Film lovers of a certain age will remember the cine-clubs and cinema societies where we cut our teeth on so many of the great classics. And, in this age of digital restoration and director's cuts, they will remember with ghastly fondness the `beater print'-a worn 16mm reel with hard-to-read subtitles, muddy greys, and blown-out whites. Well, here we have it. `Mayerling' is a beautiful film. Boyer (someone I'm not a fan of) is perfect as the impetuous, passionate prince. Darrieux has less to do but is so adorable you don't mind. Litvak's direction is superb, flitting in amongst the Viennese crowds to find the isolated lovers, the courtly grandeur of a 500-year-old empire, and the little touches that turn a good film great. But `Mayerling' is only available from Timeless Video of North Hollywood, CA. And it's an awful video. Half of the subtitles are below the screen, the scenes are mud, and the sound is so distorted you'd think you were watching a 1929 film. What to do? First off, don't buy *anything* from Timeless Video. Then wait for someone to realize a truly beautiful DVD of this great movie. Watching it in its current shape would merely spoil it for you.
17 Reviews
Fanciful
dierregi18 November 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Boyer and Darrieux are the insanely attractive couple Rudolf and Marie, bound together by a tragic pact. In reality, Archduke Rudolph was a degenerate character who enjoyed whoring and boozing and who was forced to get married to a Belgian princess at age 25, to produce an heir to the Habsburg empire.
The couple produced only a baby girl and Rudolf went back to his old ways, managing to get a venereal disease and infecting his wife, who became sterile as a consequence. The effects on Rudolf's health were a worsening of his physical and mental conditions. Enters Marie Vetsera, a mere 17 to Rudolf 30 years, and within a few months a suicide pact was executed.
This rather sordid story is transformed by Litvak into a tragically romantic, luminous affair, thanks to the beautiful photography, the gorgeous costumes, the opulent settings and the attractiveness of the leads. Rudolf's debauched life is partially shown, but he's portrayed in the sympathetic light of a young idealist whose libertarian ideas are crushed by court obligations and no sordid details about his illness are revealed, nor the fact that the had already proposed a suicide pact to one of his mistresses, who had wisely declined.
The couple produced only a baby girl and Rudolf went back to his old ways, managing to get a venereal disease and infecting his wife, who became sterile as a consequence. The effects on Rudolf's health were a worsening of his physical and mental conditions. Enters Marie Vetsera, a mere 17 to Rudolf 30 years, and within a few months a suicide pact was executed.
This rather sordid story is transformed by Litvak into a tragically romantic, luminous affair, thanks to the beautiful photography, the gorgeous costumes, the opulent settings and the attractiveness of the leads. Rudolf's debauched life is partially shown, but he's portrayed in the sympathetic light of a young idealist whose libertarian ideas are crushed by court obligations and no sordid details about his illness are revealed, nor the fact that the had already proposed a suicide pact to one of his mistresses, who had wisely declined.
Mayerling revised and updated by the seventh art.
dbdumonteil22 July 2002
In my reviews of the 1968 Terence Young version,I've already told my thoughts on the historical facts.There's no need to get back on it:suffice to say the true story was not as romantic as sensitive people still thinks so today.
Anatole Litvak does not pass over in silence Rudolph's dissoluteness, as two orgy scenes testify.Besides,Charles Boyer is a much better archduke than Omar Shariff.Ditto Danielle Darrieux who was about 20 (whereas Catherine Deneuve was nearing 25 when she played Mary),thus a more credible baroness Vetsera .Both versions,it's important to notice ,are from Claude Anet's NOVEL.It's not a historian's work and it should be not looked upon so.
However,Litvak is a better director than Terence Young.With a much smaller budget,and of course without the 1968 technical aids ,he works wonders :the tiny church where Rudolph meets Mary in half-light creates a mystical and heathen atmosphere at once.The night at the opera house is dazzling.To conclude the scene of the ball at the German embassy ,the artist uses a stunning tracking out which leaves the swirling twirling dancers,then stops on a glass door adorned with the Habsburg emblem.Rudolphe ,firing at his reflection in a mirror is an adequate metaphor.
A minor flaw:Gabrielle Dorziat is completely miscast as Sissi ,Rudolph's mother:she was one of the most beautiful women of her time (we can see the magnificent Winterhalter portraits at the beginning of the movie).At fifty,when the Mayerling tragedy occurred,her beauty was still incomparable.She had nothing to do with the aging dowager we see on the screen (in Young 's version,it's Ava Gardner!)
And hats off to Danielle Darrieux who ,sixty-four years after "Mayerling" ,recently triumphed in "8 femmes",a blockbuster in France.Any advance?
Anatole Litvak does not pass over in silence Rudolph's dissoluteness, as two orgy scenes testify.Besides,Charles Boyer is a much better archduke than Omar Shariff.Ditto Danielle Darrieux who was about 20 (whereas Catherine Deneuve was nearing 25 when she played Mary),thus a more credible baroness Vetsera .Both versions,it's important to notice ,are from Claude Anet's NOVEL.It's not a historian's work and it should be not looked upon so.
However,Litvak is a better director than Terence Young.With a much smaller budget,and of course without the 1968 technical aids ,he works wonders :the tiny church where Rudolph meets Mary in half-light creates a mystical and heathen atmosphere at once.The night at the opera house is dazzling.To conclude the scene of the ball at the German embassy ,the artist uses a stunning tracking out which leaves the swirling twirling dancers,then stops on a glass door adorned with the Habsburg emblem.Rudolphe ,firing at his reflection in a mirror is an adequate metaphor.
A minor flaw:Gabrielle Dorziat is completely miscast as Sissi ,Rudolph's mother:she was one of the most beautiful women of her time (we can see the magnificent Winterhalter portraits at the beginning of the movie).At fifty,when the Mayerling tragedy occurred,her beauty was still incomparable.She had nothing to do with the aging dowager we see on the screen (in Young 's version,it's Ava Gardner!)
And hats off to Danielle Darrieux who ,sixty-four years after "Mayerling" ,recently triumphed in "8 femmes",a blockbuster in France.Any advance?
Romeo and Juliet Austro-Hungarian version or Romantic version of the old tragedy
lyubitelfilmov13 November 2023
Historical drama, melodrama. The film adaptation of the novel of the same name by French writer Claude Anet, in turn based on real events. And since I have not read the original book source, therefore I will evaluate the film adaptation as an independent work, with an eye on real historical events, of course. This picture attracted me with the name of director Anatoly Litvak (Anatoly Mikhailovich Litvak) - a Soviet, European, and Hollywood director who shot a number of memorable pictures, personally I watched with pleasure his works such as "The Battle for Russia" (he was also a screenwriter, and the second director was Frank Capra) and "Night of the Generals" (a detective thriller about the Second World War). Both paintings are strongly recommended for viewing. But with "Mayerling" Anatole's career in Europe gave a sharp start, after the success of this picture he was invited to Hollywood. And here's my brief opinion for you - A romantic version of an old tragedy. There were both advantages and disadvantages in the picture, which should never be forgotten. And this concludes such an important introduction and gets to the point.
So, the advantages: 1. Scenario - if we do not take into account historical inaccuracies and various omissions (which will be discussed later), then we are faced with a tragic love story of the Archduke (heir to the throne) The Austro-Hungarian Empire of Rudolf and his young lover (actually mistress) Baroness Maria Vechera, who committed suicide on January 30, 1889 in the hunting castle of Mayerling (which is near Vienna). Rudolf is married, but unhappy in his marriage, and only acquaintance with seventeen-year-old Maria gave him hope for a better life. After all, the prince is also a liberal, and directly undermines the authority of his father in the state by supporting revolutionary-minded subjects. Moreover, this picture does not consider the political version of suicide, because everything is put in such a way that it is the romantic version that is correct. Indeed, it is the most common and the most studied. And the script itself is built in such a way that the viewer becomes completely on the side of Rudolf and Maria, who were simply driven into a trap - and they decided to get out of it in an unconventional way. Kurt Cobain would have approved of such a passage. In an hour and a half we were shown the life of Rudolf and how he came to such a decision, as well as the life of young Maria, who followed her beloved in the best traditions of romantic literature and the great tragedy of William Shakespeare. It was interesting to watch. After all, the dialogues do not seem pretentious, and the acting is at a high level.
2. Romance - the line between Rudolf and Maria is very good. A young beauty and a married crown prince, unhappy in marriage, therefore often carouses, drowning out the pain with alcohol and easily accessible women, until she accidentally meets Maria - such a pure and innocent soul who fell in love with him at first sight, and after all, his title is not important to her. How naive and beautiful it looks. Now such a thing is almost impossible to meet. A pity. I would like to quote Hippolytus from the famous New Year's tragicomedy by Eldar Ryazanov. There is that "spark" between Rudolf and Maria, which cannot be confused with anything. How they look at each other! This is love!
3. Atmosphere - the creators managed (in general) to recreate the atmosphere of the Austro-Hungarian Empire of the late eighties of the nineteenth century, with its revolutionary movement (mainly Hungarians and Bohemians), turbulent foreign policy situation, problems in the imperial family. And although we are focused only on the latter, revolutionary sentiments are still reflected at the very beginning of the picture (although the very first appearance of the Crown Prince raises questions). Banners, standards - everything is very reminiscent of the now-defunct empire.
So, the cons: 1. Historical inaccuracies - soldiers of the Austro-Hungarian army wear the famous "pikelhelms". Although similar helmets were worn in the Prussian - later German army, and also in the Life Guards of the Imperial Russian Army's Jaeger Regiment in the late forties of the nineteenth century, but the Austro-Hungarian wax did not have such helmets. There is practically no mention of strict morals and etiquette obligatory for the entire aristocracy here (and I'm not talking about the deliberately demonstrative behavior of Rudolf and Maria - everything is clear here). I'm sorry, but in those days this was very strictly monitored, and it was drummed into all the young aristocrats from childhood, so it's simply impossible to look at the promiscuity that is shown here. And these are only the most striking inaccuracies. I'm sure there are others.
2. Omission of important details - in reality, Crown Prince Rudolf, two years before the shots in Mayerling, wanted to pull off a similar trick with his long-term mistress Mizzi Kaspar, but the girl refused. And before leaving for Mayerling, Rudolf spent the last night with this very Mizzi. Moreover, the police ignored the suicide attempt of 1887. Rudolf himself was ill with venereal diseases (syphilis, gonorrhea), and in general he had poor health (whereas Shawl Boyer is the performer of the main role, and is bursting with health). Now you feel how the romance began to fade, and the attempt to self-heal in the company of an old acquaintance in 1887 was not so strange. I'm not talking about other versions of the tragedy (for example, politics).
A little about the main characters: 1. Archduke Rudolf, played by Charles Boyer, is the heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, who is constantly being watched, and who is unable to do anything without the permission of his august father. The only thing he is allowed is to carouse and have affairs with women, since his marriage was a purely political move (which was commonplace for all royal families, starting from the emergence of the first monarchies). And only a meeting with young Maria makes Rudolf go against the system and try to change it. Charles Boyer coped with the role perfectly. Although his image differs from the real Rudolf, he is shown very vividly in the picture. Bravo!
2. Baroness Maria of the Evening performed by Danielle Darye is a young baroness who is only seventeen years old. She could not even imagine that the courteous man in uniform who saved her from an annoying gentleman was Crown Prince Rudolf himself, and that a real love would break out between them, which, although it would end tragically, would leave a bright mark in history. Nineteen-year-old Mademoiselle Darie here amazes with her beauty, although she does not look much like the real Maria, nevertheless she was able to show on the screen the true love of a young girl for the unfortunate prince. Bravo!
This picture is the first film adaptation of the tragic love story of Crown Prince Rudolf and Maria. There are four more film adaptations (not counting theatrical productions, ballets, musicals, and so on), and they all tell exactly about the romantic version of the tragedy, and only the 1949 film adaptation (by the way, also French) also considers others. If you're interested, you can take a look.
My rating is 7 out of 10 and my recommendation for viewing!
So, the advantages: 1. Scenario - if we do not take into account historical inaccuracies and various omissions (which will be discussed later), then we are faced with a tragic love story of the Archduke (heir to the throne) The Austro-Hungarian Empire of Rudolf and his young lover (actually mistress) Baroness Maria Vechera, who committed suicide on January 30, 1889 in the hunting castle of Mayerling (which is near Vienna). Rudolf is married, but unhappy in his marriage, and only acquaintance with seventeen-year-old Maria gave him hope for a better life. After all, the prince is also a liberal, and directly undermines the authority of his father in the state by supporting revolutionary-minded subjects. Moreover, this picture does not consider the political version of suicide, because everything is put in such a way that it is the romantic version that is correct. Indeed, it is the most common and the most studied. And the script itself is built in such a way that the viewer becomes completely on the side of Rudolf and Maria, who were simply driven into a trap - and they decided to get out of it in an unconventional way. Kurt Cobain would have approved of such a passage. In an hour and a half we were shown the life of Rudolf and how he came to such a decision, as well as the life of young Maria, who followed her beloved in the best traditions of romantic literature and the great tragedy of William Shakespeare. It was interesting to watch. After all, the dialogues do not seem pretentious, and the acting is at a high level.
2. Romance - the line between Rudolf and Maria is very good. A young beauty and a married crown prince, unhappy in marriage, therefore often carouses, drowning out the pain with alcohol and easily accessible women, until she accidentally meets Maria - such a pure and innocent soul who fell in love with him at first sight, and after all, his title is not important to her. How naive and beautiful it looks. Now such a thing is almost impossible to meet. A pity. I would like to quote Hippolytus from the famous New Year's tragicomedy by Eldar Ryazanov. There is that "spark" between Rudolf and Maria, which cannot be confused with anything. How they look at each other! This is love!
3. Atmosphere - the creators managed (in general) to recreate the atmosphere of the Austro-Hungarian Empire of the late eighties of the nineteenth century, with its revolutionary movement (mainly Hungarians and Bohemians), turbulent foreign policy situation, problems in the imperial family. And although we are focused only on the latter, revolutionary sentiments are still reflected at the very beginning of the picture (although the very first appearance of the Crown Prince raises questions). Banners, standards - everything is very reminiscent of the now-defunct empire.
So, the cons: 1. Historical inaccuracies - soldiers of the Austro-Hungarian army wear the famous "pikelhelms". Although similar helmets were worn in the Prussian - later German army, and also in the Life Guards of the Imperial Russian Army's Jaeger Regiment in the late forties of the nineteenth century, but the Austro-Hungarian wax did not have such helmets. There is practically no mention of strict morals and etiquette obligatory for the entire aristocracy here (and I'm not talking about the deliberately demonstrative behavior of Rudolf and Maria - everything is clear here). I'm sorry, but in those days this was very strictly monitored, and it was drummed into all the young aristocrats from childhood, so it's simply impossible to look at the promiscuity that is shown here. And these are only the most striking inaccuracies. I'm sure there are others.
2. Omission of important details - in reality, Crown Prince Rudolf, two years before the shots in Mayerling, wanted to pull off a similar trick with his long-term mistress Mizzi Kaspar, but the girl refused. And before leaving for Mayerling, Rudolf spent the last night with this very Mizzi. Moreover, the police ignored the suicide attempt of 1887. Rudolf himself was ill with venereal diseases (syphilis, gonorrhea), and in general he had poor health (whereas Shawl Boyer is the performer of the main role, and is bursting with health). Now you feel how the romance began to fade, and the attempt to self-heal in the company of an old acquaintance in 1887 was not so strange. I'm not talking about other versions of the tragedy (for example, politics).
A little about the main characters: 1. Archduke Rudolf, played by Charles Boyer, is the heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, who is constantly being watched, and who is unable to do anything without the permission of his august father. The only thing he is allowed is to carouse and have affairs with women, since his marriage was a purely political move (which was commonplace for all royal families, starting from the emergence of the first monarchies). And only a meeting with young Maria makes Rudolf go against the system and try to change it. Charles Boyer coped with the role perfectly. Although his image differs from the real Rudolf, he is shown very vividly in the picture. Bravo!
2. Baroness Maria of the Evening performed by Danielle Darye is a young baroness who is only seventeen years old. She could not even imagine that the courteous man in uniform who saved her from an annoying gentleman was Crown Prince Rudolf himself, and that a real love would break out between them, which, although it would end tragically, would leave a bright mark in history. Nineteen-year-old Mademoiselle Darie here amazes with her beauty, although she does not look much like the real Maria, nevertheless she was able to show on the screen the true love of a young girl for the unfortunate prince. Bravo!
This picture is the first film adaptation of the tragic love story of Crown Prince Rudolf and Maria. There are four more film adaptations (not counting theatrical productions, ballets, musicals, and so on), and they all tell exactly about the romantic version of the tragedy, and only the 1949 film adaptation (by the way, also French) also considers others. If you're interested, you can take a look.
My rating is 7 out of 10 and my recommendation for viewing!
Sad But Not necessarily True
Bucs19601 April 2002
This is the original movie version of the murder/suicide pact between Archduke Rudolph, heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian empire, and his mistress, Baroness Marie Vetsera. Made in France and subtitled for the English speaking audience, it stars Charles Boyer as Rudolph and Danielle Darrieux as Marie. Boyer obviously appeared to better advantage in French films... .....his whole persona appears different than that in his American roles. His interpretation of Rudolph is one of a tortured man who does not have much to do while waiting around to inherit the throne, so he dallies with Marie Vetsera and falls in love with her. Danielle Darrieux is bewitching as the Baroness.
The story unfolds to the inevitable conclusion of murder/suicide which threw the Empire into turmoil. History may record the events of what happened at Mayerling a little differently but it surely makes a good story of thwarted love and royal politics. The 1968 remake with Omar Shariff and Catherine Deneuve is not bad either. This legendary romance has fascinated people since the turn of the century. So have the Kleenex handy and enjoy!!
The story unfolds to the inevitable conclusion of murder/suicide which threw the Empire into turmoil. History may record the events of what happened at Mayerling a little differently but it surely makes a good story of thwarted love and royal politics. The 1968 remake with Omar Shariff and Catherine Deneuve is not bad either. This legendary romance has fascinated people since the turn of the century. So have the Kleenex handy and enjoy!!
Very well made...if you like that sort of thing.
planktonrules9 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I have a confession to make. Of all the film genres, costume dramas are among my least favorite--so take my review with a grain of salt. Much of my dislike is because they seldom stick very close to the facts--which drives ex-history teachers (like myself) crazy. The other problem is that all too often the dialog seems stagy and stodgy. While MAYERLING definitely suffers some on both accounts, I must admit that despite my bias, it is a lovely film to look at---thanks to the production looking so elegant. The biggest reason, of course, is that the director (Anatole Litvak) did such a nice job with creating that elegance. Additionally, the leads, Charles Boyer and Danielle Darrieux were very good in the film. It looked very nice and probably would satisfy those looking for a tragic romance. As for me, after a while I got a bit bored--mostly because two incredibly wealthy people who suffer from ennui is hard for me to really care about in any way and because I knew the story was overly romanticized and events were changed to make for a better film. Plus, no matter what, by the end of the film I knew they'd both be dead....very, very dead.
By the way, I did some interesting reading about the Mayerling affair. It seems that recent forensics and examinations of the body of Maria cast strong doubt on the entire story. It seems that the Baroness was beaten to death and multiple shots were reportedly fired from another gun!! What all this exactly means is anyone's guess. There are many interpretations and reading up on this is actually a lot more interesting than a turgid old costumer any day, if you ask me.
By the way, I did some interesting reading about the Mayerling affair. It seems that recent forensics and examinations of the body of Maria cast strong doubt on the entire story. It seems that the Baroness was beaten to death and multiple shots were reportedly fired from another gun!! What all this exactly means is anyone's guess. There are many interpretations and reading up on this is actually a lot more interesting than a turgid old costumer any day, if you ask me.
True story
AAdaSC17 April 2022
I had forgotten that this was a true story and so sat down to watch a film, hopefully, with a plot. From what we see at the beginning of the film, I thought that we were going to embark upon an involving tale of intrigue surrounding René Bergeron (Szeps) and his association with Charles Boyer (Archduke Rudolf), the heir to the crown as they plot to bring down the incumbent emperor - his father Jean Dax (Emperor Franx Joseph).
Well, it just didn't happen like that. It turned out to be a love story starring Charles Boyer and it gets very predictable from the moment we are introduced to Danielle Darrieux (Marie Vetsera). The films tells us early on exactly where this is heading with constant references to death. So, we wait to see how this is going to happen. This gets revealed right at the end - the only part of the film that holds any interest. Up until that point, it's a series of watching ballet, going to the fair, Morris dancing (the other standout moment of the film), etc whilst there are lavish sets and costumes to look at.
Once the film had finished, my wife asked if this was a true story and looked it up. Bingo! It's a true story. That makes a big difference and adds an extra point onto the score. This now holds an interest as the film describes a hugely significant moment in history. I wish I'd reminded myself of this before watching. I'll know for next time. The actual incident is a milestone as it changes the lineage of succession. Would there have been a World War 1 if the reforming, liberal Rudolf had acceded the throne? Would prostitution have become acceptably mainstream like it should be? The real story is interesting but the film not as interesting as it could have/should have been.
Well, it just didn't happen like that. It turned out to be a love story starring Charles Boyer and it gets very predictable from the moment we are introduced to Danielle Darrieux (Marie Vetsera). The films tells us early on exactly where this is heading with constant references to death. So, we wait to see how this is going to happen. This gets revealed right at the end - the only part of the film that holds any interest. Up until that point, it's a series of watching ballet, going to the fair, Morris dancing (the other standout moment of the film), etc whilst there are lavish sets and costumes to look at.
Once the film had finished, my wife asked if this was a true story and looked it up. Bingo! It's a true story. That makes a big difference and adds an extra point onto the score. This now holds an interest as the film describes a hugely significant moment in history. I wish I'd reminded myself of this before watching. I'll know for next time. The actual incident is a milestone as it changes the lineage of succession. Would there have been a World War 1 if the reforming, liberal Rudolf had acceded the throne? Would prostitution have become acceptably mainstream like it should be? The real story is interesting but the film not as interesting as it could have/should have been.
Enchanting !!!
Atiliano15 April 2014
I first saw this movie about 20 years ago in SBS Channel in Sydney, Australia. The movie was in the French language so I had to read the subtitles. It is a very old movie in B&W but it was a very enchanting movie. Danielle Darrieux was perfect for the role of the beautiful Anna Vetsera. Her acting was also perfect (for an innocent girl madly in-love with her prince). Whether the real Anna Vetsera was as innocent is beside the point. The movie was based on the true story of the love affair between the Archduke Rudolf (heir to the throne of Austria- Hungary) and his young mistress Baroness Anna Vetsera. They committed a suicide (or murder-suicide?) in 1889 in the Archduke's hunting lodge in Mayerling. Afterwards the title of Archduke passed on to the emperor's nephew, Franz Ferdinand (who became heir). Franz Ferdinand was assassinated in July 1914 in Sarajevo in Bosnia-Herzegovina which sparked the First World War. This movie has a very sad ending, with both lovers dying in the end. But the implications for the real world in that era was most terrible. It is a great wonder today whether there would have been war in 1914 had Rudolf lived and remained heir.
Recently, I was able to obtain a copy of the this movie and saw it again after 20 years. The movie did not disappoint and I can say that it is one of the best movies ever. It must have been such a sensation when first released in 1936.
Recently, I was able to obtain a copy of the this movie and saw it again after 20 years. The movie did not disappoint and I can say that it is one of the best movies ever. It must have been such a sensation when first released in 1936.
Pretty good old film.
wsk19 October 1998
I got the film from the library...Charles Boyer was sufficiently suave, and Danielle Darrieux was lovely. The film gives the "official version" of the events; a love murder-suicide. The history that has come out suggests murder in the real world. My wife, who doesn't know the story, enjoyed it "Much better than I thought I would." Now I have to look up the Omar Sharif and TV versions. I'll rate it a 7.
A remarkable movie
richard-178724 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This is really one remarkable movie. Yes, there are a few clichés in it, as when Prince Rudolf goes on a bender when he is first separated from Maria. The very end is also strange: why does Rudolf wait so long before taking his own life after taking Maria's? The last scene, with the music rising as he clutches for her hand after finally shooting himself, is highly romantic. The filming/sound mix would reappear again, without the romantic element, years later in another Litvak masterpiece, Sorry, Wrong Number.
But those few things cannot lessen the accomplishments of this movie, and they are many. It moves at just the right pace. There are shots that are composed with remarkable beauty, such as when Rudolf and Maria toast at dinner at Mayerling. The music is used over and over to heighten the drama, not just as background wallpaper.
And Boyer and Darrieux are both at the height of their considerable talents.
In short, a real masterpiece. One well worth seeking out.
But those few things cannot lessen the accomplishments of this movie, and they are many. It moves at just the right pace. There are shots that are composed with remarkable beauty, such as when Rudolf and Maria toast at dinner at Mayerling. The music is used over and over to heighten the drama, not just as background wallpaper.
And Boyer and Darrieux are both at the height of their considerable talents.
In short, a real masterpiece. One well worth seeking out.
First Big Hit for a Foreign Film in a Non-EnglishLanguage Movie
springfieldrental19 July 2023
Motion pictures from overseas were a tough sell for American theaters in the mid-1930s. Even though movies from France, Germany, Italy among others were shown in selected theaters in the United States, none caught the attention of the public accustomed to Hollywood glossy productions. When Pax Films imported the French movie, February 1936 "Mayerling," American viewers were enthralled about its story of a royal murder-suicide.
"Mayerling" became the first international hit with sound in cinema (with a couple of British pictures the exception). The film's popularity made French actor Charles Boyer a major world-wide movie star, and a barrage of offers from Hollywood studios for Anatole Litvak cascaded on its director. One reviewer labeled the film as "one of the most compelling love stories the cinema has produced," and the co-founder of the American Ballet, Lincoln Kirstein wrote it is "a kind of standard for the romantic film in an historical setting." The movie's title derives from the small town in Austria where Rudolf, the Crown Prince of Austria (Boyer), shot and killed his 17-year-old mistress, baroness Mary Vetsera (Danielle Darrieux) at his hunting lodge in January 1889. Rudolf was the only son to Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria and had been in an unhappy marriage to a princess from Belgium before meeting Mary. Compounding the royal couple's stress was Rudolf had transmitted the clap to his wife as a result of his many affairs.
Actress Darrieux, as Mary Vetsera, was almost the same age of the real-life teenager who was shot by the prince before he took his own life. Her four-year film career to this point resulted in only small parts, but "Mayerling" brought her international fame. Receiving a number of offers from Hollywood, Darrieux and Litvak traveled together to explore their opportunities in Tinseltown. Whereas the film director remained in California where he excelled in directing several highly-regarded films, Darrieux was in only one Universal Pictures film, 1938 'The Rage of Paris,' before returning to Europe. Darrieux eventually became one of France's most popular movie actresses with a career spanning eight decades, lasting until 2010.
Boyer, who had earlier spent a short time in Hollywood, returned to California to enjoy a very rewarding life in films. The book the film's plot was based on, Claude Anet's 'Idyll's End,' served as the basis for Litvak revisiting the tragic tale in his 1957 'Mayerling' with Mel Ferrer and Audrey Hepburn. MGM pounced on the bandwagon in 1968 in its version of "Mayerling" with Omar Sharif, Catherine Deneuve, James Mason and Ava Gardner.
It's ironic Boyer played a character who kills himself over a woman. The actor met and married British actress Pat Paterson just before making "Mayerling," a marriage that lasted 44 years. He was so distraught over her death in August 1978, that he took his own life with an overdose of Seconal two days after she passed away. As for the real Crown Prince Rudolf, his death left his father, Franz Joseph, to seek an alternative when he had no other sons to give the title. The emperor's heir apparent to the Austria-Hungry throne turned out to be his nephew, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, who, in 1914 was shot and killed in Sarajevo, setting off World War One.
"Mayerling" became the first international hit with sound in cinema (with a couple of British pictures the exception). The film's popularity made French actor Charles Boyer a major world-wide movie star, and a barrage of offers from Hollywood studios for Anatole Litvak cascaded on its director. One reviewer labeled the film as "one of the most compelling love stories the cinema has produced," and the co-founder of the American Ballet, Lincoln Kirstein wrote it is "a kind of standard for the romantic film in an historical setting." The movie's title derives from the small town in Austria where Rudolf, the Crown Prince of Austria (Boyer), shot and killed his 17-year-old mistress, baroness Mary Vetsera (Danielle Darrieux) at his hunting lodge in January 1889. Rudolf was the only son to Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria and had been in an unhappy marriage to a princess from Belgium before meeting Mary. Compounding the royal couple's stress was Rudolf had transmitted the clap to his wife as a result of his many affairs.
Actress Darrieux, as Mary Vetsera, was almost the same age of the real-life teenager who was shot by the prince before he took his own life. Her four-year film career to this point resulted in only small parts, but "Mayerling" brought her international fame. Receiving a number of offers from Hollywood, Darrieux and Litvak traveled together to explore their opportunities in Tinseltown. Whereas the film director remained in California where he excelled in directing several highly-regarded films, Darrieux was in only one Universal Pictures film, 1938 'The Rage of Paris,' before returning to Europe. Darrieux eventually became one of France's most popular movie actresses with a career spanning eight decades, lasting until 2010.
Boyer, who had earlier spent a short time in Hollywood, returned to California to enjoy a very rewarding life in films. The book the film's plot was based on, Claude Anet's 'Idyll's End,' served as the basis for Litvak revisiting the tragic tale in his 1957 'Mayerling' with Mel Ferrer and Audrey Hepburn. MGM pounced on the bandwagon in 1968 in its version of "Mayerling" with Omar Sharif, Catherine Deneuve, James Mason and Ava Gardner.
It's ironic Boyer played a character who kills himself over a woman. The actor met and married British actress Pat Paterson just before making "Mayerling," a marriage that lasted 44 years. He was so distraught over her death in August 1978, that he took his own life with an overdose of Seconal two days after she passed away. As for the real Crown Prince Rudolf, his death left his father, Franz Joseph, to seek an alternative when he had no other sons to give the title. The emperor's heir apparent to the Austria-Hungry throne turned out to be his nephew, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, who, in 1914 was shot and killed in Sarajevo, setting off World War One.
Superb historical love-drama.
silverauk21 July 2002
Joseph Kessel and Marcel Achard turned the book of Claude Annet "Mayerling" into a strong script with time to overlook the political situation in the Austrian Empire at that time. The costumes of Annenkov are impressive and the music of Arthur Honegger "Musique Nouvelle" goes well with the pathetism of this flamboyant movie. The Austrian emperor Joseph (Jean Dax) is historically correct and Marie Vetsera (Danielle Darieux) and Rudolph of Habsbourg (Charles Boyer) form a convincing couple with much love but without future.
Two Death Do They Part
Lejink25 February 2023
The story of the perceived (other conspiracy theories are available!) double-suicide of Archduke Rudolph of Austria and his teenage lover Baroness Marie Vetsera at Mayerling in 1889 is one of the great royal dynastic tragedies of the 19th Century and has even been named a contributory factor in the outbreak of the First World War some 25 years later.
In this French-language version by Ukranian director Anatole Litvak, we get a highly-romanticised version of the story with Charles Boyer and Danielle Darrieux as the star-crossed but ill-fated lovers.
The direction throughout is stylish and tasteful, Litvak impressing in his recreation of the Viennese Court with its surface splendour barely concealing the jostling for position and rumour-mongering beneath the facade. Boyer and Darrieux are excellent in their lead roles, his character the reforming, rebellious heir to the throne, unhappy in his arranged marriage and she the youthful, highly-impressionable innocent caught up in the first great passion of her life.
The concluding climax is sensitively and humanely depicted too with my only major criticisms of the film being an over-reliance on the use of the no-doubt in-vogue montage sequences and a tendency to slightly overstay the camera's welcome in certain scenes.
Nevertheless, this was a fine retelling of the notorious scandal and it's no surprise that its artistic and commercial success lured director Litvak to Hollywood where he enjoyed a distinguished career for many years.
In this French-language version by Ukranian director Anatole Litvak, we get a highly-romanticised version of the story with Charles Boyer and Danielle Darrieux as the star-crossed but ill-fated lovers.
The direction throughout is stylish and tasteful, Litvak impressing in his recreation of the Viennese Court with its surface splendour barely concealing the jostling for position and rumour-mongering beneath the facade. Boyer and Darrieux are excellent in their lead roles, his character the reforming, rebellious heir to the throne, unhappy in his arranged marriage and she the youthful, highly-impressionable innocent caught up in the first great passion of her life.
The concluding climax is sensitively and humanely depicted too with my only major criticisms of the film being an over-reliance on the use of the no-doubt in-vogue montage sequences and a tendency to slightly overstay the camera's welcome in certain scenes.
Nevertheless, this was a fine retelling of the notorious scandal and it's no surprise that its artistic and commercial success lured director Litvak to Hollywood where he enjoyed a distinguished career for many years.
The Mayerling affair
TheLittleSongbird23 October 2023
'Mayerling' (1936)
Opening thoughts: There were plenty of reasons for seeing 'Mayerling'. Have always loved period dramas, and especially when it is a period of history that really piques a lot of interest. Having gained a major interest in Austrian royalty since my holiday to Vienna last year (especially Empress Elisabeth, aka Sissi), this was one such period. It also intrigued seeing Charles Boyer in an early role and the kind that he became well known for and for seeing one of Anatole Litvak's early films.
'Mayerling' is a very, very good film indeed. Not perfection, but there are numerous good things and most of those good things are actually exceptional. Of the two 'Mayerling' films seen, the other being the one from the 50s, this is infinitely better with it actually being good (was underwhelmed by the other). It is very easy to see why Boyer became a major international star after this and the film is one of Litvak's best and most interesting early films (the film that also helped make his career bigger), as far as his films in general go it's not quite 'All This and Heaven Too' and especially 'The Snake Pit' but it is in the better end.
Bad things: It isn't perfect. Will agree that Gabrielle Dorziat wasn't right for Elisabeth, she came over as too old and didn't get enough of the ahead of the time astonishing beauty that Elisabeth was famous for the struggles she faced in her life.
Also thought that the lead up to the tragic conclusion was too overlong and dragged out.
Good things: However, 'Mayerling' looks absolutely ravishing, with sumptuous costume designs and art direction and the photography is some of the most beautiful of any film from the late 30s. Was not sure as to whether Arthur Honegger's music would gel stylistically and in mood, but it is suitably dramatic without being bombastic or too melodramatic and is quite lush. Litvak's direction is some of his most stylish and sensitive.
Furthermore, the script is thought provoking and doesn't go into soap opera territory too much. There may be cliches here but they are not done in too cliched a manner. The story always intrigues, even in the slower patches, and has emotional impact and very passionate romance. The conclusion itself is very moving and the love is very deeply felt.
Boyer and Danielle Darrieux are both perfectly cast, giving performances of great dignity and passion. Their chemistry smolders. The supporting cast are excellent too, with reservations had for only Dorziat.
Concluding thoughts: Overall, very, very good.
8/10.
Opening thoughts: There were plenty of reasons for seeing 'Mayerling'. Have always loved period dramas, and especially when it is a period of history that really piques a lot of interest. Having gained a major interest in Austrian royalty since my holiday to Vienna last year (especially Empress Elisabeth, aka Sissi), this was one such period. It also intrigued seeing Charles Boyer in an early role and the kind that he became well known for and for seeing one of Anatole Litvak's early films.
'Mayerling' is a very, very good film indeed. Not perfection, but there are numerous good things and most of those good things are actually exceptional. Of the two 'Mayerling' films seen, the other being the one from the 50s, this is infinitely better with it actually being good (was underwhelmed by the other). It is very easy to see why Boyer became a major international star after this and the film is one of Litvak's best and most interesting early films (the film that also helped make his career bigger), as far as his films in general go it's not quite 'All This and Heaven Too' and especially 'The Snake Pit' but it is in the better end.
Bad things: It isn't perfect. Will agree that Gabrielle Dorziat wasn't right for Elisabeth, she came over as too old and didn't get enough of the ahead of the time astonishing beauty that Elisabeth was famous for the struggles she faced in her life.
Also thought that the lead up to the tragic conclusion was too overlong and dragged out.
Good things: However, 'Mayerling' looks absolutely ravishing, with sumptuous costume designs and art direction and the photography is some of the most beautiful of any film from the late 30s. Was not sure as to whether Arthur Honegger's music would gel stylistically and in mood, but it is suitably dramatic without being bombastic or too melodramatic and is quite lush. Litvak's direction is some of his most stylish and sensitive.
Furthermore, the script is thought provoking and doesn't go into soap opera territory too much. There may be cliches here but they are not done in too cliched a manner. The story always intrigues, even in the slower patches, and has emotional impact and very passionate romance. The conclusion itself is very moving and the love is very deeply felt.
Boyer and Danielle Darrieux are both perfectly cast, giving performances of great dignity and passion. Their chemistry smolders. The supporting cast are excellent too, with reservations had for only Dorziat.
Concluding thoughts: Overall, very, very good.
8/10.
For the women he loved
bkoganbing2 May 2014
When Mayerling came out in France, Great Britain was facing a similar situation that the former Hapsburg Empire was facing in 1889. Only their bachelor Crown Prince was about to become a king. But Edward VIII insisted it would not be without the women he loved. He found a way out that was less bloody than Crown Prince Rudolf Von Hapsburg did.
Indeed Emperor Franz Joseph lived on and on and on. He did not die until 1916 and the Empire would die with the end of World War I when so many new states were created in Europe. But when people do start getting old the succession in the dynasty becomes important.
Charles Boyer plays the dissolute and dissipated Crown Prince Rudolf who always gets a following whether he wants it or not in any monarchy. He's got more liberal views than his father played here by Jean Dax. What's not covered here is that Franz Joseph when he assumed the throne in 1848 was a rather serious minded youth of the age of 17, a total contrast to his kid. It made for continual conflict exacerbated by court politics.
The Crown Prince was more interested in letting the good times roll like there was no tomorrow. The Emperor has already arranged a match which the Prince has reluctantly agreed to as per his duty to the state. But then he meets Danielle Darrieux who plays Marie Vetsera who is of minor nobility not quite up to Hapsburg standards. After that he wants only to be with her. And she wants only him, not even the crown if he has to give it up.
Rudolf was a momma's boy in every sense of the word. The Empress Elizabeth married Franz Joseph and she was a wild child herself. Her story is covered in the Grace Moore/Franchot Tone movie The King Steps Out. Although she's at court here in this film, most of the years of her reign she lived apart from the Emperor partaking of the various resorts at places like Baden-Baden and Biarritz. Actress Gabrielle Dorziat plays Sissi and she sympathizes with her son, but not much she can do. Boyer and Dorziat have a very emotional scene covering that.
Darrieux all wide eyed and innocent does a wonderful job as the luckless Marie Vetsara. Boyer scores well as the tragic Rudolf who would just not settle down to his responsibilities.
With the British monarchy crisis in the news in America and everywhere else but the British Empire, Mayerling found an interested audience in 1936. Anatole Litvak directed it and he, Boyer, and Darrieux would be in America soon enough. Boyer was already here, but returned to France for this film. No doubt he was cast for box office reasons in the foreign markets, most especially the American one.
All of them delivered a fine film.
Indeed Emperor Franz Joseph lived on and on and on. He did not die until 1916 and the Empire would die with the end of World War I when so many new states were created in Europe. But when people do start getting old the succession in the dynasty becomes important.
Charles Boyer plays the dissolute and dissipated Crown Prince Rudolf who always gets a following whether he wants it or not in any monarchy. He's got more liberal views than his father played here by Jean Dax. What's not covered here is that Franz Joseph when he assumed the throne in 1848 was a rather serious minded youth of the age of 17, a total contrast to his kid. It made for continual conflict exacerbated by court politics.
The Crown Prince was more interested in letting the good times roll like there was no tomorrow. The Emperor has already arranged a match which the Prince has reluctantly agreed to as per his duty to the state. But then he meets Danielle Darrieux who plays Marie Vetsera who is of minor nobility not quite up to Hapsburg standards. After that he wants only to be with her. And she wants only him, not even the crown if he has to give it up.
Rudolf was a momma's boy in every sense of the word. The Empress Elizabeth married Franz Joseph and she was a wild child herself. Her story is covered in the Grace Moore/Franchot Tone movie The King Steps Out. Although she's at court here in this film, most of the years of her reign she lived apart from the Emperor partaking of the various resorts at places like Baden-Baden and Biarritz. Actress Gabrielle Dorziat plays Sissi and she sympathizes with her son, but not much she can do. Boyer and Dorziat have a very emotional scene covering that.
Darrieux all wide eyed and innocent does a wonderful job as the luckless Marie Vetsara. Boyer scores well as the tragic Rudolf who would just not settle down to his responsibilities.
With the British monarchy crisis in the news in America and everywhere else but the British Empire, Mayerling found an interested audience in 1936. Anatole Litvak directed it and he, Boyer, and Darrieux would be in America soon enough. Boyer was already here, but returned to France for this film. No doubt he was cast for box office reasons in the foreign markets, most especially the American one.
All of them delivered a fine film.
A Shot In The Light
writers_reign2 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
As another poster has pointed out neither version of Mayerling is based on the actual events but on those events as distorted through the prism of the novel. Nevertheless both the principals and the situations did exist and Anatole Litvak, Charles Boyer and Danielle Darrieux burn THIS version of the story into our retinas. All three benefited from the success of the film and if success is measured in Hollywood contracts then again all three triumphed. Litvak and Boyer made more out of it than Darrieux who quickly returned to France where she made some great movies with her first husband, Henri Decoin, and subsequently with others. Just eighteen at the time she played the tragic lover she filled the screen with the freshness of youth and the broken promise of dawn. Litvak tips his glove from Frame #1 which he fills with shadows on a wall at once announcing that this is but a shadow-play and that all of us are insubstantial as shadows in the wider scheme of things. It's true that the Terence Young version had a lovelier Sissi in the shape of Ava Gardner but Young had to make do with Catherine Deneuve whilst Litvak had Darrieux. Enough said.
mayerling
scottydog225 April 2001
I had insomnia and this film didn't cure it.
I've wanted to see a Charles Boyer film before and when this one came on(TCM),I was excited and disappointed that it was only in French,but the storyline and acting grabbed my attention and it didn't matter that there were subtitles.
Nobody's mentioned it,so I'll be the first...Boyer was one good looking dude...he was very good in this role.The only problem that I had with the movie is the ending...I wished that it could've been different.
If a movie stays on your mind days after viewing it,it's a good one and I gave this a 9.
I've wanted to see a Charles Boyer film before and when this one came on(TCM),I was excited and disappointed that it was only in French,but the storyline and acting grabbed my attention and it didn't matter that there were subtitles.
Nobody's mentioned it,so I'll be the first...Boyer was one good looking dude...he was very good in this role.The only problem that I had with the movie is the ending...I wished that it could've been different.
If a movie stays on your mind days after viewing it,it's a good one and I gave this a 9.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
