Monsieur Beaucaire (1924)

Director:

Sidney Olcott

Writers:

Booth Tarkington (novel)
Booth Tarkington (play) ...

Release Date:

11 August 1924 (USA)

Genre:

Drama | Romance

Plot:

When M. Beaucaire, a handsome barber, catches the Duke of Winterset cheating at gambling, Beaucaire...

Plot Keywords:

Gay Interest | Based On Novel | Based On Play | Character Name In Title

Cast

Rudolph Valentino	...	Duke de Chartres / Beaucaire
Bebe Daniels	...	Princess Henriette
Lois Wilson	...	Queen Marie of France
Doris Kenyon	...	Lady Mary
Lowell Sherman	...	King Louis XV of France
Paulette Duval	...	Madame Pompadour
John Davidson	...	Richelieu
Oswald Yorke	...	Miropoix
Flora Finch	...	Duchesse de Montmorency
Louis Waller	...	François
Ian Maclaren	...	Duke of Winterset
Frank Shannon	...	Badger
Templar Powell	...	Molyneux
H. Cooper Cliffe	...	Beau Nash
Downing Clarke	...	Lord Chesterfield

Runtime:

106 min

Country:

USA

Color:

Black and White

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1

Sound Mix:

Silent

Filming Locations:

Paramount Studios, Astoria, Queens, New York City, New York, USA

Company:

Paramount Pictures

Movie Connections:

Referenced in Valentino (1977)

Not as bad as some say, but not as great as it could have been

From the looks of it you'd think that this film was based on dusty source material by a European playwright of the 18th century, the place and time of its setting, but in fact "Monsieur Beaucaire" started life as a popular American novel of 1900, written by the Indianapolis-born author Booth Tarkington. The plot was entirely a product of the author's imagination (though some of the characters were based on real-life counterparts), while the milieu of the French royals and their aristocratic courtiers was the product of authorial research. Costume pictures were in vogue in the Hollywood of the mid-1920s, and the ultra-lavish court of King Louis XV offered splendid opportunities for studio costume and scenic designers. Paramount obviously didn't stint on the budget of this sumptuous film version, but the movie was costly in another sense of the word: leading man Rudolph Valentino took a lot of flak, even ridicule, over this project, and it's said that it caused his reputation lasting damage. Why? Largely because the publicity photos and posters that display him dressed as the Duke of Chartres, the "Prince of the Blood" he portrays—complete with knee-breeches, lace ruffles, satin jacket, and powdered wig—make him look like a fop, and those critics and columnists who hadn't liked him in the first place took this opportunity to cast aspersions on his masculinity. It was an ugly and unfair charge, but the most telling refutation can be found in the star's performance in the movie itself: the finery worn by the French nobility of this period was ornate and theatrical, but Rudy wears his outfits with a natural, casual elegance, with dignity and a touch of humor. (No one gave John Barrymore a hard time when he dolled himself up to play Beau Brummel the same year, but then, Barrymore's sexuality was never in doubt, while there was always a hint of mystery concerning Valentino's private life that drew hostility from some quarters.) The problem with "Monsieur Beaucaire" isn't Valentino's performance and it certainly isn't his wardrobe, it's the already antiquated film-making on display.

Sidney Olcott was a film pioneer whose directing career dated back to 1907. His best remembered work is "From the Manger to the Cross," a film on the life of Christ which was produced in Palestine in 1912 near the original locations. That early feature still survives and holds up remarkably well today, but it appears that by the mid-1920s Olcott's cinematic technique was falling behind that of younger and more innovative directors. Unfortunately, "Monsieur Beaucaire" looks stodgy and old-fashioned compared to concurrent works by rising talents such as Ernst Lubitsch. (Lubitsch had already demonstrated by this time that costume pictures can be stylish, sexy and fun.) Olcott makes a rather half-hearted attempt to be 'modern' in his staging of the first sword-fight sequence, when he limits the camera's viewpoint to a bystander's facial reaction while showing only the tips of the fighter's swords in the foreground, but the effect is gimmicky and unsatisfying: we don't want tricky camera angles, we want to see what's happening! The second duel later on is a considerable improvement, and also reveals that, fancy duds notwithstanding, Valentino could handle swordplay. During this second sequence Olcott breaks down the fourth wall for a moment as Rudy lunges directly at the camera. Otherwise, however, the film-making is rudimentary.

Perhaps the biggest problem here is clutter: there are too many title cards, the cards themselves are too wordy, and too many supporting characters are introduced who have little or nothing to do with the central storyline. For all the unnecessary embellishments the story is a simple one: Valentino is the Duke of Chartres, a denizen of the King's court and a royal favorite. He's in love with Princess Henriette (Bebe Daniels), but she's put off by his reputation as a tomcat. After defying a direct order from the King to marry Henriette the Duke finds it expedient to flee the court for England. There he assumes the identity of a humble barber and falls in love with an English lady, but she's put off by his lowly status. (It's always something!) Eventually, he returns to the French court and to Henriette, who now realizes that she loves him after all. That's the gist of it, but the screenwriters who adapted Tarkington's novel failed to streamline the story for the requirements of silent cinema, and Olcott lacked Lubitsch's facility for conveying plot points with witty visual ideas. The first section in the French court is especially draggy, but the tempo improves once Rudy reaches England and assumes his barber disguise. By the finale the movie has provided a fair amount of entertainment and is better over all than it gets credit for being, but still falls far short of the cinematic treat it could have been.

Valentino carries the proceedings single-handedly with his undeniable charisma, but this is also because the numerous supporting players have little to do except pose in their fancy costumes; even such estimable scene-stealers as Bebe Daniels and Lowell Sherman are reduced to dress extras. It's a particular shame that Bebe wasn't given better material since she had such a gift for comedy, and this movie could have used some laughs. "Monsieur Beaucaire" has never had a high reputation among silent film buffs, in part perhaps because it compares poorly to the two costume dramas Rudy went on to make in the last year of his life, "The Eagle" and "The Son of the Shiek," both of which were crafted with so much more flair and playful humor. Interestingly, when "Monsieur Beaucaire" itself was remade in the 1940s the filmmakers chose to play it as an outright comedy, and gave Valentino's role to the most unlikely successor imaginable: Bob Hope!