Disraeli (1929)
6/10
Interesting as an Artifact, Abhorrent in Its Politics
24 April 2020
"Disraeli," like many early sound films, is enjoyable more as an artifact of movie history than it is as an actual movie. It's antiquated and suffers from that stilted pacing and strange framing that defines early talkies, where actors will move to the side of the frame but the camera doesn't move with them, so what we're left with is a static shot of an empty room. But creakiness aside, it's not hard to see how George Arliss won the Best Actor Academy Award for this film. His acting is certainly old fashioned, but compared to other actors at the time, he gives what amounts to a master class. And he manages to imbue this movie about the political intrigues of Britain's historical prime minister with a sense of cheeky good humor. The film kicked off the trend that is still alive and well today of Oscars favoring actors who recreate famous historical figures.

I also really had fun with Florence Arliss, George Arliss's actual wife, who plays Disraeli's wife in the movie. She and Arliss are cute together, and she giggles at everything he says. A side story having to do with his concern over his wife's health is rather sweet and provides a memorable ending.

In order to enjoy "Disraeli," though, you'll have to be willing to overlook its abhorrent political stance, which essentially asks us to think of this historical character as a hero because he paved the way for British colonization of India. It's a film that celebrates imperialism, and I think history has shown us all how well that's worked out for everyone.

"Disraeli" was also nominated for Best Picture and Writing in the 1929/30 award year. It lost the big prize to "All Quiet on the Western Front," a total no-brainer.

Grade: B
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed