(1/2/00)
This was a reconstructed print of Foolish Wives. A lot of it was dark. (The print had an overall murky quality.) Some shots which were incomplete were optically stretched out. In any case, it was only a fragment of what Erich von Stroheim intended. So the film was seen at a real disadvantage which was frustrating, but which at the same time lent it an air of rarity, of preciousness.
To me, Foolish Wives is probably the quintessential von Stroheim film. It is set in the "old world" of Europe and deals with decadence and depravity. Greed, which is his most famous film, is set in America and has a totally different milieu. Moreover, in Foolish Wives Stroheim directs Stroheim. And it is that character of Karamzin that one takes home from this film. Stroheim was known as "the man you love to hate" and here he is all swagger and rascality.
I think the main pleasure of this film is in watching the trio of crooks "getting away with it," especially since they do so in very elegant surroundings. They are caught in the end, of course, but it is still fun watching their shameless behavior. By contrast, the Americans seem kind of dull.
Foolish Wives, like other von Stroheim films, gives the sense of a crazy imagination let loose. And the "extravagance" he was so notorious for is the trace of an amazing energy. Whatever else one can say about it, Foolish Wives has its own special flavor. It is his Monte Carlo in the same way that a painter makes a place his own. The film is full of bizarre and grotesque touches--the counterfeiter's retarded daughter, the monk who arrives to interrupt Karamzin's seduction of Mrs. Hughes, and the maid Maruschka whom Karamzin gleefully swindles out of her life savings. There is a kind of inspired madness about Foolish Wives.
The plot is reminiscent of Henry James--innocent Americans thrust against not-so-innocent Europeans. Both Mr. and Mrs. Hughes learn and grow through the experience. Mrs. Hughes learns to appreciate her solid husband as opposed to sham; Mr. Hughes is wised up and learns to take charge of the situation, confronting Karamzin and knocking him down.
What interests me in watching Foolish Wives is that Mr. Hughes, the solid upright citizen, is lacking the qualities needed to satisfy his wife. She wouldn't be so susceptible to Karamzin if he were really fulfilling her. And I don't think that he really does learn to be dashing, challenging and sexy and to realize that these are qualities that he needs to bring to the woman he loves.
What are we to make of the man who has no arms? He certainly shows Mrs. Hughes that things are not always what they seem and that appearances can be deceiving. But when his cloak falls off and she suddenly realizes the situation and tenderly puts it back on, why the passive mak-like face? He doesn't even say thanks. It is a bizarre, puzzling moment.
In the print I saw we don't see Karamzin's death. We see him stealing into the house and waking Ventucci. I think the film cuts away and when it comes back Ventucci starts to drag the corpse. This is awkward and jarring. I wonder how it was meant to be seen and how it was seen in the 1922 release version.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment