steve-perlowski

Puccini, along with his librettists (Illica and Giacosa), brought a bourgeois sentimentality to Henri Murger's 1851 earthy novel ("Scenes de la Vie Boheme"), but oh what a whitewash. La Boheme premiered in 1896 (under the baton of Toscanini), and it has remained among the most popular of operas for well over a hundred years now.

King Vidor's silent movie classic owes most (not all) of its cinematic focus to Puccini's opera rather than the harder-edged novel by Murger. Sadly, however, the composer was already dead two years, when the MGM film made it to the silver screen in 1926.

Had Puccini been alive to see it, he would have been moved to blissful tears by the incredibly astonishing (dramatic) portrayal of his frail, consumptive heroine, Mimi, by the "First Lady of the Silent Screen," Lillian Gish. As an actress, Gish was without peer. She had the most expressive eyes, the most delicate face, and she can't have weighed more than a small canary. [I've read that Irving Thalberg actually referred to her, as Mimi.]

That being said, this is a fine film. John Gilbert is persuasive, as Rodolphe, (if a bit over the top, in a couple of scenes), and the movie, quite effectively, uses Puccini's melodies to complement the film's poignant pathos.

Given its age, the film has been, surprisingly, well preserved. Technically, the only complaint I have is a very minor one: in about three spots the film needed to be paused because the cue cards were flashed on the screen too quickly to be read (Warner should have had the diligence to fix this easily remedied glitch). Lastly, I would mention that it can be purchased relatively cheaply at Warner Archive (the listed price of which also includes shipping).

This is really a decent film: spies, handsome protagonists, intrigue on a Russian train (during Russia's involvement in WW I) prior to the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. Originally I rented the film because I, mistakenly, thought it was based on some obscure work by Leo Tolstoy. Had I read the credits more closely I would have noticed that it was based on a novel by Aleksei Tolstoy, who was, apparently, unrelated to the great Russian novelist. Be that as it may, I am glad that I had the opportunity to see it, and I would encourage viewers to use the subtitle button on their remote to get the English subtitles, since the setup menu has caused some difficulties.

Although I don't doubt the sincerity of the 2006 reviewer's opinion about this version of Rossini's "Barber of Seville", I would suspect that he has absolutely no insight/ knowledge, or appreciation of opera, especially comic opera. In other words, it's hard for me to imagine that anyone with even a smattering of interest, or enthusiasm, for opera could not recognize the very high level of this performance. The acting, the singing, the orchestration, the staging, the filming are all first rate. I think that this is Kathleen Battle's finest performance on film, and I was thrilled to hear that Deutsche Gramaphone is planning to re-release it on DVD sometime in the future.

As for Eve E's comments from Sweden (11-19-07), I'm stuck having to try to absorb a 2nd negative assessment of Kathleen Battle's performance (which I found thrilling, enchanting, and perfectly pitched). I suspect, though, that Battle's notorious off-stage antics (which are suggested by Eve ) colored her appraisal of Battle's on-stage theatrical brilliance. What Eve E. calls "overacting" is actually the impeccably nuanced and exaggerated emphasis which Battle gives to Rosina's flirtatiousness (with Count Almaviva), and her tender, but coy, pouts which are addressed to the ridiculous nature of the marriage proposal directed her way by her aged guardian. Without her sly smiles, batting eyelashes, etc. the comic effect of the opera would be lost.