sacrifice for her family and was not the gold-digger Nils thought her to be.

A good movie, based on Ibsen's good play, and both give you things to think about.

This film version of Henrik Ibsen's classic dramatizes events only spoken about in the play, which makes the opening very slow. They do get down to the business of plot, but you don't get an immediate sense for the story and characters. Additionally, there are location scenes which distract from the characterizations. So, you could say "A Doll's House" with Jane Fonda (as Nora) spends too little time in the house. Director Joseph Losey sometimes has cinematographer Gerry Fisher's camera glide (but not dance) like Ms. Fonda.

Another version, with Claire Bloom in the "Nora" role, was released earlier in the year. 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 excellent actress) her version misses the target, and was sent directly to US television. Delphine Seyrig, herein playing "Kristine Linde", would probably have better played the elusive Nora; if Greta Garbo hadn't retired, her hoped-for version would have proved unassailable.

***** A Doll's House (8/24/73) Joseph Losey ~ Jane Fonda, David Warner, Edward Fox, Delphine Seyrig

"A Doll's House" is a film based on the play by Henrik Ibsen. The story focuses on the lives of Nora and Torvald Helmer and those around them and challenges the norms of marriage in the Victorian era.

This adaptation features a notable cast. Jane Fonda effectively captured the fluttery yet ultimately strong character of Nora. David Warner was appropriate to play the villain role as he often does. Trevor Howard is excellent as Dr. Rank and likewise Edward Fox and Delphine Seyrig were solid as Krogstad and Kristine.

As an adaptation of a great play, though, this film leaves something to be desired. Many unnecessary scenes were added that were not in the play, which led to problems. In added scenes, information is revealed at the start of the film which is not normally learned until later in the play. Ibsen wrote the play in such a way that the history of the characters is ambiguous and slowly revealed. Providing background information on the characters before the main events of the play dampened the element of surprise that adds a lot of interest to the play.

Another problem was that adding scenes or drawing out sequences lowered the tension compared to Ibsen's play, particularly toward the end. Also unfortunate was the fact that they unnecessarily added a handful of extra locations not seen in the play and modified a lot of the dialogue. The original structure and dialogue of the play is already perfect, so any changes only made this film worse. It would have been nice to see the cast of this film with a script that closely followed Ibsen's original work. Despite these flaws the main ideas of the story were intact and this is a watchable adaptation, but disappointing given its deviations from the original play.

With a feminist Nora, an icy Torvald, and a drunken Dr Rank, this adaptation perhaps tries too far to be a film version of the classic Ibsen play, setting scenes before and outside of the play (such as Nora's loan and Christina's past) rather than keeping strictly to the text.

Jane Fonda is a 1970s Nora, not as flighty as other actresses have played her, but still as determined in the final scenes. David Warner is an emotionless Torvald, which makes his awakening to the realities of his marriage hit home, while Trevor Howard is a less cultured Rank than Ralph Richardson in the other 1973 version of the play.

Well-worth watching, and with beautiful settings deep in the Scandanavian snow, this 'Doll's House' is just as interesting as any filmed play, and sits well alongside the Claire Bloom/Anthony Hopkins version.

Director Joseph Losey and screenwriter David Mercer's adaptation of Ibsen's symbolism-heavy play was an independent co-production between the UK and France. "A Doll's House" premiered in the US at the New York Film Festival in October 1973, but a month later was already making its debut on American television. One can see right away why no one was duly impressed: squarely-filmed on-location in Roros, Norway, it's a pasty-looking enterprise, enervating and unevenly performed. The story of marriage, morals and money matters in 1890s Norway is an interesting one, but here the central character doesn't come off. As Nora, the bank manager's wife who secretly owes money to another man, Jane Fonda is fluttery-dull and one-dimensional (this was during her "box office poison" years following her protest of the Vietnam War, and Fonda just phones it in). Feminists of the time gravitated towards Nora because of her third-act decision to leave her husband and children in order to find herself; however, when Fonda gives her big speech at the end, she doesn't sound assured, coming off instead as muddled and wifey-foolish. Stage actresses for decades have longed for a part like Nora, but Fonda does nothing special with her. In support, dying doctor Trevor Howard seems chilled by the location's climate (he's always bundled up and walking woodenly), while David Warner is way over-the-top as Nora's spouse (he bellows, capitulates, and then falls into a condescending whisper). Delphine Seyrig upstages all three of the "star names" playing Nora's widowed girlfriend (consequently, the bank manager's put-down of her in private sounds particularly ugly). The film is a personal disaster for Losey, who tries disguising the material's stage origins by giving us intermittent shots of the snowy streets and bustling crowds, yet the whole thing looks tatty and rings false. Losey was beaten to the punch, anyway, by a competing British production starring Claire Bloom, which opened four months prior, garnering positive reviews. *1/2 from ****