I'm tired of the condescending and facile "appreciations" of Eddy-MacDonald, particularly in "Rose Marie." Does no one actually pay attention to the movie?
For those who dismiss Rose Marie as a "saccharine" confection, this is an operetta. Get it? O-p-e-r-e-t-t-a. Light opera. L-i-g-h-t. No more saccharine than a Nicholas Cage vehicle like It Could Happen to You. Yes, the soundtrack for the Indian spectacle sounds, alas, like the hoochee-coochee, demanded by the box office of the time, but even that unfortunate element is an interesting document of contemporary popular taste. If one claims to have the sensitivity to make judgments about a scene, he should first know how to place it in context.
The production values someone complains about - for the first Eddy song - is a process shot, about the same quality as others throughout the film, which were state of the art for the time. So if one can shed silly presentist snobbery, the production values are fine. And the location shots are spectacular.
Perhaps the stupidest criticism is that MacDonald and Eddy were "mediocre" talents. Yes, Eddy is famous for his supposed woodenness, but I think Rose Marie shows that with good direction - like that of W. S. Van Dyke - woodenness could become stolidity and then a buffer for heavy emotions highly prized by all actors. With Eddy it was "stiffness," but the same qualities in Cooper are called "natural" by the snobs. I challenge any other actor to deal with the inner conflict between love and duty as well as Eddy in Rose Marie. The scene when he says, "You'll remember me as just a policeman" is executed with exquisite torment and brittle irony - through that so-called "wooden" countenance.
As for Jeanette MacDonald, of course she wasn't an opera singer. She had a better job! As for her "mediocre" talent, MacDonald was not only beautiful, stable and smart, she was a fine actress and had an E above high C three-octave lyrical soprano voice. That kind of voice is far from mediocre.
As for Eddy's voice, it's a little on the flat side, but it's strong and masculine. In fact, both MacDonald and Eddy had highly successful solo recital careers after their breakup. Movie build-ups last only so long. After that, it's up to talent.
No, Rose Marie wasn't Gone With the Wind, but it wasn't a 1936 Rocky Horror Show either. To call it camp or kitsch is ill-informed and incompetent. So you graduates of the David Thomson (a hack who seems to have callow film snobs in his thrall) school of criticism, get a life. Rose Marie is a fine work of it's genre - a filmed operetta, no more, no less. Watch it as that and enjoy!
Oh yes, a note about the mutual feelings between MacDonald and Eddy, again dismissed by an ill-informed reviewer: documents submitted by their children are more than just "gossip." Also, before speaking about something you know nothing about, why not check out a photo of MacDonald's beloved husband, Gene Raymond. Remind you of anyone you know?
For those who dismiss Rose Marie as a "saccharine" confection, this is an operetta. Get it? O-p-e-r-e-t-t-a. Light opera. L-i-g-h-t. No more saccharine than a Nicholas Cage vehicle like It Could Happen to You. Yes, the soundtrack for the Indian spectacle sounds, alas, like the hoochee-coochee, demanded by the box office of the time, but even that unfortunate element is an interesting document of contemporary popular taste. If one claims to have the sensitivity to make judgments about a scene, he should first know how to place it in context.
The production values someone complains about - for the first Eddy song - is a process shot, about the same quality as others throughout the film, which were state of the art for the time. So if one can shed silly presentist snobbery, the production values are fine. And the location shots are spectacular.
Perhaps the stupidest criticism is that MacDonald and Eddy were "mediocre" talents. Yes, Eddy is famous for his supposed woodenness, but I think Rose Marie shows that with good direction - like that of W. S. Van Dyke - woodenness could become stolidity and then a buffer for heavy emotions highly prized by all actors. With Eddy it was "stiffness," but the same qualities in Cooper are called "natural" by the snobs. I challenge any other actor to deal with the inner conflict between love and duty as well as Eddy in Rose Marie. The scene when he says, "You'll remember me as just a policeman" is executed with exquisite torment and brittle irony - through that so-called "wooden" countenance.
As for Jeanette MacDonald, of course she wasn't an opera singer. She had a better job! As for her "mediocre" talent, MacDonald was not only beautiful, stable and smart, she was a fine actress and had an E above high C three-octave lyrical soprano voice. That kind of voice is far from mediocre.
As for Eddy's voice, it's a little on the flat side, but it's strong and masculine. In fact, both MacDonald and Eddy had highly successful solo recital careers after their breakup. Movie build-ups last only so long. After that, it's up to talent.
No, Rose Marie wasn't Gone With the Wind, but it wasn't a 1936 Rocky Horror Show either. To call it camp or kitsch is ill-informed and incompetent. So you graduates of the David Thomson (a hack who seems to have callow film snobs in his thrall) school of criticism, get a life. Rose Marie is a fine work of it's genre - a filmed operetta, no more, no less. Watch it as that and enjoy!
Oh yes, a note about the mutual feelings between MacDonald and Eddy, again dismissed by an ill-informed reviewer: documents submitted by their children are more than just "gossip." Also, before speaking about something you know nothing about, why not check out a photo of MacDonald's beloved husband, Gene Raymond. Remind you of anyone you know?