Rating: 
Summary: Boleslawski's Bizarre Kitsch Masterpiece
Review: This 1936 chic flick is a strange, moody, lush, sometimes silly but always fascinating romance set in Algiers starring the great screen icons Marlene Dietrich and Charles Boyer. Lots of meaningful glances, execrable dialogue and great shots of Dietrich in flowing gowns. If this your thing, then this over the top melodrama must be the ultimate escape. Entertaining and memorable in ways probably not intended. Directed by Richard Boleslawski. (Widescreen, 79 minutes, Not Rated)
Rating:
Summary: Another misleading video box!
Review: Yes, misleading because of its black and white cover. When I saw this in the library, I picked it up because I was in the mood for an antique-type film. Total welcome shocker was that it was in vivid Technicolor! I mean, what absolutely beautiful photography--I couldn't get over the warm reds and oranges, and neither could my family. Then Marlene's got a fantastic wardrobe as well, so there's a lot to engage the eye here.Why only three stars, then? Well, I wish it could be more, but the problem lies in something far more fundamental that should sadly have been fixed before shooting started. Basically, the script is just way too talky. Too many encounters of Marlene and Charles just talking at each other. They meet Basil Rathbone, and I thought, "Good, now there'll be some action because he's going to come between them somehow." But no, they just talk at him and he back to them. Besides the talkiness, the other problem with the plot is that we know all along what Boyer' problem is. They could have gotten a lot of mileage out of Guess the Secret. What a shocker it would have made if you found out with Marlene what the problem was! Odd that the studio didn't understand the importance of suspense as a script motivator. Interesting premise, though. Recently bereaved, deeply religous Marlene has gone to Algiers to find Something in the Desert. The day she arrives, Charles Boyer has also popped up. What we know that she doesn't know, is that he's a runaway monk, of all things. So he's looking for the forbidden, while she's looking at him. The scene where he reveals the truth is the best in the movie, because it rings true when he speaks of his anguish upon discovering what he gave up by joining religious life too soon. In fact, I am surprised that such a film was allowed by the censors, because it presented a sexually sinning monk. But I think "Garden of Allah" should be shown to those thinking about the religous life, to encourage exploration of what people may not realize, like Boyer's character, they will have to forswear by taking their vows. I think in this way, the film is more true than the moviemakers understood when it was made, given the exodus of men and women from the orders after Vatican II, for just the kind of reasons Boyer gives Dietrich. I was also interested to see what the resolution of the problem would be, and found it appropriate enough. So while disappointing to listen to, treat it as moving display of colors until that Great Scene of Boyer's, and you should be happy enough with "Garden of Allah".
| 
