Motion Picture Review Digest (Jan-Dec 1936)

MOTION PICTURE REVIEW DIGEST 95 at her best in the balcony scene, Mr. Howard came a cropper in a few of his soliloquies — there must be some inherent antagonism between the screen and soliloquy — Conway Tearle was a bit on the declamatory side as the Prince of Verona. . . Mr. Howard is a pliant and graceful Romeo, overly weak perhaps in those moments when his hot blood should have boiled and he shared some of Mercutio's fiery spirit. But as a wooer and whisperer of Shakespeare's silver-sweet lines, he is as romantic as any lady on a balcony might desire. . . We reach the end of the film with this realization: the screen is a perfect medium for Shakespeare; whether Shakespeare is the perfect scenarist for the screen remains uncertain. Metro's film of 'Romeo and Juliet' is a lovely thing; if it should not be well received the fault will not be Hollywood's." F. S. Nugent + + N Y Times pl2 Ag 21 '36 "[It is] a handsome, dignified and reverent production. Possibly too reverent, as though upon advice of counsel it were deemed Master Will were still alive and might sue. . . Norma never looked lovelier. Indeed, she is so adequate I have no doubt her performance will go down in cinema history as THE Juliet of the screen. . . She is, I fear, too much for Mr. Howard's Romeo — a role, I am told, that was a natural. But Mr. Howard hath a lean and hungry look, methinks, and runs too much to age. His is a fine maturity, but too wise. . . I must also, in justice to my own reactions, disagree with the antic Mercutio of John Barrymore, who plays this suave and subtle rake, whose demise is so untimely, as a corseted Falstaff, sawing the air and mouthing his words. . . It is disconsoling that so fine an artist as Edna May Oliver should so misconstrue the nurse, giving the role a biting metallic quality more steel than iron. . . But these are flaws, if flaws they are, of no consequence to the lay observer, and the production in its entirety overcomes in its very honesty a quibble here or there. . . I can heartily commend it to an indulgent public." Douglas Gilbert _j N Y World-Telegram p7a Ag 21 '36 "The whole thing should have value as a reference film for students of the Elizabethan drama. Vulgarians may overlook the fine points and see in it somewhat the usual costume piece done on a rather bigger than average scale. . . The picture clearly belongs to Norma Shearer and Juliet. . . Actually for once, we see a Juliet who is a girl. . . Miss Shearer never seems desperate, and though her eyes well so richly with tears, seems hardly either terrified or tragic, never inelegantly intense. Her first encounter with Romeo is a delightful scene. . . Leslie Howard appears to be an intelligent, well-bred, and not quite well Romeo. He is possibly a little chilly in the role. . . It's in the later and tragic scenes that Mr. Howard is at his best; and there is a good deal to be said for a Romeo who isn't the violent gallant so much as the mournful romantic, whicn is the kind of Romeo Mr. Howard probably intended. . . I think the studio has been overwhelmed by Shakespeare . . . and [has] rendered the film somewhat cumbersome, removed the possibilities of something fresh and exciting. . . This is a good sensible presentation of 'Romeo and Juliet' but it won't be one you 11 hark back to when you are discussing the movies as great art." John Mosher + New Yorker p-18 Ag 22 '36 "Let there be no doubt about it — Shearer's Juliet can rub elbows with any modern interpretation of the damsel, from Cowl to Cornell. Whether she could have matched her predecessors behind the footlights is irrelevant. As the first Capulet of the films, she answers twice over the camera's peculiar dramatic demands. No one of the current crop of cinema satellites could have touched her performance with an 11 -foot pole. . . The only weak spot in the ensemble, Howard enunciates beautifully and tiptoes about in the best of taste, but with all the passionate fervor of a potato." News-Wk p28 Ag 22 '36 "It comes as something of a surprise to report that M-G-M's production of 'Romeo and Juliet' is all that it should be. . . The cast lists many names that probably have known 'Romeo and Juliet' only on the stage of the Danville High School Auditorium, but their recitation of immortal lines has had intelligent, and sometimes inspired direction. Norma Shearer . . . gives by far the best performance of her career, to create a character of tenderness, emotional stature, and confidence. Leslie Howard's Romeo is perhaps the most mature lover the screen has ever bothered with, his performance being something of a cross between Alan Squier and Hamlet. . . It is maybe more of a commendation to Shakespeare than to the current producers that this play has the authentic touch; but then it's quite a compliment to Mr. Thalberg and associates, too." + Stage pl2 S '36 " 'Romeo and Juliet' is certainly the best since the Jane Cowl-Rollo Peters version and quite probably the best ever shown. . . To intelligent cinemaddicts, it will be no great shock to learn that the best actors currently functioning in the U. S. act the play as well as it can be acted; that the most expensive sets ever used for Romeo and Juliet are by far the most realistic and hence the most satisfactory; and that the camera — which can see Juliet as Romeo saw her and vice versa — greatly facilitates the story. As for the play itself, which is by far the best part of the production, it remains what it has always been, the best version ever written of Hollywood's favorite theme, Bov Meets Girl." + + Time p30 Ag 24 "'36 Trade Paper Reviews "New heights in cinema artistry have been achieved in the picturization of Shakespeare's immortal love story. It is one of the most important contributions to the screen since the inception of talking pictures — a glorious triumph for Producer Irving G. Thalberg, Director George Cukor, the starring combination of Norma Shearer and Leslie Howard, and all others concerned in the making of the picture. The Universal appeal of its tragic romance and the unusual marquee strength of its cast are assurances that the picture will interest maximum patronage and from the standpoint of enlisting the attention and support of constructively influential public elements and raising the screen in everybody's esteem, it will prove one of the most effective releases in years." + + Film Daily p2 Jl 16 '36 "Mr. Irving G. Thalberg, producer, showman and visionary . . . has evolved a picture that should be as timeless as the story it tells, gives him top billing in this magnificent effort. . . It is a picture born to be re-issued. It seems to this humble reviewer that, once seen, it must be seen again, so that the appreciation and satisfaction may be more complete. . . The wit and flow of language is something that everyone will want to enjoy again and again. The superb acting throughout of a cast of picture favorites is another thing that you'll want to view again and again — everything about the production will make you proud to be a movie fan. There isn't anyone we can think of who will not want to see this picture; who will not love it; who will not wonder why Shakespeare has been so long neglected or viewed with such pedantic awe." Helen Gwynn + + Hollywood Reporter p4 Jl 16 '36 "Its appeal unquestionably will be to every type of picture patronage above the juvenile audience level. For the erudite audience it offers that beauty of fine artistry which should be found wholly charming, while for that average segment of the screen public which ordinarily turns from anything which savors of the highly artistic, there has been concocted much which is stirring, and occasionally thrilling, action. The picture has been magnificently produced, the settings and effects + + Exceptionally Good; + Good; -\ Fair; j Mediocre; — Poor; Exceptionally Poor