Ideally, I would only watch good movies. This is, well, it's not good. Not even close to being average. It might be worth watching for historical value. but even that's a tough call. The historical value is that this is Greta Garbo in her first talkie. But boy is this movie slow, awkward, and boring. The camera shots... the cameras must be trees. They're stuck and don't move. It's a talkie, but it still uses written cards on three occasions for transitions -- when probably no "transitions" are actually necessary. Just switch to the new shot, director. It's okay. I promise the audience can follow along, especially at the turtle's pace this movie is going. And, it doesn't help that the movie is based on a Eugene O'Neill play, so that all the scenes are talk-driven and stationary. I just watched Mata Hari (1931), and I wondered in my review of that film if Garbo was still finding the proper use of her voice in talkies. Probably so, because s...
In Camille (1934), which I just watched, Greta Garbo plays an older woman. A younger man falls in love with her, and she eventually falls in love with him, even though she should know better. Well, that's essentially what happens in Mata Hari, too. This time, instead of a courtesan, she's a German spy. Set in 1917, she's "stationed" in Paris, and in flies this younger Russian airman, Lt. Alexis (Ramon Navarro). Hari wears these elaborate outfits, and when Lt. Alexis sees her at the casino, he buys a ring from another woman who needs money to gamble, and then he gives the ring to Hari, a token of his affection. Originally, you can tell that Hari knows better than to get involved with this guy, but he's persistent, and she's weak. She could have flown to Amsterdam and got away before getting caught, but she refuses to leave Paris, and that leads to her downfall. Like I said, they fall in love, but there's no way for them to be together, and unfortunately...