Rembrandt

Why *can't* they make films like this anymore? Today, a film has to be the best part of three hours long and packed with special effects. In this film we see the story of a man's life told in half that time, made at a studio outside London. (Having said that, it was a box-office failure, presumably the audiences who shunned this flocked to see Clark Gable in 'San Francisco'.)

Charles Laughton's performance is truly great, portraying Rembrandt's vision and artistic integrity (which appears as perverse stubbornness to his fellow citizens), and his deep humanity. His speeches at the inn which mirror each other at the beginning and end of the film, on the glory of perfect love and the vanity of human life, are so beautifully delivered I almost held my breath so as not to miss a word.

More than that, the film succeeds in recreating Rembrandt's world. We see the business-like merchants, self-important local politicians and hard-living peasants who made up Dutch society in the 1600's. One of the most moving passages of the film shows Rembrandt trying to return to his home. He is physically unsuited to his father's work and derided by the villagers. He returns to Amsterdam realising he can't fit in with the merchant-class or the peasant-class where he was raised - he is a man alone.

The supporting cast is noteworthy, including Elsa Lanchester (Mrs Laughton, of course) as Rembrandt's last love, Gertrude Lawrence (although I'm still not sure why audiences seemed to fall in love with her, maybe her histrionics were more suited to theatre) and a large crop of Liveseys (Roger, Jack, Sam - I'm sure there were others).