The 1952 film The Prisoner of Zenda, directed by Richard Thorpe, is a remake of the 1937 version of Anthony Hope’s beloved novel. While it attempts to capture the essence of the original story, it also faces some challenges. Let’s dive into the film’s strengths and weaknesses, and see why it remains a notable entry in classic cinema.
Kinescope Approach to Filmmaking
Thorpe’s direction is intriguing. He reportedly used a kinescope to study John Cromwell’s earlier adaptation. This technique allowed him to replicate camera setups and scenes. In doing so, he created a film that feels familiar yet lacks originality.
Comparison to Psycho
Interestingly, Thorpe’s approach predates Gus Van Sant’s infamous shot-for-shot remake of Psycho by 46 years. While Van Sant’s film aimed to reinvent a classic, Thorpe’s version feels more like a tribute. However, this homage comes at a cost: the film often feels stagnant and uninspired.
Storyline: Romance and Action
The Prisoner of Zenda revolves around a doppelgänger plot, where the protagonist, Rudolf Rassendyll, must impersonate the king of Ruritania. The film is filled with romance, intrigue, and adventure, but it struggles to balance these elements effectively.
Lackluster Romance
Deborah Kerr plays the role of Princess Flavia, but her performance lacks the spark needed to engage the audience. The romance between her character and Stewart Granger’s Rudolf feels flat. Viewers may find themselves wishing for more action and less of the slow-paced romantic scenes.
Need for Action
The film’s pacing is another issue. It often drags, making it difficult for viewers to stay engaged. More action sequences could have elevated the film, providing the excitement that the story demands.
Stewart Granger: The Charismatic Lead
Despite the film’s shortcomings, Stewart Granger shines as Rudolf Rassendyll. His charisma and charm help carry the film, even when the script falters. Granger’s wardrobe, featuring fleece-collared faux-Junker tunics, adds a touch of style to his character.
Royal Fashion Statement
Granger’s outfits suggest a blend of Prussian officer chic and high fashion. This unique style choice adds visual interest, making his character more memorable.
James Mason: The Standout Performance
One of the film’s highlights is James Mason’s portrayal of Rupert of Hentzau. Mason brings a level of wit and cynicism that elevates the film. His character is a charming anti-hero, reminiscent of classic Victorian villains.
Wit and Charm
Mason’s performance is filled with sharp dialogue and clever quips. He enters the film with a flourish, delivering lines that showcase his character’s cunning nature. His exit, following an intense sword fight, leaves a lasting impression on the audience.
Unadapted Sequel
Interestingly, Hollywood has largely ignored Hope’s sequel, Rupert of Hentzau. This may be due to the fate of many characters from the first novel. The sequel’s darker tone and character deaths make it a less appealing choice for adaptation.
Why No Adaptation?
The lack of interest in adapting Rupert of Hentzau highlights the challenges of continuing a beloved story. While the original The Prisoner of Zenda has its flaws, it remains a classic that captures the imagination.
Conclusion
The Prisoner of Zenda (1952) is a film that offers both charm and disappointment. While it pays homage to its predecessor, it struggles with pacing and character development. However, the performances of Stewart Granger and James Mason provide enough entertainment to make it worth a watch.
Final Thoughts
If you enjoy classic cinema and are a fan of adventure and romance, give The Prisoner of Zenda a try. Just be prepared for a slower pace and a lack of action.
Watch it for the performances, but don’t expect a perfect remake!
