Reviews & Ratings for
Madeleine More at IMDbPro »

42 out of 48 people found the following review useful:
A lesser known but no less than brilliant David Lean film, 30 June 2006
Author: sol- from Perth, Australia

As one of David Lean's lesser known films, I did not have any great expectations (excuse the pun) before watching this film. After watching the film, the only conclusion that I could draw is that it is lesser known because it is hard to acquire rather than because it is a lesser Lean film. Lean's directing in 'Madeleine' is on par with his grand visions of the two works of Charles Dickens that he had directed in the few years before this one. With Guy Green photographing again, and once again John Bryan involved in the film's production design, Lean creates a visual feast here that helps flesh out the themes of the screenplay.

The film is about a woman of wealth who is torn between a foreign working class man who she loves, and her father's expectations that she marries within her own class. Her father is a strict, conservative man, and Madeleine keeps her love affair a secret because she knows that he would not approve. However, she feels guilty for leading her lover on when she knows that it is futile. To make matters worse, her father is insisting that she lets an upper class young man romance her. Madeleine is unsure how to cope with the situation, and even considers using poison at one point in time.

The film has one of the best lighting designs that I have ever seen. Lean pays careful attention to shadows and the direction that light is coming from on screen. In the first scene when we see Madeleine and her lover Emile together outside, they are photographed with only back lighting so that their facial features are hardly seen, showing the secretive nature of their meeting. And after a few cuts they are then seen so that only their necks downwards are properly lit up. There is a definite contrast between shots like these are those that take place inside her house, where very strong lighting is used so that the skin on the characters all seem very white.

Another interesting use of light is in a conversation that Madeleine has with her father. The scene uses cuts between their faces, and her father is shot with light from a low camera angle so that his features are barely seen and that he seems dominating. In contrast, a slightly high camera angle is used on Madeleine with lighting work that shows her skin as grey with very visible distinguishing features. Whenever the sky is seen, it is also shown as moody and cloudy, which would be a combination of lighting and art direction. There is also one scene in which Madeleine says "No", and the light source for the shot when she says this is coming from below, with shadows falling from her nose above on her face.

The camera-work is brilliant too, especially in the scene with administering the poison. There is a low camera angle on a closeup of the bottle to make it menacing, then only seen in closeups, it is poured, while a girl in the background (not seen) sings a song about the death of a bird. The closeups and inserts are great throughout, as are Guy Green's angles. One of the best has a man's hand holding a cup in the foreground, while Madeleine is seen sitting down in the background. This is not a point of a view shot, but rather one that shows that Madeleine's attention is drawn to the cup. Amazing stuff.

The sound design of the film is also great, with certain sounds (footsteps, clanging) isolated when they are all that a character is listening out for. The audio in terms of music though is less than splendid. It is overly melodramatic, and tends to overplay the tension of certain scenes. The film also has another couple of detracting factors. One is that we never really feel the chemistry between Madeleine and her two lovers, which makes it slightly difficult to sympathise with what she is torn between. Also, the final third of the film is rather weak - the bulk of what it is of interest lies in the middle section. Either way, Lean's talent for directing makes this a very worthwhile experience overall, and it comes particularly recommended to those who liked his Charles Dickens films.

19 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
"The tenderest conscience among you", 20 December 2007

Author: Steffi_P from Ruritania

Madeleine is one of a number of costume dramas produced around the late 1940s to focus upon psychological conflicts from a female perspective. Other notable examples are Vincente Minelli's Madame Bovary and William Wyler's The Heiress, both released in 1949. However, whereas those two pictures were based upon great literary works from the 19th century, Madeleine is a dramatisation (I would imagine a fairly liberal one given its melodramatic style) of actual events.

Director David Lean was always one to immerse the audience in the psychological states of his characters, often through use of attention grabbing shots and expressive use of sound. There are some fairly routine examples of this in the first half of the film – eerie shadows of Emile twirling his cane, the blaring bagpipe music of a village dance at Emile and Madeleine's secret meeting, and so on.

Another of Lean's characteristics was that, in order to tell a full story, the narrative would switch between the multiple points-of-view. This can be done fairly easily with a director who treats the audience as a passive, externalised viewer, but with Lean's constant involvement of the audience it could occasionally give his films a disjointed, unbalanced feel. This is somewhat the case with Madeleine, which begins as a psychological drama in which a young woman from a strict household must choose between her heart's desire and loyalty to her family. About halfway through however the story becomes a murder mystery and eventually a courtroom drama, and the narrative fragments as we see the points-of-view of various witnesses to supposed crimes. All the psychological set-up of the first forty-five minutes becomes forgotten.

In spite of the fragmentary nature of the whole, there are some strong scenes and the occasional touch of class here and there. The pivotal scene in which Madeleine's father discovers his daughters affair, while at the same time Madeleine learns of Emile's death shows Lean's dramatic staging at its best. Intelligent use of space and positioning of actors in this scene best shows off the varying reactions. The final scenes in court are a carefully constructed blend of points-of-view and reaction shots, and Lean's background as a renowned editor is in evidence.

A great cast was often a hallmark of a David Lean picture, but Madeleine suffers from a lack of classy actors. Having said that Ann Todd, whom I don't normally rate that highly, is not too bad here, emoting well in close-ups. Apart from that the only standouts are Andre Morell in a powerful performance as the defence counsel towards the end of the film, and an unfortunately brief appearance from Scottish character actor John Laurie as a fanatical mob leader.

Madeleine has its moments, but all in all is a bit of a mediocrity. Lean was at his best when he could go all out on the emotional drama, but this foray into the courtroom is simply not enough of one thing or the other to be a really strong picture.

11 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
true story told by David Lean, 2 July 2008

Author: blanche-2 from United States

Ann Todd is "Madeleine" in this 1950 film directed by David Lean. The film also features Norman Wooland, Ivan Desny, Andre Morrell and Elizabeth Sellars. The film looks at the true story of the famous Madeleine Smith murder trial in the mid-1800s. Pressured by her upper class family to marry, Madeleine is in fact secretly intimately involved with a man from a lower class, L'Anglier (Desny) and has agreed to marry him. She doesn't want to tell her family, so she urges him to elope with her. L'Anglier was planning on marrying into the upper class lifestyle and insists instead that she tell her father (Leslie Banks) about their relationship. She can't, and believing that all L'Anglier wanted was her money all along, she breaks off with him and requests the return of her letters to him. She then agrees to marry William Minnoch (Wooland), who has been courting her.

L'Anglier doesn't return her letters, and after she purchases arsenic, he dies of arsenic poison, having become ill at her house once before. Madeleine is arrested for murder.

The film seems to follow the case quite accurately, but it's pretty cut and dried. There are some marvelous scenes - the two dancing in the moonlight is one, as an increasingly wilder dance goes on inside. The structure of the courtroom was interesting, as I had never seen a prisoner walk upstairs into the dock from what is almost a trap door in the floor. The view of all the faces looking down before she starts the climb gives an idea of what it's like to be put on trial.

Ann Todd is a good actress, though an internalized one who comes off as rather cold. She was married to Lean, which may be the reason for her casting. At the time of the murder, Madeleine's father was displeased that she wasn't married, complaining that she had met many men but none of them have worked out. She was twenty when she took up with L'Anglier and 22 when she broke it off. Todd was 41 at the time this film was made. She was not carefully photographed and looked her age - way too old for this role. Andre Morrell is excellent as Madeleine's attorney. The rest of the performances are very good, with Banks a strong, intimidating father and Desny hinting at the slime that's below the surface of L'Anglier. Norman Wooland gives a charming and concerned performance as Madeleine's suitor, Minnoch.

Lean's opinion of what happened is made very clear in the last moments of the film. Someone said the story needed Hitchcock's hand, but he was not successful with "The Paradine Case." There's something about these stories that is very detached and unemotional. Maybe Hitchcock could have cracked it; this early effort by David Lean doesn't quite make it.

17 out of 25 people found the following review useful:
Familiar material given the David Lean touch but is emotionally cold..., 29 October 2007

Author: Neil Doyle from U.S.A.

It should come as no surprise that the trial of MADELEINE may well have been termed "the trial of the century" in 1857's Scotland. And from this true story, David Lean has made a period romance starring ANN TODD as the scheming woman from a wealthy background who feels compelled to hide her love affair with a commoner from her disapproving father.

Madeleine defies the conventions of her stiff upper-class household and, after receiving a proper gentleman caller with her family, retreats to her private room where she has an assignation with a lover who is not a man of means. The shadowy interiors suggest the menace to come, as her father urges her to take a suitable suitor in marriage as soon as possible.

What hurts the story is the familiarity of it all--a woman of substance wanting to break out of the social boundaries of convention. And unfortunately, there is nothing novel or different about this version of such a tale to make it of more than routine interest, despite the David Lean touch. What it really needed was Alfred Hitchcock's guiding hand.

All of the technical ingredients are fine but the script is ultimately a disappointment and tends to be dull in spots. Furthermore, Ann Todd's Madeleine is not a very arresting character. This has to be considered one of David Lean's less effective films. The story is as emotionally cold as Madeleine herself and her demure behavior with her father seems more like a pose than anything else, one that he should easily be able to see through. Her arrest for murder in the poisoning of her lover is handled with too many frigid close-ups of Todd's face and no real explanation of what happened.

It's certainly not a "must see" film by the renowned directed Lean.

Best performance in the entire film: ANDRE MORELL as the defense counselor who gives the most stirring and satisfying speech in the courtroom as to why Madeleine should be found innocent of the circumstantial evidence.

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Mysterious True Story, 3 July 2008

Author: whpratt1 from United States

Enjoyed this 1950 true story about a young woman named Madeleine Smith, (Ann Todd) who lived in Glasgow, Scotland in 1857 and the story begins with the Smith family looking for a rather large home. Madeleine is very excited about a room in the basement of this house and I wondered just why she preferred such a location and of course the story will reveal the reasons for this decision. William Mennoch, (Norman Wooland) was an older professional man and was interested in Madeleine and wanted to marry her, but she kept putting off any discussions or decisions in this matter of marriage. However, the father and mother approved of William becoming their son-in-law. As the story moves along, you find out that there is another man that Madeleine is very much in love with and he is French and not very well off financially. This man's name is Emile L'Anglier and he was determined to climb into Glasgow's high social class and found that Madeleine and her family would be able to help him accomplish this task. This story holds great mystery in black and white and all the actors gave great supporting roles in this true story about a strange woman.

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
A scandal in Scotland..., 27 March 2008

Author: moonspinner55 from redlands, ca

A boarding-house Lothario in 1857 Glasgow dies from arsenic poisoning; a stack of incriminating letters point the finger at the man's secret lover, an unmarried high society woman who has recently announced her engagement to a man of her class. True story which held Victorian Scotland spellbound is given handsome, but not elaborate treatment from director David Lean. Lean's then-wife Ann Todd reportedly played Madeleine Smith on the stage (not credited here) and her assets--steely eyes, a knitted-brow and taut mouth--are in perfect accompaniment with this inscrutable character, who may or may not be what she seems. Lean captures the allure of a clandestine romance, with the screen fading to black as the lustiness becomes palpable, and his third act in the courtroom is quite lively. Still, this seems to be a lot of striding up and down for a fairly certain verdict, and the conclusion is curiously flat. Columbo could've solved this case in an hour. ** from ****

Excellent Movie, 11 May 2012

Author: nutritionist from United States

Inexplicably, there are some reviews of this film that are less than enthusiastic. However, if you are a real movie watcher, an appreciator of good old movies, you will find this an excellent, engrossing, well made film. A young, wealthy beautiful girl gets involved with a poor handsome caddish Frenchman. She has a very strict Victorian father who shapes her character in many ways. The attention to details in the film by the Director are excellent, especially the dancing scene that flashes to the villagers dancing- films are not made like this anymore. The Director, David Lean, was married to the lead actress in the film, Ann Todd, and you can tell that this film was made with great care. Some people say that Ann's performance was cold, yet I feel she was true to character, and that she portrayed her personality due to youth and upbringing very well. The costuming is also so stunning that it too adds to the film. As far as I am concerned this film is right up there, near to the level of the Heiress and other great films.

2 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
A Jerseyman is not a British man, 16 September 2008

Author: Tolkny from near Maldon, Essex, England

"In 1857 a citizen of Great Britain (from the Channel Island of Jersey)" At least I do not think so.

Jersey like the other Channel Islands is an Independent State otherwise, for example it would have the same income tax regime as applies elsewhere in the places Governed by the UK parliament which are currently England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, although in 1857 the whole of Ireland was under UK law.

The film is nonetheless of interest apart from the error in the comment that I record.

One wonders whether a better portrayal of a fascinating story would have been achieved with the lead played by a more natural actor, rather than the wife of the director. However, this rather stiff style is of it's age and so hardly surprising as it was not made in the times of Susan Sarandon or Meryl Streep.

Add another review

Related Links