Liebele
box 13/4
W
Milkovánig (Alfa, zadává Elektafilm), je na¬
Itodeno podle známé divadelni hry Artura
Schnitzlera. Velmi dohre rezirováno mladym
e#gtem Ophilleefft, ukazuje bezvadné a vkus¬
né prostredi stäré Vidné, düstojnicky svêt, jak
dävno jiz zmizs!
vlastné v této formé ne¬
existoval. Ide zde Nväsnivon läsku mladého po¬
ručika k svüdté, Prepychové Zené, které pod¬
léhá. Nemüze & Pomoei finak nez sonbojem
s podvedenym mapäélem, ktery ho zastfeli. A
dévée ho ve smprtf näsleduje. Ophüls nelièl vsak
toto prostfedi jako néco samozfejmého: vité¬
zem v tomto filmu je vlastné mlady nadporu¬
eik, ktery nechce nic slyseti o omezenosti dü¬
stojnického öestného fädu, rozhoduje se pro Zi¬
vot a zaklädá si manzelstvi, Stésti. Viden uvi¬
dite ménè v hercich a vice v bezvadné foto¬
grafil, pfekräsnych zimnich exteriérech; hra
Schneiderové, Ulrichové, Hörbigera (jediného,
jenz mluvi vidensky), Gründgense a Liebenei¬
nera je bezvadná. Cely film je velmi kultivo¬
—
vang, vkusny, do detamdobfe propracován. Jei
V. L. A
to vzäcny pfiklad filn##o umeni.
223481934
PRAVOLIDU
2 2 Jan 1934
# Tines teneen
Entertamments
NEW EILNS- IN
LONDON
HERR LUBITSCH AND A
COWARD PLAY
Mr. Noel Coward’s play Desien Tor
Living, adapted for the screen by Mr. Ben
Hecht and produced under the direction
of Herr Lubitsch, is now to be scen at the
Plaza. Other important changes this weck
bring the Constant Nymph to the New
Gallery and Schnitzler’s Liebelei to the
Academy. #.
PLAZA
Design for Living.—The relation be¬
tween this film and Mr. Noel Coward’s
play is a rather distant one, so distant,
indeed, that nothing of the stage dialogue
remains, and the point of the play’s argu¬
ment is passed off as a farcical extrava¬
gance. But that is not to say the film lacks
justification. Herr Lubitsch, who pre¬
sumably considers it a waste of time to
photograph what is intended for the
theatre, has insisted on having the subject¬
matter of Design for Living thought out
afresh in terms of the screen; and the
result is a farce with a sparkle all its own.
The characters parade no theories about
themselves. They are too actively engaged
with their farcical predicament to find
time for those slick generalizations upon
Art and Life that gave their prototypes of
the stage an intellectual background of
sorts.
It is impossible to believe that George (he is
not even called Leo) could construct a successful
play or Tom (Otto has dwindled into Tom) paint
an amusing picture, but as farcical puppets whose
friendship groans under the strain of sharing the
favours of the woman they both adore they are
uncommonly lively. Gilda, the one character to
retain her name, is not encouraged to be hysteric¬
ally introspective. She is asked only to look
irresistible, to love two men with equal intensity,
and to be incapable of living either with or
without them, all of which feats Miss Miriam
Hopkins accomplishes in a very amusing andt
natural manner. Mr. Gary Cooper and Mr.
Fredric March depict with humour and precision
the rivalry, the friendship, and the embarrass¬
ment of the men between whom the butterfly
lady flutters with such disconcerting impartiality,
and Mr. Edward Everett Horton, though a mere
laughing-stock, is a very funny onc. It is a
very funny farce—but what an effort it must
have been for its author to resist the allure, not
540
merely of some, but of all the“ Noelisms“ of
the play!
NEW GALLERY
The Constant Nymph.—The Constanf Nymph
has been in its time a novel, a play, and a silent
film. It was inevitable a talking film should be
made of it, and to be expected that the direction
would be in the hands of Mr. Basil Dean. His
treatment belongs to the theatre more than 1o
the cinema. His two or three attempts to illu¬
strate emotion in the idiom of the sercen fail,
and his misty photographs of trains rushing to
and fro as Tessa wrestles with her arithmetic
belong to the elementary stage of cinematic
technique, but so long as he is contented to be
straightforward and unselfconscious, so long is
the film an honest and satisfactory piece of work.
Honest and satisfactory, adjectives which best
describe something lacking in inspiration and
intensity, and Mr. Dean, while keeping the film
free from distortion and vulgarity, has allowed
the magic of what is, after all, a singularly moving
story to escape between the lens of a camera
which is too formal and static when it is on its
best behaviour and too old-fashioned and naive
when it is experimenting.
The film, like the novel, hinges on the rela¬
tionship between Lewis Dodd and Tessa, the
Pconstant nymph of the title, and Miss Victoria
Hopper and Mr. Brian Aherne are excellemt
box 13/4
W
Milkovánig (Alfa, zadává Elektafilm), je na¬
Itodeno podle známé divadelni hry Artura
Schnitzlera. Velmi dohre rezirováno mladym
e#gtem Ophilleefft, ukazuje bezvadné a vkus¬
né prostredi stäré Vidné, düstojnicky svêt, jak
dävno jiz zmizs!
vlastné v této formé ne¬
existoval. Ide zde Nväsnivon läsku mladého po¬
ručika k svüdté, Prepychové Zené, které pod¬
léhá. Nemüze & Pomoei finak nez sonbojem
s podvedenym mapäélem, ktery ho zastfeli. A
dévée ho ve smprtf näsleduje. Ophüls nelièl vsak
toto prostfedi jako néco samozfejmého: vité¬
zem v tomto filmu je vlastné mlady nadporu¬
eik, ktery nechce nic slyseti o omezenosti dü¬
stojnického öestného fädu, rozhoduje se pro Zi¬
vot a zaklädá si manzelstvi, Stésti. Viden uvi¬
dite ménè v hercich a vice v bezvadné foto¬
grafil, pfekräsnych zimnich exteriérech; hra
Schneiderové, Ulrichové, Hörbigera (jediného,
jenz mluvi vidensky), Gründgense a Liebenei¬
nera je bezvadná. Cely film je velmi kultivo¬
—
vang, vkusny, do detamdobfe propracován. Jei
V. L. A
to vzäcny pfiklad filn##o umeni.
223481934
PRAVOLIDU
2 2 Jan 1934
# Tines teneen
Entertamments
NEW EILNS- IN
LONDON
HERR LUBITSCH AND A
COWARD PLAY
Mr. Noel Coward’s play Desien Tor
Living, adapted for the screen by Mr. Ben
Hecht and produced under the direction
of Herr Lubitsch, is now to be scen at the
Plaza. Other important changes this weck
bring the Constant Nymph to the New
Gallery and Schnitzler’s Liebelei to the
Academy. #.
PLAZA
Design for Living.—The relation be¬
tween this film and Mr. Noel Coward’s
play is a rather distant one, so distant,
indeed, that nothing of the stage dialogue
remains, and the point of the play’s argu¬
ment is passed off as a farcical extrava¬
gance. But that is not to say the film lacks
justification. Herr Lubitsch, who pre¬
sumably considers it a waste of time to
photograph what is intended for the
theatre, has insisted on having the subject¬
matter of Design for Living thought out
afresh in terms of the screen; and the
result is a farce with a sparkle all its own.
The characters parade no theories about
themselves. They are too actively engaged
with their farcical predicament to find
time for those slick generalizations upon
Art and Life that gave their prototypes of
the stage an intellectual background of
sorts.
It is impossible to believe that George (he is
not even called Leo) could construct a successful
play or Tom (Otto has dwindled into Tom) paint
an amusing picture, but as farcical puppets whose
friendship groans under the strain of sharing the
favours of the woman they both adore they are
uncommonly lively. Gilda, the one character to
retain her name, is not encouraged to be hysteric¬
ally introspective. She is asked only to look
irresistible, to love two men with equal intensity,
and to be incapable of living either with or
without them, all of which feats Miss Miriam
Hopkins accomplishes in a very amusing andt
natural manner. Mr. Gary Cooper and Mr.
Fredric March depict with humour and precision
the rivalry, the friendship, and the embarrass¬
ment of the men between whom the butterfly
lady flutters with such disconcerting impartiality,
and Mr. Edward Everett Horton, though a mere
laughing-stock, is a very funny onc. It is a
very funny farce—but what an effort it must
have been for its author to resist the allure, not
540
merely of some, but of all the“ Noelisms“ of
the play!
NEW GALLERY
The Constant Nymph.—The Constanf Nymph
has been in its time a novel, a play, and a silent
film. It was inevitable a talking film should be
made of it, and to be expected that the direction
would be in the hands of Mr. Basil Dean. His
treatment belongs to the theatre more than 1o
the cinema. His two or three attempts to illu¬
strate emotion in the idiom of the sercen fail,
and his misty photographs of trains rushing to
and fro as Tessa wrestles with her arithmetic
belong to the elementary stage of cinematic
technique, but so long as he is contented to be
straightforward and unselfconscious, so long is
the film an honest and satisfactory piece of work.
Honest and satisfactory, adjectives which best
describe something lacking in inspiration and
intensity, and Mr. Dean, while keeping the film
free from distortion and vulgarity, has allowed
the magic of what is, after all, a singularly moving
story to escape between the lens of a camera
which is too formal and static when it is on its
best behaviour and too old-fashioned and naive
when it is experimenting.
The film, like the novel, hinges on the rela¬
tionship between Lewis Dodd and Tessa, the
Pconstant nymph of the title, and Miss Victoria
Hopper and Mr. Brian Aherne are excellemt