Reviews (19)

Shakespeare in Hollywood.
Let me begin by saying that the 5 star rating is purely subjective. As you can see from the other reviews you either like this film or you don't. I LOVE this film. As an adaptation of Shakespeare's play it's not very good. Such is the case with other Shakespeare movies of this vintage (check out the 1934 ROMEO AND JULIET with Leslie Howard and Norma Shearer or the 1929 TAMING OF THE SHREW with Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford). In fact the hostile reception this version received steered Hollywood clear of anything by Shakespeare for years. So much for Shakespeare in Hollywood. The fairy scenes are among the most magical I have ever seen in any film echoing their German origins while the Athenian scenes are as Hollywood as they come. F.W. Murnau's FAUST (the co-director William Dieterle played Valentine in FAUST) meets 42ND STREET (note the dance numbers). The performances by James Cagney, Olivia de Haviland, Ross Alexander, Jean Muir, and Victor Jory are quite good. Anita Louise is a lovely Titania and Mickey Rooney (12 at the time) is loud and mischievous. Just what I would expect Puck to be. Most of these performers were in Max Reinhardt's stage production which this film is based on. The tradesmen are vaudeville comics with the exception of Frank McHugh and are perfectly at home in this dual setting. Joe E. Brown and Hugh Herbert get to do their shticks while an unrecognizable Arthur Treacher gets to do nothing. A MIDSUMMERNIGHT'S DREAM is not for everyone and definitely not for Shakespeare purists. But if you approach it as a movie from the Golden Age of Hollywood and all that implies then it's much easier to enjoy. Postscripts for the historically curious (with apologies to Henry W. Simon). This was the film that brought Erich Wolfgang Korngold to Warner Brothers. His job was to arrange the well known music by Mendelssohn. The rest as they say is history. The part of the young Indian prince is played by Kenneth Anger of HOLLYWOOD BABYLON fame.

I liked the new one better
This wasn't a terible movie, but I liked the new version better. Some of the acting in this version was overdone; Anita Louise, who played Titania, sounded like she belonged in an opera house, and why did Mickey Rooney decide to portray Puck as a wild animal in human form? Olivia De Havilland did give a good portrayal of Hermia, however; I just wish she'd had more lines! James Cagney also gave a good portrayal of Bottom. In the new version, whoever played the man who played the woman in the play about Pyramus and Thisbe gave a much better performance than Joe E. Brown does here. Brown just plays it for laughs. For the most part, the acting in the new version was much better. I believe the special effects were innovative for the time period; it is easy to see that, but, unfortuanatly, they pale in comparison to all that has come since in special effects in movies. The sets weren't too bad, either. So, on the whole, there were pluses to this movie, but minuses, too. The new version had more pluses.

Puck steals the show!
This is not the type of movie I would normally watch - but it is a must-see! The dance numbers are awesome, and the real kick is watching the performance of Puck, which I only realized later was Mickey Rooney - he doesn't look 12, and I found myself wondering "how did they get him to act like that?".

The movie seems long at times, particulary in the party at the very end. But I wouldn't mind watching it again with someone -

The best to date
There have been criticisms here of Reinhardt's AMND as "un-Shakespearean," but truly: who among us would really want to sit in a theater with almost no props or backdrops, minimal costuming, men performing the women's parts, and audiences that were anything but quiet during the show? -For that's exactly what Shakespearean theater conditions amounted to. Our idea of Shakespeare derives simply from modern Masterpiece Theater style productions, which make a virtue of sober lucidity, and do a fine job of it, too.

But Reinhardt gives us a German High Romantic version of AMND, and displays a very different virtue, seldom seen in modern screen transcriptions of older works: a sense of well-conceived and executed style. You may not like his Mendelssohnian fairies, but their integration into the play--by choice of dialog, imaginative staging and costuming, brilliant special effects and incidental music--is consistent. Mendelssohn's music was in fact intended to accompany actual performances many years previously; and the ballet sequences built around it have a way of stopping time even today with their visionary beauty, a matter of movement, staging, lighting (the remarkable Hal Mohr), editing and effects. A book in fact could be written on Reinhardt's multi-level application of thematic materials, which is done in a manner that's far less boring than the way it sounds. This is a brilliant conception of Shakespeare, far from the "let's be different to grab attention" Shakespeare of punk Romeos that have fled across our screens in recent years.

The casting is generally very good. Mickey Rooney, in his first film role, displays all the remarkable energy and focus which were his greatest gifts. (What a shame the film industry kissed him off when he matured into a short, pudgy man, who was just as talented!) No prim, polite observer, his Puck is an elemental force, taking malicious delight in the strongly felt emotions of the humans that have come to the forest. Everything is brilliant, bright mockery: his deliberately garbled imitation of the speech and gestures of Lysander prior to the latter's magical sleep is a good example. This is not a Puck you would want call Robin Goodfellow, not unless you wanted to please him--and you most definitely would want to please him. It is a taut, kaleidoscopically varied performance.

The comic players are also well cast. James Cagney is superb as Bottom, particularly in the monologue that follows waking from what he considers "his dream." Hugh Herbert brings more variation to a giddy giggle, both for accompanying expression and meaning, than any other human being probably ever has. Frank McHugh is a delight as Peter Quince. Only Joe E Brown, as Flute, goes overboard, trying to steal the scene from others during their lines; but he makes up for it with a delightful Thisbe. Arthur Treacher is very much wasted, with nothing to say; and their are indications in the action that more may have been filmed, or at least planned of their material to film. Considerations of length and/or budget probably intervened.

Victor Jory, so well known even today for his villainous roles (especially in Flash Gordon serials), is a superbly dark Oberon: not sinister, but more of a somber Herne the Hunter type, in contrast to Anita Louise, who is all Elven gossamer. Presumably Reinhardt saw them as a balance of light and dark, perhaps with an overlay of contemporary Austrian psychoanalysis: masculine/dark/forceful against feminine/light/receptive. No, I don't buy the silly pop analysis of Men Are From Mars, Women From Venus; but in Reinhardt's AMND, we may be looking at an earlier incarnation of the same values, definitely presented on a more creative level. I don't buy into Reinhardt's portrayal of Oberon's followers as a bunch of anthrompomorphized bats, but I have to admit it works in context. This especially holds true for the ballet sequence where one bat follower symbolically forces a fairy follower of Titania to the ground, overshadows her, then bears her off, horizontal, her hands waving delicately in the air. I suppose we can only be thankful that the Hayes Office wasn't really paying attention to high prestige Art films.

The lovers are not quite as effective. All four are good, with Olivia de Haviland perhaps the best of the lot; but there's little sense of emotional depth in their performances, at least enough to draw forth Puck's disparaging remark about "what fools these mortals be." Some of this, again, may be due to the director's conception. Reinhardt clearly plays them more for laughs, cutting a fair amount of the four-way badinage, and deliberately staging at least one famous piece of it as a four-way, non-stop, unintelligble harrangue, in which opponents trade off to continue arguing. The quartet in Adrian Noble's 1996 AMND is to be preferred, here (though the staging is, IMO, awful).

To round out, I have to return to Reinhardt. He gave many of Hollywood's greatest talents during the 1920s-40s their apprenticeships. The contemporary notices for his productions are unanimous raves for his artistic insight, integrity, intelligence, directorial ability, and brillance of execution. Yet he would be no more than a footnote in some theatrical encyclopedia if it were not for this single film, made after Reinhardt escaped from the Nazis. A modest success in box offices at the time, Hollywood could not countenance the huge expenditure of resources on such a film, and Reinhardt was a respected pariah in the film community until his death in the early 1940s. But AMND lives on, and provides an excellent sense of what all the excitement was about this master visionary of theater...and potentially, cinema.

Mere Words Cannot Describe the Horror
Max Reinhardt was among the great theatrical impresarios of the early portion of the 20th Century, renowned primarily for the pageantry of his stage productions. His 1930s Los Angeles staging of William Shakespeare's A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM was such a popular success that Hollywood studios went wild to lure Reinhardt into adapting his production to the screen. Strange to say, Warner Brothers--more at home with gangster movies, tough melodrama, and strident musicals--won the bid, and the result was this 1936 abomination.

Now, I won't go so far as to say this version of Shakespeare's famous fairy tale will actually make you run screaming from the room, but I will say that by the time it ends you may wish you had. Fairies flutter, flounce, and flop around to some of the most uninspired choreography imaginable; the score, lifted from the Mendelsson's most obvious works, could rot your teeth at twenty paces; the sets and costumes strive for a Parrish-like effect and instead come up with clunky Hollywood gloss. And need we mention that Shakespeare's gossamer script has been ripped to shreds?

The cast is simply horrendous. This was Olivia de Havilland's first film, and while she isn't memorably bad, neither is she memorably good--and that's really the highwater mark of the performances as a whole. James Cagney is terribly miscast, and Dick Powell behaves exactly as if he is about to launch into a Busby Berkley musical number. And then there is Mickey Rooney, who gives what must be single most abrasive performance in all of 1930s cinema. Only Joe E. Brown manages to emerge unscathed.

All in all, watching the 1936 Warner Brother's version of A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM is akin to watching an alligator swallow an innocent, sweet-eyed fawn. You just can't quite believe that it is happening, right there, in front your own eyes. Now, if you have an interest in how Hollywood approached Shakespeare in the 1930s, you may actually want to sit through this movie once. But don't inflict it upon any one else. They won't thank you for it.

--GFT (Amazon.com Reviewer)-- ... Read more

Reviews (39)

Trashed at first, but vindicated later.
This is what happened with Portrait of Jennie. David O. Selznick was so obssessed with Jennifer Jones that his judgement was clouded when it comes to choosing film projects for her. In the case of "Portrait of Jennie", this movie ran over budgeted when Selznick decided to add in a pompous "epic finale" with wind, waves and green tint.

When it was released, Portrait of Jennie did not set the world on fire, and it wasn't a hit. But years later, it have gone on to become a classic.

Joseph Cotten played an artist who ran into a young girl named Jennie in Central Park. The strange part of it is that for each successive time he meets her again, she grew older. With information he got from talking to Jennie, he did some research and found out to his astonishment that the girl he has been talking to could be the ghost of a dead woman. When the anniversary of the death of her parents came, Cotten find her grieving in the park. Pretty soon, as Jennie grew into a beautiful mature woman, Cotten fell in love with her. And when the anniversary of her death approaches, Cotten was determined to change history by rescuing Jennie from her fate. Alas, that was not to be, but the love the two share inspired the portrait of the young woman, hence the name of the movie.

Jennifer Jones delivered another high caliber performance. She can actually convincingly played a young little girl and then slowly turning into a mature young woman. It is my belief that if David O. Selznick's obsession with Jennifer caused her to become one of the most underrated actresses from the old Hollywood studio system. Her performance in this movie is absolutely mesmerising.

Portrait of Jennie captures Jennifer Jones in all her glory. She is still with us today and I am glad that she lives to see this movie turn from a flop to a classic favorite.

On the short list of Hollywood's great ghost stories
This delightfully unique movie would have been very, very easy to have marred. Fortunately, director William Dieterle maintained a light touch throughout, managing just the right mood for each segment of the film. What could have easily have been hokey instead is eerie and delightful.

PORTRAIT OF JENNIE is unique not just for its subject matter, but for being one of the very, very few films of the Hollywood studio era to have been filmed on location in New York. Almost always in the 1930s and 1940s, a film that was supposedly set in New York or Chicago would in fact be filmed on a Hollywood back lot. In this case, that would have been a serious blow to the atmosphere of the film, since the numerous scenes shot in Central Park, with the unique skyline framing the park, creates imagery unlike any other film of the time.

The cast overall is quite excellent. Jennifer Jones is not completely believable in her role, but, then, I am not sure many actresses could have been. She is asked to age too much during the course of the film, and no adult actress is going to be completely believable as small girl and as an adult. I always love seeing Joseph Cotton in anything, and this was one of his finest romantic roles. The cast is filled out with a bevy of notable character actresses and actors, such as David Wayne, Lillian Gish, Ethel Barrymore, Florence Bates, Cecil Kellaway, and Henry Hull.

The ending is a bit anticlimactic. The heart of the story is Eben Adams's (Joseph Cotton) meeting Jennie, and the way she changes at each meeting, until he is able to solve her mystery. The ending was much ballyhooed by Selznick, with the striking tinted waves, but ironically it pales next to the much quieter, but far more emotionally involving, story of a man and a woman.

Strange but irresistably fascinating love story.
Portrait of Jennie is a strange time-warp love story which may be dismissed by some modern viewers as silly. Yet to me it is almost irresistably fascinating. Even though I regularly watch it on DVD, if I come upon it on TV anywhere in the story I usually am hooked and stay with it to the end, which I almost invariably find quite moving. On the other hand, I suspect that some modern viewers might turn this strange movie off after only a few minutes, or dislike the ending if they stayed with it that far. This wonderful movie is Hollywood's Golden Age at its romantic best and may not please some modern tastes. Therefore, I can't assure you that you'll like this movie because you may not, particularly if you're not a romantic. I can tell you, though, that many of us count this haunting romantic fantasy among our favorite films and, if you see it, you may do so too. I strongly suggest that you give it a try. By the way, Jennifer Jones is outstanding -- and especially beautiful -- as Jenny.

angel like
she is angel like, in all her movies, very special and this . is the one i've never forgotten. I'ts so sad.

Beautiful film
A wonderful, haunting film that can be seen many times. Jennifer Jones is fantastic as Jennie, a mysterious young lady who inspires artist Eben Adams, excellently played by Joseph Cotton. The score, comprised of music of DeBussy, perfectly fits the drama on the screen. A great cast of supporting players are also at their best here: Lillian Gish, Ethel Barrymore, David Wayne, and Cecil Kellaway. Jennifer Jones is delightful as Jennie, aging from a child to young woman. Joseph Cotton and Jennifer Jones were a wonderful screen team and were at their best in this film and also in Love Letters. Viewers of this film glimpse New York City of decades past and see Central Park and the Metropolitan Museum of Art in glorious black and white. The most haunting and dramatic sequence is the hurricane sequence at the Lighthouse. Another memorable image is the portrait itself, shown in brilliant technicolor.This is one of Selznick's best and is a truly classic movie. It convincingly conveys the message that love is eternal. ... Read more

Description

The Life of Emile Zola episodically explores the career of the novelist who championed the cause of France's oppressed.Zola (Paul Muni) is a hugely successful French author who risks all his success and comfort to come to the defense of the unjustly jailed Capt. Dreyfus (Oscar(R) winner Joseph Schildkraut).Winner of three Oscars(R) overall-and of immense critical and popular success-this distinguished film is a must-see portrait of a life that's "a moment of the conscience of man." Winner of the Academy Award(R) for Best Picture!Gale Sondergaard, Joseph Schildkraut, and Gloria Holden co-star. Year: 1937 Director: William Dieterle, Irving Rapper Starring:Paul Muni, Gale Sondergaard, Joseph Schildkraut, Gloria Holden, Donald Crisp, Erin O'Brien-Moore, Henry O'Neil, Morris Carnovsky, Louis Calhern ... Read more

Reviews (7)

"He was a moment in the conscious of man" - Eulogy
There are 3 great speeches in this movie including the ending eulogy by Cezanne and the rest of the film moves along admirably, the mood is even a bit in the same way, as "Les Miserables", aficionados of that book-stage play, music and/or film, will find a great and similar message in this movie as well.

Yes, this was made in about 1936; expect that and not something from the '80s, '50s or the present. An outstanding movie, somehow, as one who has read a number of Zola books, I think he would be pleased.

The Life of Emile Zola: Stuffy but Stately
In 1936, Paul Muni was on a roll. He had just won an Oscar for best actor in THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR, so it was no surprise that a year later, director William Dieterle chose him for the lead in THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA. Zola, as Muni plays him, is a man who brings to mind a stuffy but morally centered grandfather type who sees his mission in life as the only man who is willing to stand up for what is right and root out corruption and evil when all others turn away claiming one valid excuse after another.
TLEZ is your standard but exceptional Hollywood bio-movie then so popular. Typically, such films begin 'en medias res', thrusting the hero into a series of lesser adventures that prefigure his later, more heroic ones. Zola and Paul Cezanne (Vladimir Sokoloff) are two poverty-stricken friends sharing a dumpy apartment in Paris. Each dreams of using his talent, Cezanne with art, Zola with words, to shake a complacent world with the immediacy of their need to force others to re-evaluate some given bedrock assumptions. Zola is a mudracker, but he cannot find it in himself to lead the fight alone. At critical points in the movie, others step in and out of his life to fire his conscience. Zola and Cezanne meet a streetwalker, Nana, who pours out a tale of economically blighted woe, the result of which is to fire Zola's imagination to write a novel exposing the corruption of a society that allowed such otherwise decent women to go astray. The first half of the movie sets up the character of Zola as one who, when convinced of the rightness of his cause, would boldly put in print inflammatory words that more than once would place him in peril. The second half focuses on the relation that Zola had with Alfred Dreyfus, a French Jew who was a captain in the French army. Zola and Dreyfus never met, but their interaction set the stage for some political fireworks that rocked the very core of the French government. Dreyfus was wrongfully accused of spying for the Germans, and a kangaroo court-martial found him guilty of treason and sent him to Devil's Island as punishment. In historical truth, Dreyfus's Jewishness was a significant factor in arousing France's widespread anti-Semitism against him. Director Dieterle sidesteps this controversy by using the word 'Jew' only once, and then briefly in a personal file on Dreyfus. At first, Zola does not care very much for Dreyfus' protestations of innocence. However, when the wife of Dreyfus makes a personal appeal to him for help, he agrees and the movie then turns into a battle between Zola and a corrupt, entrenched French High Command who are collectively willing to see Dreyfus rot on Devil's Island to save their own skins. Zola's 'I Accuse' harangue rings with the sincerity of a man who is willing to take on the Powers That Be to save a country's honor when those very corrupt Powers argue that their own sense of honor requires the opposite. Louis Calhern leads a fine supporting cast as one of the lying officers who see honor only in lying to the French public about their own shortcomings. Joseph Schildkraut as the accused Dreyfus brings considerable dignity to the role of a man who is forced to endure a public and humiliating ritual of dishonoring. By the film's end, the audience can see that virtue and honesty are not enough to ensure the ongoing vitality of a country's nobility. For that, the occasional pecking gadfly is needed. Zola was such a gadfly. THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA serves to remind us that such gadflies are often in short supply, especially when they are most needed.

Two Great Speeches by Muni, But Skip The Rest
As a child in the 1930s I thought Paul Muni one of Hollywood's best, but I can't recall the movies on which this judgment was based. I don't know whether I saw this film then or not.

Now I find the depiction of "great writer (Zola) and great painter (Cezanne) in Paris during the 1800s" to be a grade school or Sunday school version of life. Hollywood's description of the Dreyfus affair lacks complexity, sophistication, reality, accuracy. The true story abounds in dramatic interest, excitement, conflict and power quite beyond the movie's reach.

But we do have two marvelous speeches, one when Muni as Emile Zola is reading his pamphlet, "I Accuse," to his friends and allies. And the other, when he is defending himself on a charge of slander in a hostile court. These alone are worth more than the price of admission. Spend your time hearing them again and again and then get yourself a copy of Zola's pamphlet and a good book from Amazon.com on what the Dreyfus affair was all about.

1937 PRESTIGE PICTURE
An unknown young Parisian writer suddenly becomes famous for penning the sensational NANA. Paul Muni, the great Polish actor who specialized in playing great men of history (seemingly taking the place of the elderly English stage-trained George Arliss) is terrific in his characterization of Emile Zola. It took Warners nearly a year to prepare the "Zola project". The screenplay went through various re-writes and a great deal of research was done to ensure historical accuracy; the result was a showcase for the unique Mr.Muni. The picture may seem a trifle dry, stodgy and drawn-out today, but it has long been esteemed as one of the greatest historical biographies Hollywood ever put on film. Variety called it "a vibrant, tense and emotional story about the man who fought a nation with his pen" It has followed not merely the spirit but, to a rare degree, the very letter of his life and of the historically significant lives around him. The racial theme involving the Jewish Dreyfus is tastefully handled; not once is the word "Jew" mentioned. The movie brought not only great financial success to Warner Bros., but prestige as well. And it solidified Muni's superstardom.

A brilliant story as relevant today as ever
To be honest, I rented this video to do some period costume research, but forgot all about that after getting involved in the story. Paul Muni portrays Zola most realistically, from his rise from the cramped, cold apartment of his early career to becoming the literary toast of France. And just when it seems that life is as good as it can be, along comes the "Dreyfus Affair" to challenge his conscience. All he has to do is keep quiet, and he can live a life of luxury right to the end. However, "all" becomes too much for the man who has spent his life developing the social conscience of his country through literature. Muni is brilliant in the role of Zola, and all the supporting cast give believable and stirring performances. This film holds you in its grip from start to finish, as it examines the worth of social institutions versus the lives of the people who uphold and venerate them, and sometimes become their victims. A definitely timeless piece of art. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Paul Muni's Oscar winning performance as Louis Pasteur
The 1930s were very much the glory day of Hollywood bio-pics, a fact amply evidenced by "The Story of Louis Pasteur" a 1936 production from Warner Brothers. Paul Muni in his Oscar winning role plays the French scientist who had to convince a skeptical scientific community that germs were the cause of disease. The one thing that can be said for modern science is that at least they are not dogmatic enough to threaten their opponents with execution, so this is not exactly a replay of the story of Galileo before the Inquistion. The scene where Pasteur instructs his chief opponent Dr. Charbonnet (Fritz Leiber) on how to wash his hands to prepare for surgery seems so strange when you consider that everybody today knows what doctors are supposed to do, it is so ingrained in both medical practice and popular culture.

The film tells of a time when science was about to achieve its ascendancy, which is ironic because in today's world of the Internet, that which is true is not scientific fact but rather that which is more easily accessible. "The Story of Louis Pastuer" is one of fighting each battle twice, for he not only has to find a cure for anthrax and rabies, he has to convince the scientific community that he is right. The fact that we know Pasteur is right does not take away from the drama of the story, and it does not hurt to be reminded of society's immense capability for stubbornly insisting on being stupid in the fact of evidence of a brave new world.

"The Story of Louis Pasteur" also won a couple of Oscars for the screenplay by Pierre Collings and Sheridan Gibney, but lost out on the Best Picture award. It is the sort of picture that can inspire younger viewers to think about what can be accomplished in the world of science and can certainly claim to be educational in terms of teaching us about how to prevent and cure disease. The film is filled with noted character actors in supporting roles, such as Akim Tamiroff as Dr. Zaranoff and Halliwell Hobbes as Dr. Lister, but I especially like the performance of Henry O'Neill as Dr. Emile Roux, who publicly challenges Pasteur on the question of the anthrax vaccine and does not bat an eye on changing his views when he is proven wrong.

However, ultimately this is Muni's film, when he was considered the premier actor of his generation. The actor would team up again with director William Dieterle two years later on another bio-pic, "The Life of Emile Zola." I think Muni's performance is a bit better in that film, mainly because Zola gets to give a very impassioned speech during his trial, but of course once you win an Oscar for playing a French national hero it is hard to get comparable acclaim for doing it again so soon.

An amazing story about a towering figure in history!
This movie not only powerfully tells the story of one of the greatest minds in human history, but of the ordeals of one of history's greatest human spirits. The Story of Louis Pasteur didn't just teach me about Pasteur's brilliant insights and scientific accomplishments - it portrayed the incredible drama of a man who doggedly fought for truth and the relief of human suffering against incredible opposition, ridicule, and derision. Einstein said that "great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from men with mediocre minds" and no truer words could be spoken about Pasteur and his career. His bravery and self-sacrifice as portrayed in this classic movie could not be more poignant or inspirational. A must see for everyone!

An excellent telling of this amazing scientist's story
An entertaining and reasonably accurate depiction of the triumph of Louis Pasteur over the entrenched naysayers in the French medical establishment of the day. The movie covers his support of the germ theory of disease and early efforts at antisepsis, but mostly focuses on his development of vaccines for anthrax and rabies. I can't think of another person in the history of biology and medicine who had a greater impact upon the human condition than this man. He laid the groundwork for modern microbiology as well as scientific method. This is a really entertaining movie that has you rooting for the focused and determined Pasteur through all of the ridicule and derision of the medical "luminaries" of 19th century France. A great movie for anyone with an interest in microbiology, medicine, or epidemiology, but just a terrific story for everyone.

Paul Muni: The Master of Historical Biography
Just as the world of science and medicine owes a debt to Louis Pasteur for his cures of anthrax and rabies so does the world of entertainment owe a similar debt to Paul Muni for dramatising the work of a much reviled French chemist in THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR. Director William Dieterle brought to the screen the essence of a man who was not afraid to speak out against the political correctness of his day, as collectively symbolized by the French Academy of Medicine who refused to see the very evident proof of Pasteur's claims that he lay right under their arrogant noses. Dieterle and Muni were to collaborate again one year later in filming the life of yet another great Frenchman in THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA. Pasteur, as Muni plays him, is a doctor who insists that cleanliness, if not next to godliness, is at least next to safety during surgery. The louder Pasteur claims that unwashed surgeons' hands and unsterilized scalpels cause patients to die with infection, the more viciously he is attacked by the Academy, symbolized by the haughty Dr. Charbonnet (Fritz Leiber). Pasteur later finds a cure for anthrax, and one would think that Charbonnet and the other Academy members would recognize Pasteur's genius, but even after a conclusive experiment proves his claims, his colleagues still ridicule him. It is only when Pasteur finds a cure for rabies that even the nearsighted Academy must hail his results.
THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR is the kind of movie bio that lets you know from the first scene that the hero will meet and later overcome considerable obstacles on the way to an upbeat ending. Dieterle was old-fashioned enough to end the film on a rousing call by Pasteur to the younger generation of scientists and doctors to work ceaselessly to find cures for mankind's illnesses. Muni won an Oscar for Best Actor and the film won a Best Story oscar. Further, it was nominated for Best Picture. At the closing credits, what I took away from this inspiring film was the assurance that whenever highly placed doubters say that a thing which may help humanity cannot be, there will always be a Pasteur to argue otherwise.

Fighting The Establishment
Paul Muni stars in another one of his famous biographical roles, this time as scientist Louis Pasteur. Pasteur became famous for his involvement, in among other things, demanding that doctors sterilize their instruments and wash their hands, in finding a vaccine for anthrax, and developing a treatment for rabies. In this film, we see how Pasteur struggled not only with the science behind these issues, but also with the medical establishment that did not want to give credit to a mere scientist. Muni is very good in the title role, impatient, demanding, wise, and impassioned at various moments. The screenplay manages to take a topic that could have easily been made boring (a scientist staring into a microscope looking for germs) and makes it great entertainment instead. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Paul Muni's Oscar winning performance as Louis Pasteur
The 1930s were very much the glory day of Hollywood bio-pics, a fact amply evidenced by "The Story of Louis Pasteur" a 1936 production from Warner Brothers. Paul Muni in his Oscar winning role plays the French scientist who had to convince a skeptical scientific community that germs were the cause of disease. The one thing that can be said for modern science is that at least they are not dogmatic enough to threaten their opponents with execution, so this is not exactly a replay of the story of Galileo before the Inquistion. The scene where Pasteur instructs his chief opponent Dr. Charbonnet (Fritz Leiber) on how to wash his hands to prepare for surgery seems so strange when you consider that everybody today knows what doctors are supposed to do, it is so ingrained in both medical practice and popular culture.

The film tells of a time when science was about to achieve its ascendancy, which is ironic because in today's world of the Internet, that which is true is not scientific fact but rather that which is more easily accessible. "The Story of Louis Pastuer" is one of fighting each battle twice, for he not only has to find a cure for anthrax and rabies, he has to convince the scientific community that he is right. The fact that we know Pasteur is right does not take away from the drama of the story, and it does not hurt to be reminded of society's immense capability for stubbornly insisting on being stupid in the fact of evidence of a brave new world.

"The Story of Louis Pasteur" also won a couple of Oscars for the screenplay by Pierre Collings and Sheridan Gibney, but lost out on the Best Picture award. It is the sort of picture that can inspire younger viewers to think about what can be accomplished in the world of science and can certainly claim to be educational in terms of teaching us about how to prevent and cure disease. The film is filled with noted character actors in supporting roles, such as Akim Tamiroff as Dr. Zaranoff and Halliwell Hobbes as Dr. Lister, but I especially like the performance of Henry O'Neill as Dr. Emile Roux, who publicly challenges Pasteur on the question of the anthrax vaccine and does not bat an eye on changing his views when he is proven wrong.

However, ultimately this is Muni's film, when he was considered the premier actor of his generation. The actor would team up again with director William Dieterle two years later on another bio-pic, "The Life of Emile Zola." I think Muni's performance is a bit better in that film, mainly because Zola gets to give a very impassioned speech during his trial, but of course once you win an Oscar for playing a French national hero it is hard to get comparable acclaim for doing it again so soon.

An amazing story about a towering figure in history!
This movie not only powerfully tells the story of one of the greatest minds in human history, but of the ordeals of one of history's greatest human spirits. The Story of Louis Pasteur didn't just teach me about Pasteur's brilliant insights and scientific accomplishments - it portrayed the incredible drama of a man who doggedly fought for truth and the relief of human suffering against incredible opposition, ridicule, and derision. Einstein said that "great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from men with mediocre minds" and no truer words could be spoken about Pasteur and his career. His bravery and self-sacrifice as portrayed in this classic movie could not be more poignant or inspirational. A must see for everyone!

An excellent telling of this amazing scientist's story
An entertaining and reasonably accurate depiction of the triumph of Louis Pasteur over the entrenched naysayers in the French medical establishment of the day. The movie covers his support of the germ theory of disease and early efforts at antisepsis, but mostly focuses on his development of vaccines for anthrax and rabies. I can't think of another person in the history of biology and medicine who had a greater impact upon the human condition than this man. He laid the groundwork for modern microbiology as well as scientific method. This is a really entertaining movie that has you rooting for the focused and determined Pasteur through all of the ridicule and derision of the medical "luminaries" of 19th century France. A great movie for anyone with an interest in microbiology, medicine, or epidemiology, but just a terrific story for everyone.

Paul Muni: The Master of Historical Biography
Just as the world of science and medicine owes a debt to Louis Pasteur for his cures of anthrax and rabies so does the world of entertainment owe a similar debt to Paul Muni for dramatising the work of a much reviled French chemist in THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR. Director William Dieterle brought to the screen the essence of a man who was not afraid to speak out against the political correctness of his day, as collectively symbolized by the French Academy of Medicine who refused to see the very evident proof of Pasteur's claims that he lay right under their arrogant noses. Dieterle and Muni were to collaborate again one year later in filming the life of yet another great Frenchman in THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA. Pasteur, as Muni plays him, is a doctor who insists that cleanliness, if not next to godliness, is at least next to safety during surgery. The louder Pasteur claims that unwashed surgeons' hands and unsterilized scalpels cause patients to die with infection, the more viciously he is attacked by the Academy, symbolized by the haughty Dr. Charbonnet (Fritz Leiber). Pasteur later finds a cure for anthrax, and one would think that Charbonnet and the other Academy members would recognize Pasteur's genius, but even after a conclusive experiment proves his claims, his colleagues still ridicule him. It is only when Pasteur finds a cure for rabies that even the nearsighted Academy must hail his results.
THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR is the kind of movie bio that lets you know from the first scene that the hero will meet and later overcome considerable obstacles on the way to an upbeat ending. Dieterle was old-fashioned enough to end the film on a rousing call by Pasteur to the younger generation of scientists and doctors to work ceaselessly to find cures for mankind's illnesses. Muni won an Oscar for Best Actor and the film won a Best Story oscar. Further, it was nominated for Best Picture. At the closing credits, what I took away from this inspiring film was the assurance that whenever highly placed doubters say that a thing which may help humanity cannot be, there will always be a Pasteur to argue otherwise.

Fighting The Establishment
Paul Muni stars in another one of his famous biographical roles, this time as scientist Louis Pasteur. Pasteur became famous for his involvement, in among other things, demanding that doctors sterilize their instruments and wash their hands, in finding a vaccine for anthrax, and developing a treatment for rabies. In this film, we see how Pasteur struggled not only with the science behind these issues, but also with the medical establishment that did not want to give credit to a mere scientist. Muni is very good in the title role, impatient, demanding, wise, and impassioned at various moments. The screenplay manages to take a topic that could have easily been made boring (a scientist staring into a microscope looking for germs) and makes it great entertainment instead. ... Read more

Reviews (26)

Sprawling western, silly plot
Duel in the Sun was supposed to be the next Gone with the Wind for David O. Selznick. The hyped film boasts an all star cast: Jennifer Jones, Gregory Peck, Joseph Cotton, Lionel Barrymore, and Lillian Gish. The acting is over the top, especially Jennifer Jones' sultry Pearl. Gregory Peck seemed to enjoy his change of pace role as Lewt and enacts the role with gusto. It was a change from his heroic characters that he played in his earlier films. Joseph Cotton is the virtuous brother, Jesse, who does not choose to "forget" that he catches Lewt with Pearl, much to Pearl's hearbreak.

The ending of the book had Jesse and Pearl vanquishing the evil Lewt and riding off into the sunset. Looking at the over the top finale of this movie, I wish the producer had stayed with the ending of the book. The lines are laughable ("You know I had to shoot you," cries Pearl. "Yes, dear, I know you did," answers Lewt.)

There are many cliches: Lewt catching Pearl swimming in the nude and not allowing her to leave the water and get her clothes. Pearl throwing herself at another man to make Lewt jealous. Pearl's transformation, where she decides to become a wanton, her facial expression changing to reflect this.

I understand the "dance of the sump" was left out of the film, where Pearl dances for Lewt. It was supposed to be "indecent" but in retrospect might have been a source of amusement to contemporary audiences.

If you are looking for representative films from the Selznick studio, consider the following instead: Gone with the Wind, A Star is Born, Portrait of Jennie, and The Prisoner of Zenda. For MGM, Selznick produced such standout films as David Copperfield and Anna Karenina. For better films pairing Jones and Cotton, look for the films Love Letters and Portrait of Jennie. The two are at their best in those.

Epic, Sprawling Horse Opera (Roadshow Edition Review)
Sweeping! Magnificent! Corny! Romantic! A west that never existed is splashed across the screen as only David O. Selznick, the master of such gargantuan Hollywood classics as "Gone With the Wind", "Since You Went Away" and "Rebecca" could give us.
This is not the revisionists west of the 1990's, nor that West of the gritty operatic glamour of Sergio Leone's "Once Upon A Time In The West." You will not find the spare clean and lean beauty of John ford's West. What we have here is the epic telling on a screen that screams to be stretched into widescreen and spills out over the audenience the lush and romantic horse Opera of Pearl Chavez, the McCanles clan and the coming of the railroads in the 1880's.
From the moment the overture replete with unneeded narration begins you know you are in for a melodrama of purple emotions and blood red vendettas. The opening scene is set in a saloon on a scale of a modern Vegas casino. There amidst the wild gunfire of overheated cowboys and insanely spinning faro wheels we are introduced to the Scarlett O'Hara of the West, half-breed Pearl Chavez. As played by Jennifer Jones she is just about the hottest tamale to ever hit the pages of a screenplay expressly written to drive men mad, turn brother against brother and defy a "Sinkiller". What Jane Russell was supposed to be in "The Outlaw" we get in Technicolor spades in the form of Miss Jones.
She takes huge hefty bites of the massive sets and chews them to a fare thee well and in the process creates a wanton nymphomaniacal character of such charm, heat and passion that she is truly a motion picture original. This is the best thing Miss Jones ever did because it is so out of control and beyond the pale of her more subdued performances. Of saints, teenage war brides and ghosts of lost love.
As Lewt McCanles we get the hottest, meanest, most excitingly nasty performance Gregory Peck ever was allowed to give. And what an irresistible bad boy he is. He was never sexier or more wonderful than in this departure from the Peck norm.
Even the usually dull Joseph Cotton manages to rise above his typically dry rolls, but not too much, in the thankless roll of the good brother. He seems a little too old for the part and a little too polished. Someone like Charlton Heston might have been more on the spot.
Lillian Gish steals every scene she is in with quite assuredness and only finds completion from the ever-prissy Butterfly McQueen. In her final scene with Lionel Barrymore Miss Gish makes off with the scene so quitly that you are hit with it's impact only after the fact. Barrymore creates one of his most beloved curmudgeons as Senator Jackson McCanles full of sound and furry and ultimately signifying less than nothing. His introduction to Pearl topped by a sneeringly shocking racial slur that encapsulates his character and time and place.
Another highlight is the cameo by Walter Huston as "The Sinkiller". What can be said of him is only this, pure cinematic magic.
The film unfold with such a sense of grandeur and awe that it sweeps you along to its incredible ending on the wings of epic pure camp poetry. The Dimitri Tiomkin score is a masterpiece and much famed over the years for the incredible call of the bells set piece.
The three cinematographers involved, Hal Rosson, Ray Rennahan, and Lee Garmes paint movie memory after memory with the palate of hot dusty hues that have long been forgotten by audiences of today. To see it now is perhaps more exciting and thrilling than it was in 1947.
All of this mad mixture of melodrama, mush and music was orchestrated by the master showman of his time, the ultimate huckster of smoke and mirrors and consummate barometer for just what we wanted in our early epics of the America that never existed, David O. Selznick, who added the "O" to his name just because it looked better on the marquee. When they say that off heard lament "They don't make'um like they used to." Both Mr. Selznick and "Duel In The Sun" are what they are talking about. If they still made them like this then something would be terribly wrong. Thank god they did make films like this once upon a time and we still have them to lose ourselves in a dream of what never was and what will never be again.

Dreadful sound transfer
The dvd image is great, the soundtrack transfer is horrible: drops in volume and the dialogue is often distorted.

POINTLESS REISSUE OF ALREADY AVAILABLE DVD
Producer David O. Selznick never thought small. Dreaming of a magnum opus on the same grand scale as "Gone with the Wind" and, perhaps a little bit self-conscious of the fact that his recent affair with Jennifer Jones had yielded only one stellar performance from the starlet - and not even in a film he had produced - Selznick's driving ambition to make Jones a star on par with the likes of Vivien Leigh, led him to handcraft "Duel in the Sun." This was to be an extravagant Technicolor epic about a doomed mulatto, Pearl Chavez (Jones) and her rabid lust for, Lewton McCanles (Gregory Peck, in the uncharacteristic part as the villain), the ruthless son and roguish playboy of retired senator and bigoted rancher, Jackson McCanles (Lionel Barrymore). After Pearl's father, Scott (Herbert Marshall) murders her mother, Pearl is sent to live with Jackson and his wife, Laura Bell (Lillian Gish) on their sprawling ranch, Spanish Bit. Pearl is determined to live purely and plainly, but her incendiary disposition leads into the arms of Lewton. Jesse McCanles (Joseph Cotten), the good son, is forced to leave Spanish Bit, returning years later to find that his brother has become a ruthless tyrant and outlaw. Buttressed by a fiery backdrop about the colliding sensibilities of old West morality and the true Northern ambitions to tame it, "Duel In The Sun" ultimately became an overblown melodrama that seemed almost a garish lampoon of "Gone With The Wind" rather than its successor. It did respectable box office at the time but very little to advance Jennifer Jones' career into the echelons of super stardom. Prior to its release a sensual dance sequence that Pearl performs around a tree stump for Lewton was deleted because the censorship of the period found its sexual implications...well, shocking. Selznick's usual attention to craftsmanship and story design also seem to be absent from this occasion. He repositions Butterfly McQueen (Prissy from "Gone With The Wind) as the Prissy-esque house maid, Vashti, who is even dumber than Prissy and, Selznick muddles the supporting cast with oddities of all sorts, including Walter Huston as a religious zealot, determined to rid Pearl of her sexual demons, and Charles Bickford, as an over-the-hill farmer who offers Pearl his hand in a loveless marriage. Because of its sexually charged subject matter (there is, after all, a rape, a murder and the prospect of lovers committing suicide in the mountains) "Duel In The Sun" acquired the rather unflattering moniker of 'Lust In The Dust.'
"Duel In The Sun" had previously been made available from Anchor Bay in a stunning road show edition. MGM's reissue is the truncated theatrical version - also made previously available through Anchor Bay. On all three DVD incarnations, colors are well balanced, though on this new version they seem a tad more dated from the rich and vibrant colors on the Anchor Bay version. Black levels are good but fine detail is lost in many darkly lit scenes. There's also more noticeable film grain on this version than the Anchor Bay edition. The audio is remixed to stereo but only marginally appealing, sounding rather forced and re-channeled. There are NO extras.
There's nothing to stand up and cheer about here. If you are a die hard fan of this film, or westerns, then you will definitely want to look up the out of print copy from Anchor Bay, rather than this reissue. Aside from being longer, the Anchor Bay version also tends to be a better visual presentation overall.

Don't know why this movie has such a bad rap.....
It is WONDERFUL!!! What more could one ask for from the Golden Age of Hollywood: Producer David O. Selznick(he did a little something called "Gone With the Wind" - you may not remember that one....), beautiful Jennifer Jones, a young Gregory Peck, stalwart support from Joseph Cotten, a crotchtedy Lionel Barrymore, a luminious Lillian Gish, supendous 3-strip Technicolor, a decent story for a western(my least favorite movie genre), and a history that would equal Selznick's other "little movie" - GWTW. The DVD of this does the film justice, although some commentary or other supporting features would have been fantastic. I have the Anchor Bay releases of this film and just got this MGM release-they seem to be taken from the same source material, which is very, very good. This film's reputation needs to be defended - sure it was shocking in 1947, but in 2004, they could probably touch on these topics in an "Waltons" or "Litte House" episode. Judge for yourself - get this movie - you won't be disappointed!! ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Edward G. Robinson looks for a vaccine to cure V.D.
Edward G. Robinson stars as Dr. Paul Ehrlich in this 1940 film directed by William Dieterle that is one of the best biopics out of Warner Brothers. The film is noteworthy because of its mature handling of the formerly taboo subject of syphilis, which is mentioned in a Hollywood film for the first time. Ehrlich was the German doctor who decided to search for a vaccine for the venereal disease and discovered Salvarsan. These were the days when a bunch of dedicated scientists looking through a microscope while speaking of the wonders of nature and the sancity of life could come across as being dramatic. The Hays Office signed off on this film, after some intense deliberations, and "Dr. Ehrlich's Magic Bullet" was supported by medical societies and the U.S. Public Health Service. This film has an outstanding supporting cast, with Ruth Gordon as Mrs. Ehrlich, Otto Kruger as Dr. Behring, Donald Crisp as Minister Althoff, Sig Ruman as Dr. Wolfert, Donald Meek as Mittelmeyer, and Maria Ouspenskaya as Franziska Spever.

Excellent Warners biography of famed chemist.
Edward G. Robinson should have netted an Oscar nom for his finest screen portrayal - as the dedicated chemist and researcher, Paul Ehrlich. This is one of the great Warners screen biographies (THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR, THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA, MADAME CURIE). The screenplay is literate and absorbing. The acting is excellent, the direction tight. Ehrlich introduced the idea of treatment with chemical substances and developed a cure for both diptheria and syphillis. The screenplay was deservedly nominated for an Oscar but it is Robinson who shines in an atypical but superb performance. ... Read more

Reviews (24)

Laughton is Amazing
Charles Laughton is one of the great actors of all time. Watching this version of Vitor Hugo's novel it is not hard to see why. Laughton looks like he was born to play Quasimodo, the deaf and disfigured bell keeper of Notre Dome Cathedral. Wearing heavy face make up and a body suit, Laughton literally transformed himself to play the part. This novel has been adapted several times for the screen , but this is the best one. The performances are on the whole excellent. Particularly Cedric Hardwicke as the cold Chief Justice of Paris. Maureen O'Hara also gives a strong performance as Esmeralda. The direction of William Dieterle is very good, although he concentates a little too much on the subplots at times. On the whole this is an excellent film, that despite it's age, hardly seems dated. The story is a timeless classic and so is this film. Watch it just for Laughton's performance.

Grim,filled with pathos and terrific acting!!
This version of "THoND" is in my opinion,the best ever made.Charles Laughton epitomizes all the sadness,frustration and anguish the Hunchback feels when he falls in love with the beautiful Gypsy girl who showed him kindness..The supporting cast is wonderful,with Sir Cedric Hardwicke excelling as the Chief Justice who falls under the spell of the lovely Gypsy girl,Esmeralda,played gently and kindly by Maureen O'Hara.
When you begin watching this movie, you forget it is Charles Laughton.The make-up he wears is grotesque,and he is unrecognizable,but even through all the make up you can feel the gut-wrenching emotions he so ably portrays to the viewer.
Any classic film lover will most certainly already have this masterpiece on his/her DVD shelf.If you don't already have it,please give it a try.You will not be disappointed.Then,after you watch it,check out"The Beauty and the Beast," by Jean Cocteau,1948.Another classic love story not to be missed.

Hugo's Hunchback: Outer Ugliness Hides Inner Beauty
When director William Dieterle transformed Victor Hugo's THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME to fit the big screen, he succeeded in capturing the power and sweep of an age that was characterized by individual examples of humanity lost in a sea of inhumanity. Much has been said about the universality of the Beauty and the Beast theme that has marked many past and future books, movies, and television series. Here, Dieterle makes use of the considerable talents of Charles Laughton as Quasimodo, Maureen O'Hara as Esmeralda and Sir Cedric Hardwicke as Frollo, all of whom play out their lives against a brute Parisian government that seemed determined to crush any opposition. One of the less acknowledged aspects of the Beauty versus Beast contrast is the theme that the beauty of Esmeralda and the beastiness of Quasimodo are not limited to those two alone. The very system that wrecks the lives of the poverty-stricken populace puts on a facade of saintliness that makes its inner core of corrupt ugliness all the more stark.

O'Hara's Esmeralda is sweetness personified. She is a lovely gypsy woman who unhappily catches the eye of a lecherous Chief Prosecutor, sanctimoniously played by Hardwicke, who commits a murder only to frame Esmeralda, who has rejected his advances. Hardwicke plays the Chief Prosecutor in a way that brings to mind every corrupt official who has ever been caught with his hand in the till. He sees nothing wrong with using the full weight of his office to humiliate and condemn a woman who has done nothing to deserve this. Enter Quasimodo, a hunchbacked and deaf bell ringer whose appearance frightens others to the same extent that Esmeralda's captivates these same others. Early on, she takes pity on him by giving him water after a savage lashing. Later, he shows that his inner being is far more decent and sensitive than the hypocrites that cry out for his blood. The trial that condemns Esmeralda as a murderous witch says a great deal more about the repressed ugliness of the judges even as they mouth pious and empty phrases that can only caricature but not capture the spirit of their criminal justice system, which in any event, stacks the deck against anyone whom the church accuses of misdeeds. Frollo's perfect diction,his sonorous phrasing, and his impressive robes linger in the audience's mind as a truly terrifying symbol of evil. The people of Paris themselves have two faces as well. As Quasimodo is being whipped, nearly every voice is raised against him. The mob of Paris was as unthinking then as when, centuries later, Madame Guillotine lopped off countless heads during the French Revolution. Yet, these same Parisians could storm a church where they mistakenly believed the King's soldiers were headed to arrest Esmeralda and take her for hanging. The theme of outer appearances hiding its inner opposites makes an unexpected appearance when Quasimodo intervenes and kills many of these same Parisians who want only to save Esmeralda from the King's soldiers who have been given new orders to save her. The final scenes of THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME are full of unforgettable savageries made even more unforgettable by their lack of necessity. Quasimodo laughs maniacally as he repells the church door crashing mob. At the end, only Esmeralda finds a measure of closure as she is reunited with her lover. But for Quasimodo, all he has is the certainty that Esmeralda is safe from the rampaging mob, the lecherous criminal justice system, and an uncaring royal army. Quasimodo's closing line as he addresses the stone gargoyles atop the bells of his beloved church--"Why can't my heart be as stony as thee"--well evokes the paradox that often virtue comes with a high price tag. For good-hearted men--even human gargoyles like him, Quasimodo emerges as a man whose humanity dwarfs all those around him.

Good movie
Charles Laughton's performance of Quasimodo is excellent, instilling not only sympathy for the character, but also a sense of how the character's deformity caused him to be abused by not only the common people, but by a clergyman also.

It's not really fair to compare this version with the Lon Chaney silent. Chaney's performance is the stuff of legend, but this version is excellent. The visual quality is much better. The Chaney version is a classic, but it was a one-man show practically. Laughton's version has many fine performances by other actors also.

Recommended

Movie acting doesn't get any better than this!
Charles Laughton delivers what is,unequivocally, one of Hollywood's greatest performances. His "Quasimodo" embodies all of an actor's craft. Hidden and hard unrecognizable under heavy makeup, the performer manages to convey the spectrum of human emotion.

A young Maureen O'Hara as the beautiful "Esmeralda" and Sir Cedric Hardwicke as the sinister "Frollo" are equally as mesmerizing.

Acting 101 should make this required viewing and no film library is complete without it. ... Read more