Count Your Blessings #7
![]() |
| Patriarch of All He Surveys Burt Lancaster was at a Disadvantage in Whatever Version of The Leopard Unspooled |
CYB: The Leopard (1963)
THE LEOPARD (1963) --- Made the mistake of watching the 2003 standard DVD release in mistaken belief there was no Blu-Ray, learning subsequent that Criterion upgraded to Blu later on. The Leopard is like so many European features hobbled by necessity of an English language version to properly sell stateside. That meant dubbing of everybody aboard, even star Burt Lancaster, who though he spoke English during the Italian shoot, had to do-over his voice for Twentieth-Fox distribution, that version supervised by the actor along with American director Sydney Pollack. Result was a mess that couldn’t help being a mess, the original Technirama debased to standard scope projection with inferior Color by Deluxe Fox was using in the sixties as opposed to rich Technicolor Euro audiences got. Length was also reduced by 24 minutes, 185 minutes down to 161 for domestic dates (the Rome premiere actually ran 205 minutes). I looked at the 185 edition, then portions of the Fox job, mainly to hear Lancaster, understand now why The Leopard failed, at least in the US. There seemed no way this or any Euro effort, let alone such an epic as here, would survive the crossing. Everybody spoke in voices not their own, here and there, each using native language during shooting and having to leave final outcome to post-production techs. Such was reality of multi-lingual filming and distribution worldwide. Yes, Lancaster spoke English when he acted his role in Italy, but all that had to be post-post-dubbed by him once back in America, and imagine how difficult that was with director and Italian crew moorings lost. Lancaster had to essentially work alone and try to remember nuances of a performance he had given months before. Poor guy ended up badly dubbed by both others and himself. Alain Delon and Claudia Cardinale were major names with no little appeal to worldwide audiences, but neither were heard in America, substitute speakers the rule with actors suffering for the switch. Delon especially loses what conviction he’d have otherwise brought to the US version, having to rely, like Cardinale, and Lancaster, on whatever impact his physical presence could have. This was enough to some extent, for these players had visual appeal during shared peak period, but to rely upon that would not support The Leopard enough in most markets it played.
![]() |
| Want to Hear These Actors Speak? Go Find France's Edition of The Leopard |
Lancaster could not speak Italian, Cardinale could not speak sufficient English to dub her part for US release, Delon in the same position. He and Cardinale were only heard in their real voices for the French language version, which is available on a Region Two Blu-Ray. That may be the closest to an authentic rendition of the film in circulation, but wait, Burt Lancaster did not speak French, so there goes that. Fact is most Europeans never got to hear the actual voice of Lancaster and many other major American stars, as they of necessity were dubbed for whatever of their films circulated offshore. As with silent features and many a talkie from Europe, I frankly find it more satisfying to “learn” the narrative from a couple of viewings, then turn off the subtitles and watch the shows sans reading from there on. Certainly it helps from a visual standpoint, and we can sense most of drama and conflict from character expressions, the tone and tenor of their voices, or whoever's voice has been grafted onto the action. In that sense, European films are essentially silent, enjoyed best where we approach them that way. 60's critics argued endlessly on dubbing vs. subtitles, neither camp emerging the clear winner. A general public spoke loudest perhaps ... they'd take neither. Euro receipts from The Leopard gratified, but reviews and boxoffice in the United States crashed, $673K collected in domestic rentals against $2.466 million spent on the negative (Italian producers bankrupted by the venture). Final loss recorded by Fox was $1.422 million. Darryl Zanuck had seen and evaluated footage as production went on, him back in charge as crisis of Cleopatra deepened. The Leopard was anything but Zanuck’s sort of movie, him baked from beginnings in narrative-centered oven where languor or distractions of any sort were shaved before he’d permit release, but Zanuck knew also that his way of work was largely finished, especially where confronted by European methods and philosophy. He was in this regard not unlike Burt Lancaster’s character in The Leopard.
![]() |
| Inapt Comparison to The Longest Day and Cleopatra Was Far From Ideal Way to Sell The Leopard in the US |
Critics in the US would not support The Leopard, which based on what they had to look at was understandable. Lancaster and Pollack did the best they could with what they had, a near-hopeless commission. The Leopard suffered on all screens for a story and background (obscure Italian history) that viewers needed thick encyclopedias to follow. I never understood what conflicts were really about and had to rely on colors of opposing uniforms as to who shot who, but never did I fully grasp why. The one mass battle scene seems a disorganized mess, now-sharpness of a restored image revealing soldiers running aimlessly forward or backward without really engaging one another. Zanuck surely winced when he screened these dailies. Director Luchino Visconti was celebrated enough to go forward with much resource, but till then smaller films may not have prepared him to now stage outsized action. In fact, he had not wanted the fight footage but was obliged by producers wanting size to sell. Euro makers dreamed constantly of American markets they’d crack. It had been done, by Italians in fact with La Dolce Vita, but insistence on an American star was not enough to overcome so many obstacles to The Leopard’s success in English-speaking markets. For all attempts at action, this came off insistently like an art film, which meant mainstream housing would bypass it, Burt Lancaster or not in the lead. He hosted an effusive trailer but showmen smelled a rat. Maybe they remembered how he stiffed them before with art-inclined projects. Television was as cruel. ABC used The Leopard first on November 5, 1967, again May 12, 1968. Ratings bottomed out both times. This film like so many others was utterly wrecked by square-framed tubes, or maybe viewers were used to seeing mere 60%, if that, of intended images. I’ll confess to that being the case for me. Fox recovered $491K from televised exposure of The Leopard.
![]() |
| A Ballroom Tour-De-Force to Influence Many Films That Would Come Later |
![]() |
| Even If You Lose the Story's Thread, There Still is Wonderment Just to Look At |
What did we know of proper ratio at the time? There was a book I eagerly bought during run-up to new network offerings called “TV 68,” cost $1.25. A most critical section, which I more-less memorized, was “Movies on TV Are Better Than Ever,” NY Times critic Howard Thompson brief reviewing near-all features networks had scheduled for the new season. One was The Leopard, which Thompson started out praising, “strikingly artistic, moodful, and atmospheric tableau,” then out came the stiletto, “also slow and extremely remote.” Result was me skipping ABC's run. It was a school night anyway and I would not have been permitted to stay up (same thing happened, and more traumatically, with Shane). Considering Leopard length, it would have been midnight before embrace of Morbius, although I can imagine how much ABC chopped this offering to keep it out of AM hours. The Leopard would wait long to flower. Per often, Criterion got the job done. Their Blu-Ray is the best The Leopard ever looked, the US cut there as an extra but not restored. The Italian “legitimate” version now seems the only one serious cinephiles care to watch. I don’t say “Count Your Blessings” lightly here. The Leopard as rendered by Criterion is a rescue for what many consider a masterpiece, a till-then oblivion admirers thought The Leopard would never emerge from. Still a commitment to get through, but highlights are more than memorable, a final forty minutes centered on a lavish ball one of the outstanding highlights of sixties, or anytime, filmmaking. We see clear where inspiration for parts of The Godfather, The Deerhunter, Heaven’s Gate, and The Age of Innocence came from. They all learned from Visconti, though I’d not say any surpassed him.









9 Comments:
Did not realize THE LEOPARD ran on TCM, but Dan Mercer saw it there and files this reaction:
I saw "The Leopard" on TCM some years ago, which was probably the restored Italian version released by The Criterion Collection. I found it to be a beautiful and affecting film, with its meditation on death and the passing away of things.
As the Prince, Burt Lancaster is a magnificent presence, which undoubtedly made his performance a saving grace in whatever mongrelized versions were shown elsewhere. His character embodies a theme, in that values are kept only for so long as they are living things. So, the traditions embodied by the aristocracy, which he personifies, could not survive its displacement by the newer, more pragmatic mercantile class, given that they seemingly contribute nothing to the now more important bottom line. He understands this, and though he decries the delusions of modernity, he accepts that his class cannot be preserved except by destroying in the process that which gives it legitimacy. That many of the aristocrats are complicit in their decline only contributes to the tragedy. Nonetheless, the film suggests that the fervor of the revolutionaries might have resulted in good and lasting change, had it not been co-opted by the elites. In this, however, it was not mindful of certain qualities of the human condition, which persist and seemingly remain poised between the heavens and hell, whatever social structure or cultural values they give rise to. As such, the film neither acknowledges the history of the twentieth century, which Visconti should have understood as having already contradicted his own ideals, nor reflects the on-going struggle taking place even to this day, over sixty years later. But as I noted, the film is a meditation, despite its vast scope. I could not watch it without turning my own thoughts to the same questions.
It is a great film in its Italian version; to summarize it the film is about "change, so things will actually not change at all." This is among a long series of Italian international productions that suffer in any version you will watch it: Alain Delon did not speak Italian, Burt Lancaster couldn't speak Italian, only Claudia Cardinale was able to speak Italian but her voice is still dubbed. At least, Anthony Quinn in LA STRADA was able to speak Italian since the language is similar to Spanish (you can see him later on television speaking the language without problems). Dubbed version spoiled each and every film that came from Italy from the late 40s up to the 80s; the soundtracks always sound fake no matter how good they worked on them, and I grew up watching far more Italian films than Americans because although they always intended to hit the US market, the films always did far better in Argentina. They still do.
That's really interesting about Italian films doing so much better in Argentina than in North America, something I had not considered before. And I agree with you about so many Italian imports spoiled by the necessities of dubbing.
More than half of Argentinians are descended from Italian immigrants, including the family of my paternal grandfather.
Not only that, but I'm not a descendant of Italian immigrants even though my late uncle was born in Milano. But as far as I know, Italian films were always shown in Buenos Aires in mainstream theaters uninterruptedly since the silent days. In fact, several movie stars made at least one or two features in Argentina. The problem, however, began in the sixties when these movies began to be shown dubbed in English. No matter the quality of the films, the soundtracks were always awful, and if you ever managed to get a version in Italian, the sound was still bad, involving the dubbing of certain actors from other European countries. The Terence Hill and Bud Spencer films were always shown dubbed in English, after the earlier titles were shown by independent distributors the rest were either presented by Warners and Columbia (they shared a distribution company at the time) but they were still extremely popular. The soundtracks were still awful... yet in the 90s, one of the major TV networks presented them on primetime on Friday nights, dubbed to Spanish in Mexico... and these dubbed versions were actually far better!
Well, now I know why I've never watched "The Leopard". By the way, John, my wife and still use the phrase "school night" almost 50 years after graduating from college. Some things are hard to shake.
Dan Mercer's varied forum observations from this week (Part One):
Louise Brooks and Henri Langlois
To be forgotten is not an uncommon end for most people. To be revealed as someone of worth who did wonderful things is to be born again to life. It is like catching a glimpse of something beautiful in a mirror, when it is oneself. Thus, Louise Brooks was given new life by Henri Langlois.
Background animals in Tod Browning’s “Dracula”
What animals would I throw in the picture? Well, not armadillos, opossums, or potato bugs. A few rats, spiders, and snakes would do just fine.
Ramon Navarro and Joan Crawford in “Across to Singapore”
Silent film was intended for the expression of emotion. The thoughts of the characters or the incidents of plot could be related in a title card. Only the barest sketch would be necessary, when the feelings engendered by those thoughts would be displayed with such intensity. As here, the eyes were the medium for such communication.
“Meshes in the Afternoon,” Maya Deren and Alexander Hamid, 1943
Was the proximity of the shot of the knife to that of the eye a homage to "Un Chien Andalou"? Would an audience have anticipated a fatal concision from past experience with surrealistic illusion? Was the proximity of the shot of the knife to that of the eye a homage to "Un Chien Andalou"? Would an audience have anticipated a fatal denouement from past experience with surrealistic illusion? Was the shock that there was no shock?
Barbara Payton’s Beauty
A lovely picture of Barbara which suggests why she made such an impression on people and in Hollywood. She is beautiful, but her beauty is of a particular type, paedomorphic, in that it retains juvenile features. So, the eyes are large and wide-set--proportionately larger to the rest of the face, as a young girls would be--the nose is smaller and shorter, the cheeks are round and full, the chin and jaw are relatively small--reducing the perceived harshness of the face--and the forehead is high and smooth. These features mirror those from childhood development, but in doing so, suggest the innocence and delicacy that is associated with children. Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of her beauty is that, even towards the end of her life, when she had begun to show the ravages of how she lived that life, this paedomorphic quality, especially that of innocence, was still apparent.
Special Effects in “The Invisible Man”
Were the footsteps, appearing as those of a man wearing shoes, though Raines' character was naked, a gaffe or a bit of droll humor on the part of director Whale?
Part Two from Dan Mercer:
“Bride of Frankenstein”
"Frankenstein" and "Bride of Frankenstein" have certain stylistic similarities, in makeup and gothic settings, but are very different in other respects. "Frankenstein" has a chilly metaphysics that is frightening in itself, since everything proceeds from it. "Bride," however, has an amused and amusing take on human foibles and frailties. Though both were directed by the same man, "Bride" is more a James Whale film than "Frankenstein."
Garbo
There was a time when I found Garbo's allure elusive. That has become less so over the years. The beauty of her face was always apparent, with the superb profile of high forehead, flawless jawline, and long, finely shaped nose, and with large and deeply set eyes. Cinematographers could bathe that face in bold, high contrast lighting which seemed to reveal the very bone structure. What I came to appreciate was how she conveyed complex emotions with severe restraint, as though I was looking not so much at her face as her thoughts and feelings, the face becoming only a medium through which they passed. As such, there was a sense of great intimacy to which I drew closer, and a grandeur and profundity that transcended the melodrama of many of her vehicles.
“Shadow of a Doubt”
Interestingly, the earliest sketches of the story for "Shadow of a Doubt" indicate that Joan Fontaine was to be cast as the young Charlie, the role played by Theresa Wright. Fontaine had become a star as the unnamed second Mrs. De Winter in Hitchcock's "Rebecca" and won an Academy Award the following year in his "Suspicion." She had a unique ability to play young women whose innocence was challenged by their experience of life, as in "Rebecca" and two masterpieces by Edmund Goulding and Max Ophuls, respectively, "The Constant Nymph" and "Letter from an Unknown Woman." Unfortunately for her, she was already booked for major film projects during this period, including "This Above All" for Anatole Litvak, Goulding's "The Constant Nymph," and "Jane Eyre”, directed by Robert Stevenson, with her Jane opposite the Rochester of Orson Welles. Undoubtedly, she would have been excellent in the role, but much as I love her work in films, I can hardly regret this missed opportunity, for the excellence of Teresa Wright.
When Louise Brooks was Everywhere
Louise Brooks was extraordinary. The movie studios and advertisers recognized it immediately and exploited that beauty and grace, that joy of living, and that special relationships to the times. But it was Brooks who walked into the studio and on the stage, for her own reasons, which had nothing to do with theirs. And she could just as well walk away, which she did, but not before leaving a few souvenirs of her presence. They would be better understood years later.
Gail Russell
Gail Russell's beauty was like a rose seen by moonlight. Its ethereal nature betrayed an inner quality no less removed. Her gaze would be fixed upon another place, as though she was not entirely a part of this world. One such as her is too lovely, it seems, to long remain among us. That she was a presence in our lives, all the same, is found in these pictures, in their theme and variations. All the rest is wonder and mystery.
“Taming of the Shrew” (1929)
There is another film adaptation to consider, the one from 1929 with Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford. It is not the best from a literary standpoint, since it was based on David Garrick's performing edition of the play and, at that, with only half the text presented. However, Fairbanks and Pickford, the great silent film stars, intended it as a star vehicle for themselves, which it succeeds in being. Fairbanks, who was making his sound debut, is fine as Petruchio, with his boisterous good humor and barking baritone voice, and Pickford is a gorgeous and feisty Kate. See it as a curiosity, stay for the fun.
Dan Mercer looks back on THE LEOPARD:
It seems strange that 20th Century-Fox should have botched the version of “The Leopard” made for the important U.S. market as badly as they did. That was why they had invested $3 million in the production in the first place, in effect to have an important film for that price for release into that market. They got their film, but everything they did after that was about as wrong as it could be. For release prints, they went the cut-route with CinemaScope and Deluxe Color. Worse, they cut the running time by keeping the plot but paring away much that contributed to mood and atmosphere.
The result was that the real strengths of the film, in its visual beauty and scope and in the contemplative development of its themes, were diminished or muddled, while its flaws, as in the confused action sequences you noted, were emphasized. Fox had insisted on an American star as a condition for its investment and got one in Burt Lancaster. They even had him dub his own voice. But with so much in the film ruined by the inept approach to its adaptation, he might as well have been Laocoon wrestling with the serpent.
Ultimately, the blame for this must fall not on the collective “they” of the company but the man in control of it, Darryl F. Zanuck. Your insight as to his personal biases is telling. No doubt, he regarded it as just another mess left by the previous management that he had to clean up, something he was unsympathetic towards and would never have authorized in the first place. So, he told the unfortunate Pollack and Lancaster to cut it down and get it out.
At least, I cannot otherwise account for his indifferent handling of the release. Perhaps with the studio’s financial condition being so precarious, he saw it as simply a way of recouping what would otherwise be a dead loss. He wanted to avoid putting any more money into it than he absolutely had to. Certainly, the cheapness of the release prints and the generic advertising of a Burt Lancaster film suggest as much. That the film might be a masterpiece that would find its audience, if he took the risk, was something he could not consider, even had his heart been in it.
Post a Comment
<< Home