Oh... Rosalinda!!

Moviecut—Oh... Rosalinda!!

This ingenious adaptation of the great Strauss operetta for the screen with a positive political message, that carried results, has always been grossly undervalued. For some reason it was never shown in America until 30 years after it was made. It shows all the Powell-Pressburger magic tricks in a fantasmagoria of great fun with intriguing details in every new scene. The story is rather confusing, but that's the purpose of it, and doctor Franke (Viennese, played by Anton Walbrook) is the magician controlling everything. He wakes up after a party having been placed on top of a statue as an insult to the Russians by the French (Michael Redgrave) and decides to take a comprehensive revenge. He persuades the Russian in charge (Anthony Quayle) to give a party for all involved, and the most involved of all is Rosalinda, Michael Regrave's (French) wife (Ludmila Tcherina, the primadonna of the film, like she was in their previous film "Tales of Hoffmann"), and here she repeats her very seductive role, insistently courted by the American Mel Ferrer. The funniest scene is perhaps the British representative (Dennis Price) seeing double after the party, which is clearly visualized to the audience, while the best acting is by Anthony Quayle as the pompous and very convincing Russian general, the most drunk of all. It's a party film all the way and one of the best ever made, and it was in some aspects prophetic, as the French, the British, the Americans and the Russians actually gave up their occupation of Vienna in this year, tiring of being guests staying too long and of being unnecessary occupants of such a charming and lovely city.

I really wanted to "like" this but I can't. Sorry. the film is totally uninspired by the miscasting and the actors inability to lip sync to the songs! If only they had achieved something amazing - by getting Orson Welles and Bing to sing! But they didn't and that's the rub. The colour is a delight and the music a delight but it can't work until someone spends a fortune re-editing this and applying CGI to the lips syncs? Some awful acting doesn't help. What is Quayle like? Awful.

This 'lost' Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger movie updates Strauss' operetta Die Fledermaus to post-war Vienna, with the city under occupation by the four Allied powers. A romantic romp starring Anton Walbrook, Michael Redgrave and Ludmilla Tchérina as the titular object of desire, its primary pleasure is Hein Heckroth's gaudy décor, and it's not hard to see why it was a critical and commercial flop. If you want to see P&P meld opera and cinema to dazzling effect, try their previous film The Tales Of Hoffmann.

Powell & Pressburger take Strauss' "Die Fledermaus" and update it. I'm not familiar with the original work, but from what I can tell most of the plot points remain intact. The updating comes in the form of bringing it to postwar "Four Power" Vienna (like THE THIRD MAN) with some light commentary on the occupation. My problem with opera is quite similar to my problem with Shakespeare. The story is being advanced in a manner I find difficult to comprehend. Sometimes it's alright, but whenever there's a large chorus singing, it all sounds like mush to me. And some of the ladies go into that ridiculously high register where all words turn into "aaaaaaEEEEEEeEeEeEeee!!!" Still, when I couldn't make out the words I managed to get most of it from context, and the movie is fun musical comedy. The farce is well-constructed and the performances are very enjoyable (including Michael Redgrave being far more flamboyant than I would have ever imagined him). It's not brilliant, it's not stunning, it doesn't stick with you, but it's a good little romp with some nice tunes.

The Archers made some memorable films,but this was not one of them.To be honest I am not a lover of operetta and I just about made it to the 45 minute mark.I am sure that there has must be ecstatic to see it but I could last the film out.Maybe if they had managed to assemble their proposed all star cast it would have made it memorable.

Surreal, not even taking into account the operetta part. Slightly subversive, too. Normally, surreal and subversive are a great mix, but this one just keeps tripping over itself. I kept waiting for it to get off the ground, and in the process sort of enjoyed the weirdness. But it's not a good movie by any measure. Think Dr. Caligari crossed with the worst Mickey Rooney/Judy Garland musical you've seen (ok, with better music, but is anyone really _that_ into Strauss?). Or maybe The Third Man on a tremendous amount of ecstasy, except that's way too kind. My wife thinks Mel Ferrer's performance might have been an inspiration for Jim Carrey's acting style. That's the kind of quality to expect. Have fun!

Strange by any measure. Did Powell and Pressburger really make this? A dreadful version of Strauss' masterpiece. The color and scenic design is somewhat similar to P&P's Tales of Hoffman but way overdone. The performances are embarassing. Lots of yelling and loud singing with absolutely no subtelty..Worth a look for the scenic design and Anton Walbrook who seems to recognize how silly the whole thing is. Not shown in the US until 1985, for good reason.

Referential? You've got to be kidding. Start with Peter Ustinov's The Love Of Four Colonels than throw in a 'borrowing' from Max Ophuls' La Ronde, made more blatant by employing the same actor Anton (Tilly)Walbrook to do the narration-to-camera. As if do divert attention from the plagiarism Powell and Pressburger cheerfully own up to taking Die Fleidermause and 'updating' it to the immediate post-war Vienna, still divided into four sections and ruled by four powers. For me, Michael Redgrave was the selling point though Iconcede that for others it may have been the Strauss operetta - it's hard to see Mel Ferrer being a draw. Whatever, it's a sort of soufflé manque and amusing in parts.

We are big champagne fans and this movie was sponsored by a big French champagne outfit and it couldn't have been more appropriate. The post WWII Vienna setting was marvelously bubbly and clever. Where better to set such an international tale of deception and decadence. With the recent US occupation of Iraq, this film may be newly relevant. After all,Oh ... Rosalinda! was a plea for an end to the occupation of Austria. The party was over in the mid50s. In another ten years, perhaps, there might be a wonderful remake set in Bagdad.