Fanny and Chemistry

Post Reply
User avatar
mrsl
Posts: 4200
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Chicago SW suburbs

Fanny and Chemistry

Post by mrsl »

Before we get too far into Since You Went Away so I can watch it for the 50th time, if not more times, I wanted to talk a little about chemistry. Early this a.m. I watched Love is a Many Splendored Thing, from 1955 starring Jennifer Jones and William Holden. While watching it, I thought what great chemistry these two people had, I could almost believe she was a Eurasian doctor and he a war correspondent and they met and fell in love in a nice, slow, leisurely way.

Their embraces were so real, and the way they looked at each other made you almost feel guilty for being a voyeur into their private little world. Then when it was over, I looked it up on imdB and learned Jennifer and Bill rarely spoke to each other off set. Apparently his womanizing tried to include her, but as a newlywed she wasn't interested, but couldn't make him stop, so she took to eating garlic before love scenes to punish him. :lol: eeeewwwww.

With all of that said, I looked forward to a good, old fashioned love story for the evening since starting my day that way, I guess I wanted to end it the same way. In this case however, I felt no chemistry at all. Horst did a great job in playing the cad and maybe there wasn't enough time given to bring their feelings more into play, because I just didn't see the adoration. Actually, there really was only that one scene out on the wharf, and the short walk into her house. In fact, I saw more love in Leslies' actions at the end for her older husband, than for Horst through the whole movie. If not for the earlier movie, I would say I might be getting jaded in my old age, but with two actors who disliked each other I saw emotion (that's acting), than I did in Fanny.

I do think this movie is what made studios keep trying to get Leslie to come back from France to resume her career, because she did prove she was an actress as well as a song and dance gal. Some of those close up shots were fantastic. I think she played her part perfectly as a girl in love with a guy who was still not sure who he was. Even by the end of the movie he still hadn't found his niche.

Anne
Anne


***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *

]***********************************************************************
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Post by charliechaplinfan »

Anne, I have this movie in a pile to be watched, I'll move it to the top and come back and let you know what I thought of it.

I loved the French trilogy so much, it's perfectly acted by the leads, I honestly don't know what I'm going to make of Fanny.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
User avatar
moira finnie
Administrator
Posts: 8024
Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Post by moira finnie »

Image
Gee, Anne, maybe this movie wasn't your cup of tea. Still, I wouldn't describe Horst Buchholz's character of Marius as "a cad", but I do think that he was a young man who yearned for something more out of life. The feeling between Marius and Fanny (Leslie Caron, who had the romantic role of a lifetime and whose lovely face I suspect had enraptured cinematographer Jack Cardiff) was deeper on Fanny's side, and I responded to her halting admission that she loved him, as well as her belief that sending him away to be free was an act of love on her part as well.

Marius takes a bit longer to mature, and begins to understand how much he's thrown away once he has been away at sea, though he does not have adequate words to express it--even when he and Fanny are alone on the pontoon in the harbor before he runs away. I thought that Horst B.'s expressions and body language communicated his sense of longing and loss beautifully in the later scenes. This is eloquently expressed when he returns briefly, to find his father Cesar (Charles Boyer) closing his bar for the night and when, after realizing bitterly that he cannot make Fanny leave Panisse (Chevalier), and most of all, when he is working in the grease pit of the garage, and realizes that the legs of the boy he sees are those of Cesario, his son. The embrace he impulsively gives the boy, followed immediately by an apology, made my eyes well up just thinking of it. His love for Fanny begins as an adolescent urge, then becomes a form of regret, and finally comes full circle by the end of the film as a mature love, with the possibility of permanence tantalizingly hinted at but not promised at the end of the story, making it all the more bittersweet.

Just as people rarely understand how they truly feel until after an incident in their lives has retreated in time, this pair realize that they are not alike, but do have love. Chemistry? Yeah, it was there for me in this version and the French trilogy.
Avatar: Frank McHugh (1898-1981)

The Skeins
TCM Movie Morlocks
User avatar
MissGoddess
Posts: 5072
Joined: April 17th, 2007, 10:01 am
Contact:

Post by MissGoddess »

I unfortunately missed the first part of this film, almost the first 50 minutes. I thought the photography beautiful---but there were far too many pointless close-ups. I was very annoyed by that because they undercut any possiblity of meaning and intensity. However, I could overlook that aspect. Horst Bucholz I felt nothing whatever from. He's just too young and callow for me to see him in any possible romantic light. I liked best of all the scenes, as Robert Osborne brought up, with Leslie's mother, and also those between Boyer and Chevalier. How marvelous to see those two icons of Hollywood-Gallic in the same film and in such great parts. I love Boyer's character and Maurice's "Panisse", too. They were adorable.

I look forward to seeing it again all the way through. Marseilles never looked so ravishing. I wish now I had not skipped it on my last trip to southern France.
"There's only one thing that can kill the movies, and that's education."
-- Will Rogers
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Post by charliechaplinfan »

I watched Fanny last night, I'm incredibly prejudiced towards the Fanny Trilogy, rarely have I enjoyed films as much as I enjoyed them.

To start with the positives, the cinematography was stunning, I agree with Miss Goddess Marseilles never has looked so fine, we fly there in April, I hope I get chance to go to the waterfront.

What also worked well was the casting of Charles Boyer and Maurice Chevalier as Cesar and Panisse. Raimu who played the original Cesar was incomparible and Charles Boyer had his work cut out. He did an admirable job. Another agreement with Miss Goddess, the exchanges between Cesar and Panisse are the high points. Much of the humour was kept in this film, the scene around Panisse's deathbed, was funny, but it is much funnier in the original trilogy.

Panisse's character is altered, probably because the charismatic Chevalier played it, he doesn't come across as a lecher but neither does the relationship come across as a marriage.

One of the best scenes is when Marius comes back and discovers the truth about Cesario, all four principals in the same scene, it's a brilliant scene, it works very well and it's heartrending.

For me what doesn't quite work is at times heavy handed direction and much as I love her, Leslie Caron, she is far too beautiful to be cast as Fanny. This is why the relationship between her and Panisse doesn't work, Panisse would not be he only suitor. Fanny while attractive in the original is not jaw droppingy beautiful.

Horst Buchholz, very handsome, doesn't jar as Marius, he's believeable as the 19 year old boy, he and Leslie don't radiate chemistry.

There are high points and it is worth watching. If you've seen this film first I don't think you would be as picky as I have been. You can always just let the French accents wash over you. I've adored the accents of Charles Boyer and Maurice Chevalier for years, I was never sure who sounded the best to my ears. Now I know, it's Charles Boyer.

Anne, if you want to be completly absorbed into this story rent the original from your library or DVD rental company. Very few films have moved me both in the sensitivity and depth of the performances and the cleverness of the dialogue. I think you'd love it :wink:
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
User avatar
moira finnie
Administrator
Posts: 8024
Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Post by moira finnie »

Good points, Alison. I think that I like the version with Boyer (who is the outstanding actor in the 60s version) because I saw that one as a teen on tv, and did not catch up with the French trilogy until years later.

From what I've read there was a popular press belief at the time of the later film's release that Chevalier would receive the kudos for his Panisse, especially since he was riding high once again after Gigi. Boyer impressed many more viewers then and now, though I must admit I loved Raimu too, especially in The Baker's Wife (1938).

In any case, I suspect that one's enjoyment of a movie often depends on where you are in your life when you see it. Maybe that's trite, but this discussion makes it clearer of that basic of movie appreciation.
Avatar: Frank McHugh (1898-1981)

The Skeins
TCM Movie Morlocks
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Post by charliechaplinfan »

I think as a teen I would have loved Fanny, I certainly wouldn't have sat through the Fanny Trilogy in my teens.

You're right about Boyer being the best actor in this movie, his performance is very close to Raimu's he probably modelled his whole perfromance on that of Raimu but he does it so very well. In both versions Cesar is the best character, he strikes the correct moral tone, once he's finished puffing his chest out in outrage.

I've only seen Raimu in the trilogy, I'd love to have The Baker's Wife released on DVD, the whole synopsis of the story just makes me smile.

I think there is just a little too much Chevailer in Panisse, and one thing I attribute to Chevalier more than anything else is an eye for the ladies. Perhaps I just couldn't disconnect that in my mind.

Another thing to remember is who was ever going to have the chance of watching the French original when this was made. Whatever our differing views, this is a good discussion :wink:

Interestingly the credits said something about a book of Fanny by Joshua Logan.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
Post Reply