In between the "Best" and the "Worst" are the movies that are reasonably entertaining, but could and should have been a whole lot better. Directed by Roberto Gavaldon (and with superb 2nd unit photography by Jack Draper), this movie rates with me just below the six out of ten mark. Certainly it starts off in a most promising manner with imaginatively photographed and excitingly staged crowd scenes set against visually impressive Mexican locations. But both script and direction lose their grip once the actors start to speak in earnest. Lloyd Corrigan turns the governor into such a bumbling stereotype, it's impossible to feel any sympathy for him when he is overthrown by John Sutton. In turn, Sutton then fails to turn his Count de Brissac into a thoroughly nasty piece of work. Instead, he's so stiffly formal that he makes the character plain wearisome. And as for the title role played by Arturo de Cordova, the man certainly looks like Casanova, but displays little of the dash or personality needed for the part. Lucile Bremer makes an attractive if unconvincingly disguised Lady Bianca. As for Turhan Bey and most of the rest of the cast, the lot are merely adequate, with the notable exception of George Tobias who alone plays with the energy and sparkle that the role demands. Admittedly, Nestor Paiva's Chief of Police seems to have come adrift in the sound department, as some – but by no means all – of his dialogue is obviously dubbed. As for the action scenes which started off with such a bang, they too fizzle out in both quantity and quality until they come to a halt with the final climactic sword duel between Sutton and de Cordova – which is a very tame affair indeed! In many respects, the plot is rather similar to "The Adventures of Don Juan", but Errol Flynn is far more dashing than de Cordova while Robert Douglas has it all over John Sutton for enthusiastic villainy. And when you compare the final sword duel in "Don Juan" with that in Casanova, there is really no comparison. One is exciting and vigorously staged, the other is a weak affair between two no-hopers in not particularly fancy dress. Casanova's best assets are neither acting nor script, neither direction nor editing, but photography and sets. They at least are worth looking at!
3 Reviews
Don Juan, your money's gone, and when your money's gone, Casanova is on.
mark.waltz11 July 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Arturo de Córdova is no Errol Flynn, and Eagle Lion studios was no Warner Brothers. Gone too is the glorious Technicolor, but basically other than that, it's still pretty much the same film. Okay, so the story lines from my recollection of both films are different, but you're not really getting anything new, basically just a western with silks, satins and wigs in gilded carriages as opposed to burlap and buckskin in covered wagons. De Córdova and Turhan Bey are taking on an evil ruler (John Sutton) who has usurped the Sicilian throne and a buffoonish governor (Lloyd Corrigan), protecting lady Lucille Bremer and her companion Noreen Nash.
Actually, this is pretty opulent for a film from an independent studio, perhaps not poverty row but certainly no MGM or Fox. This co-production of Mexico and the United States certainly could have used color photography, but outside of Technicolor, no other process of color photography at the time was as good and that was very expensive. Cinecolor would have made this look even cheaper. De Córdova and Bey are dashing heroes, although de Córdova doesn't always photograph in a flattering light. Bey is a stronger and more dashing actor. With big budget swashbucklers coming from pretty much every studio ("The Three Musketeers" at MGM; Robin Hood films at Columbia), this pales in comparison. Bremer is beautiful but bland, but Nash makes the most of her part which has her disguised as a boy for a majority of the film. Acceptable, but forgettable.
Actually, this is pretty opulent for a film from an independent studio, perhaps not poverty row but certainly no MGM or Fox. This co-production of Mexico and the United States certainly could have used color photography, but outside of Technicolor, no other process of color photography at the time was as good and that was very expensive. Cinecolor would have made this look even cheaper. De Córdova and Bey are dashing heroes, although de Córdova doesn't always photograph in a flattering light. Bey is a stronger and more dashing actor. With big budget swashbucklers coming from pretty much every studio ("The Three Musketeers" at MGM; Robin Hood films at Columbia), this pales in comparison. Bremer is beautiful but bland, but Nash makes the most of her part which has her disguised as a boy for a majority of the film. Acceptable, but forgettable.
Don't Look for Historical Accuracy
Thalberg12 April 2002
Don't look for historical accuracy, but this story of history's best-known self-confessed lover leading a rebellion against foreign tyranny in late 18th century Sicily has great sword play, romantic intrigue, good photography and a surprisingly big-budget look. Mexican actor Arturo Cordova is a smooth, athletic lead. American Lucille Bremert plays the feisty aristocrat who schemes to win his heart, and exotic Turhan Bey is the second lead who dies for love. The film is fun while you are watching it, but it is disappointing to learn that in 1973, when the movie allegedly took place, Casanova was a 68-year-old librarian living in Bohemia.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
