Anatole Litvak

[MissGoddess]

I believe Paula is very devastated at the end...she believed Roger would change, that he wanted what she did...which he does. But men often seek comfort from aging in younger women, while women seek it from their family or in Paula's case, from Roger. But they were both insecure and that's the trouble. I think Litvak understood this, understood the silly vanity of men, the vulnerability of women. He also seemed to understood to what degree many marriages and relationships between men and women are built on compromise, and not always what we wish from them. That's what is wonderful about the movie. Ingrid is superb, and this is one of my favorite of her performances, and her most heart breaking.

Now if it would only get a decent U.S. DVD release.

[MissGoddess]

If only this would be released in the U.S. These are three of my favorite Bergman performances, and in one set:


I have all three movies, but Goodbye Again (Aimez-Vouz Brahms?) is the only one that recorded from TCM, the other two are commercial DVDs and quite good quality. Funny, it just occurs to me that Indiscreet is in some ways takes a comical view of similar issues in Goodbye, Again. The man in Indiscreet (this time, Cary Grant) definitely wants his cake and eat it too, and uses deception to do so. Ingrid is wonderfully spirited and genuinely funny. I never expected her to be able to be funny but Stanley Donen at least, gets to her there in style. Gorgeous looking movie, too, for those of you who have not seen it. Bergman is begowned in Dior and stunning REAL jewels and her London apartment is absolutely to die for. Just look at the foyer if you don't believe me, I've seldom seen anything so lovely. And the adorable "breakfast nook"....in short, I want that apartment! Even if I have to live in London (I did for a while...the weather killed me but it was fun).

[JackFavell]

What you say about men and women is so true, MissG! You always show a deeper understanding of classic films.

I think you are right about Paula being devastated and disappointed at the end - maybe it isn't doubt at all, but sure knowledge that he is not so different than he was. It's quite sad, since she cannot change herself into the type who would not care.

Great call on Indiscreet and Goodbye Again being twin versions of the same story!

[MissGoddess]

Thank you, Wendy, I don't believe it but I return the compliment in double.

I find it great how Litvak shows the differences between a man and woman by having Paula end up doing exactly what Roger does. Yet in an entirely different manner and with an entirely different reaction. Roger pursues, Paula capitulates, as if out of a vulnerable need for the kind of blind adoration that someone as young as Anthony Perkins can provide but which she longs to get from Roger. She would never look for this to happen but Perkins was relentless in his pursuit. Ultimately, though, she is saddened by the experience, and disappointed in herself and the entire situation. Ingrid manages to convey all this. And how sad Perkins is, when he expresses how much he does love her and knows he can't make her return his love. And you believe him. You believe he's loving with the kind of purity that you only have when it's your first love.

Oh, and I want to say a word for the charming little maid, "Gabi"...I adore her! She's so protective of Paula and boy, does she have Roger's "number" from the start. She is younger but so much less naive than Paula. This somehow is very poignant. But I love the actress, she's so sweet and piquant. "Oui, madame...I mean, yes ma'am!"

[JackFavell]

That's a great point about the maid being in so many ways wiser (well more wordly wise that is)... it shows you too, how much an actress can do just by looking, or reacting. She's really good.

[charliechaplinfan]

I think I must have a more European view, I think Paula isn't niave but rather she is jaded, she's been marriage and knows in her case it's not all it's cracked up to be. I think what saddens her is living apart from Roger, he's takes her out but then goes home to his apartment, she's his girl but he's taking it no further than that for now, nor does it seem that he ever will. Phillip's admiration provokes no spoken response from Roger, Paula's capitualtion to Phillip makes him re evaluate how important Paula is to him and that's more important than he realises. Able to pursue the other ladies, he's saddened by his freedom finding no satisfaction. Paula's affair is his fault in the first place, if he had spoken up for her she wouldn't have done it, he quickly capitulates into marriage and living with Paula. She's wasn't niave enough to think that he's going to change when they're married, she marries him in full knowledge of what's coming but knows when he has to 'work late' he will come home to her and not just be picking her up and taking her to dinner when he feels like it. I think that the love is in the commitment, he's set her apart from his other girls, she's the only one he marries and intends to live his life with her. It is Paris, where society has a different view of men who have affairs, love can be construed in different ways and Paula has Roger's love and as such it's a love story between two people who have been hurt in the past.

Indiscreet has many parellels, only Ingrid is put in the position of the mistress. Only here the mistress holds more importance than the wife.

[MissGoddess]

Hi Allison! I appreciate your reply because this movie does traverse what seems to be two different views, however I think the two views are largely gender-based, and less a matter of Continental vs. American. We could assume Paula did know that Roger would never change, but going by how her character behaves in the movie, knowing is not the same as feeling with Paula. Her reactions to the cracks in their relationship are too emotional from the start of the film to suggest she's comfortable with the state of their relationship. I didn't get the impression that her character was the blasé Parisienne. I don't believe that she's reached that point yet or if she ever will. She's hurting inside, terribly. I never sensed she was jaded at all. Ingrid plays the role with a youthful vulnerability that is perfectly in keeping with her neediness and expectations. If she was cool, composed and reacted less emotionally, I'd agree with you that she was jaded or at least fully possessed the mindset that was accepting of her man's constant flings.

One example for my reason for my viewing it this way, is that Ingrid is definitely upset in the last shot when she hears Roger is not coming home to take her out. If she was emotionally prepared to live with what was coming, I don't believe they'd show her acting so devastated. We would also be left without the conflict between them if they are both on the same page about infidelity. Litvak seems to be saying that they've simply gone around in a circle, that Paula got what she wanted only on paper and in fact Roger spoke the truth (more than he even intended) when he said nothing would change between them if they married. Paula did bring up the issue of marriage with Roger, only to have him rebut with that argument.

Ultimately, I think this is a movie about two different ways of coping with age/sexuality and commitment. Paula clearly isn't able yet to shrug off the fact that Roger can't get along without younger women. And they aren't really mistresses, they're sexual flings to soothe his ego and fears about aging. I wonder how long their relationship has been this way, because Paula still reacts so strongly to disappointment.

In the last scene, I also bear in mind Gabi's reaction to Roger's not coming home that night; she clearly shows that she knows this will hurt her mistress.

I read the Sagan novel, but remember little about it. I wouldn't be surprised if it was more ambivalent than the movie, which was primarily made for an Anglo/American audience.

[charliechaplinfan]

Isn't it funny, I see her as jaded, she's been married and although I believe what she tells her maid is as much as to placate herself than the maid. I don't think Roger hides anything from her, she knows how it is going to be and it's how it works out. He's not faithful but he's put their lives on a surer footing, he's not interested in cutting down on his fun, it's like an addiction, he seems to gain little pleasure from it but he will carry on. I don't find it easy to feel a great deal of sympathy with her, Phillip isn't right for her and she knows how her marriage to Roger will work out. I read Ingrid's look differently in the end. It's like the best works of literature, two people can read the same text and have differing opinions as to what happened, Ingrid is a great actress it's credit to her performance and Litvak's direction that we can read it diffferently.

[charliechaplinfan]

This is what I felt after watching Anastasia, I wanted to enjoy it more.

Anastasia worth it because I love Ingrid and I'd never watched her in this, I've only watched Yul Brynner as the King in The King and I. Wow, he's lovely. The stars kept me watching but the narrative was a little boring and very factually incorrect. I don't mind the facts being wrong if the script supports it. Litvak one of my favorite directors fails me a little here. I wanted a better role Ingrid, I wanted to feel that she deserved that Oscar, not that it might have been given her to say sorry. She was good but not Oscar winning material for me. Sorry Ingrid.

[Ann Harding]

I felt Anastasia was a bore too. Ingrid is just going through the motions unlike her fascinating earlier performances like in Gaslight. As for Litvak, he could do far better pictures as some of his 30s films testify.

[JackFavell]

I like Anastasia, and I have never felt that Ingrid was "just going through the motions". I can agree that the movie is a little long, but the acting is quite good. Yul and Ingrid have great chemistry of course, and the supporting players are quite good. I think maybe that the film seems a little stagey compared to other Litvak movies, but I kind of like that. I wouldn't put it at the top of my list, but I do find parts of the movie thrilling.

[charliechaplinfan]

The part I thought thrilling was Yul Brynner He does have good chemistry with Ingrid, I've found Ingrid to be far better in most of her other films. It often happens for me that an Oscar winning performance isn't as good as others that year or others done by the same actor/actress.

[JackFavell]

He IS thrilling.

[knitwit45]

The Sound and The Fury is on TCM August 16, 10 pm (ET). All I can say is.....ZOWIE!

[charliechaplinfan]

Another Litvak movie that has failed for me is The Night of the Generals, despite a stellar cast, Peter O'Toole, Omar Sharif, Tom Courtenay, Donald Pleasance. I was watching with my husband but gave up after an hour and left him to it, Chris gave up a short time later, we never found out who the killer was and I doubt it we ever will.