Oh… Ludmilla!!

Fun and frolics from Powell & Pressburger’s OH… ROSALINDA!!

A ballet/operetta movie based on Die Fledermaus but updated to four powers Vienna, with the Bat, played by Anton Walbrook, functioning as a black marketeer and general fixer — a singing Harry Lime, if you will — this movie could actually qualify as the weirdest thing the Archers ever attempted. And it’s generally regarded as a complete failure. I think it’s the only P&P film not yet available on DVD anywhere in the world.

Of course, dismissing something as a failure is too easy, and doesn’t really allow one to get to grips with the peculiar qualities that make a film interesting. For my money, ROS is a lot more engaging and enjoyable than either of the Archers’ late-period war films, BATTLE OF THE RIVER PLATE (a widescreen snooze that Powell pronounced himself pleased with) or ILL MET BY MOONLIGHT (a b&w trudge through one of the war’s least interesting skirmishes that Powell was deeply dissatisfied with, leading to the break-up of the Powell-Pressburger partnership). OH… ROSALINDA!! forms a trilogy with THE RED SHOES and TALES OF HOFFMAN, and if it isn’t quite as extreme in its eccentricity as the latter, it isn’t for want of trying.

I’ve had two memorable big-screen encounters with this movie. One was a private screening in the company of Comrade K, where it formed one half of an all-time great Fever Dream Double Feature so misbegotten I can hardly bring myself to mention the second film, which was… LETTER FROM AN UNKNOWN WOMAN. Now, you just can’t put Ophuls’ masterpiece on a double-bill with anything. The other film is always going to suffer. Here, the agreeably superficial similarity, that both films take place in lovingly rendered studio representations of Vienna, was wholly swamped by the massive tonal disparity, not to mention the stylistic clash between Ophuls elaborately artificial realism and Powell’s scattershot surrealism. “Some of those colo(u)rs just don’t belong together,” was just about the only sentence K. could formulate after exposure to the P&P movie, which had even caused the projectionist to avert his gaze. and he wasn’t wrong — driven by some inner demon, production designing genius Hein Heckroth blasts the audience with what might be politely called myriad hues, like a psychotic paintballer looming from the screen and giving vent to his full chromatic range as a final revenge upon the world.

The previous, more successful showing, was at the Edinburgh Film Festival, where Powell’s widow (and Scorsese’s editor) Thelma Schoonmaker, and the film’s cinematographer Christopher Challis, introduced it. “Now that you’ve all bought your tickets,” smiled the cherubic Challis, “I don’t suppose there’s any harm in telling you that when we made this film back in 1955, none of us liked it very much.”

Big laugh from the audience (the first of many).

(Incidentally, working for Powell as a cinematographer, though one might expect it to be exhausting work, seems to have had a beneficial effect on both Challis and Jack Cardiff, both of whom are enjoying Methusalah-like longevity as I type this.)

“They tell me this film’s been restored. I don’t quite know what that means, but when I look at myself in the mirror every morning, I do find myself wishing there was a restoration programme for aging cameramen,” Challis went on.

Thelma took the stage and told us that when Scorsese and Powell first started spending time together, Scorsese would look through Powell’s collection of memorabilia, and every now and then would find a lobby card or image from OH… ROSALINDA!! Anton Walbrook dressed as a bat… “‘What’s this?’ he’d ask, and Michael would look abashed and hide the image and say, ‘Oh, nothing, nothing…’”

Having set the film up as the great disaster of Powell & Pressburger’s career, Challis and Schoonmaker (they should form a comedy double act) had actually created the perfect mood to enjoy the film. Expectations had been lowered and spirits had been raised, and the movie could then shine as the rare piece of hallucinogenic confectionery it is, the embodiment of Gavin Lambert’s judgement on Powell: “He would do these extraordinary things, which didn’t always come off, but it mattered that he did them.”

Has anyone noticed that Mel Ferrer plays his part as an exact, note-for-note imitation of William Holden? It’s technically quite effective but falls short of actual charm, either because it’s too studied, or because Ferrer simply lacks the physique for it.

In the Youtubed scene we get two jokes at once, and I’ve chosen it for that reason. When Redgrave (at his campest, especially when paired with Walbrook — TOO MUCH!) attempts to throttle Ludmilla Tcherina (from THE RED SHOES and Sirk’s SIGN OF THE PAGAN), the towel on her head rearranges itself to form a pair of bunny ears. While Fiona was laughing at this, I was laughing at the fact that Tcherina, not generally considered the most capable actress alive, starts to make her throttling sound BEFORE Redgrave actually has his hands around her throat.

Now, ANTICIPATION is one of the most basic errors an actor can make, revealing to the audience that the performer knows what is going to happen next — has read the script, in fact. All illusion of reality is destroyed. But in the rather special case of a contemporary operetta on stage sets with singing and dancing and gay men playing straight men in a manner even camper than they would consider adopting if they were playing gay, if you follow me, all questions of reality should be pushed firmly into the cupboard of irrelevant things and locked up there for 101 minutes. Once this is done we can see that Tcherina’s choice is the most intelligent and thoughtful one possible, and entirely in the spirit of the exercise.

12 Responses to “Oh… Ludmilla!!”

  1. Well I don’t care if it’s a failure. I STILL want to see any and every film Micky Powell ever did.

    Mel Ferrer in that still looks a bit like his part in Renoir’s ”Elena and Her Men”(he’s one of the men). I always thought there was a connection between Renoir’s Technicolor pageants and what the Archers were upto. ”Elena and Her Men”, the third film is also dismissed often even if it’s great and is an a feast for the eyes with the most beautiful colours.(though the best of that trilogy is ”French CanCan”)

  2. Well I’ve seen it, and it’s a film maudit if there ever was one. It’s incipienct archness was chalk on a blackboard to me at the time. Not sure if seeing it again would improve things. Women throwing things at their hubands/lovers to “comedic effect” I find invariably tiresome.

    Raymond Durgnt called Walbrok’s Bat a “Harry Lime of love,” and I’m sure that was P&P’s intention. He also noted that “Michael Redgrave has more dancing to do thant Ludmilla Tcherina.

    You’re ctiign of Elena et les Hommes as a point of comparasion is quite correct Arthur. But the “charm” is less heavily aid on there, and Juliette Greco’s 11 O’Clock number is most festive.

    BTW, the proper title is Oh…Rosalinda!!

  3. You’re right. You can even hear the second exclamation point the way Redgrave says it. (Fliedermaus ’55 seems to have been another title considered.)

    The marital comedy stuff is indeed rather arch and at the same time conventional (how glad I am that Lubitsch’s wife left him, breaking his heart and deepening his comedy so that cuckolds were no longer figures of fun). But the style overwhelms most of that — it’s not a film one watches for plot, and the best jokes are in the design rather than the script. There’s a great shot of a Russian earnestly painting a globe red, and the butterfly broach which flutters its wings got a big laugh too.

  4. Forgot about that butterfly broach. In Synecdoche New York there’s a great shot of a butterfly tattoo falling off a character’s arm in the form of an actual butterfly.

  5. Olivier Masson Says:

    Good morning. I saw this film (Oh Rosalinda!) on a very poor quality VHS a few years ago from a music video online shop and nevetherless enjoyed it much. So I come back from time to time to see whether someone by luck (or maybe by error) has put it properly on DVD. I would be really happy if your efforts could lead to that.

  6. Morning! With all the other P&Ps out on DVD, this one must come out eventually, with or without my help. The trouble is, saving it to last puts too much pressure on it to live up to the rest of the P&P oeuvre. Still, in the US there are lots of unreleased Powells. It was nice to see everyone grooving to The Small Back Room recently. That’s a far more successful film overall than O…R!! but on the other hand a more modest one.

    Since Criterion has released The Red Shoes and Tales of Hoffman, completing the informal trilogy would make sense. And Challis could hopefully provide a commentary or interview.

    Trivia corner: the film’s corps de ballet includes a nubile John Schlesinger.

  7. Schlesinger also appears in The Battle of the River Plate. Not a dancing role, however.

  8. I don’t think ”The Small Back Room” is in the least bit modest. It’s restrained and smaller in scope but it’s just as visually beautiful and assured as Powell at his best. It’s a favourite of his, I believe. It also has David Farrar’s best work for Powell and Kathleen Byron is great as well, a nice sympathetic role after the hysteria(great as it is) of ”Black Narcissus”. Jack Hawkins is also terrific as the most unsympathetic character in the Archers’ corpus.

    It’s also a visually stunning Black and White film. The soft blacks and grays used is quite different from what you get then. The film works as a coda to the wartime films made in the early 40s and it’s more critical and bleak in tone than those films, really going after the bureaucracy and the like. And the final bomb defusing scene…it makes Henri-Georges Clouzot look like a thumb-twiddler. It’s more tense than all of ”Wages of Fear”.

    Is there anyone who has anything nice to say about ”Oh…Rosalinda!”? I understand that it might be quite bad but still…I heard Scorsese liked this film. But then he likes everything.

    by the way, Powell also returned to opera when he made a film in Germany called Herzog’s Blaubart’s Berg. Has anyone seen that? I heard there are problems with rights, regarding that.

  9. 1) Maybe “modest” is the wrong word for Small Back Room. I didn’t mean to imply it was in any way ineffective or uninteresting. It was a conscious retreat from the spectacle of Red Shoes, which was initially perceived as a flop by Rank. So it was an attempt to be more low-key, to slip under the radar… but Powell was on fire as a filmmaker at the time, and the movie attains a hallucinogenic intensity it can scarcely contain. It all explodes out during the bottle scene, but it seethes underneath the rest of the film.

    Yeah, Hawkins is loathesome: Powell did not get on with bureaucrats! See also the studio boss (Don Jarvis = real-life Rank manager John Davis) in Peeping Tom.

    2) *I* like Oh…Rosalinda!! I have to temper that by saying the film is flawed. The style is Powell at his most extreme, the content not quite so lofty, as David E points out. But the political message is interesting, and the visuals are just demented.

    3) I got a very flawed VHS of Bluebeard’s Castle from the late Raymond Durgnat. No subtitles. But a great piece of work — again showing Powell as spiritual kin to Mario Bava (see also: the climax of Black Narcissus, the repeating rooms moment of Tales of Hoffman, reproduced in Kill Baby Kill). I should write something on it.

  10. ——————————–
    So it was an attempt to be more low-key, to slip under the radar… but Powell was on fire as a filmmaker at the time, and the movie attains a hallucinogenic intensity it can scarcely contain. It all explodes out during the bottle scene, but it seethes underneath the rest of the film.
    ——————————-

    Definitely. It’s also there with the use of that bewitching photo-frame of Kathleen Byron. The photo in the frame disappears in Sammy Rice’s scene before his nightmare. Then there’s that field testing excerciise at Stonehenge.

    It’s really a film about a man battling his demons. The theme is simple enough but it’s never been done with such honesty and force. The anger, the self-loathing, the proximity to death(the bomb scene where he comes inches to his annihilation) and also the uncertainty over their purpose and their usefulness. It’s really the best film about how Britain was like during the war years, if not the best then one of the best certainly. This one deals with it psychologically. And also interesting is that for a Post-WW2 film, it doesn’t end with a flashforward and a banal all-is-good ending “some years later” that films nowadays are won’t to do.

    ———————————————————-
    But a great piece of work — again showing Powell as spiritual kin to Mario Bava (see also: the climax of Black Narcissus, the repeating rooms moment of Tales of Hoffman, reproduced in Kill Baby Kill). I should write something on it.
    ———————————————————-

    Well…not that I dislike Bava…but Powell certainly operates on a level far above him. He’s right up there with Murnau, Lang, Sjostrom, Buster Keaton and all the great masters of the fantastique films.

  11. Tony Williams Says:

    I saw OH ROSALINDA!! years ago at St. Louis. It is a fun film and visual extravaganza, maybe not up to the best works of the Archers but definitely worth reissuing on DVD.

  12. Some of the visual invention, and narrative cheek, is breathtaking. It might not be a success overall, but it’s essential viewing for fans.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 128 other followers