Under Capricorn (B or 3/4 stars)
Brooding costume melodrama 'Under Capricorn' would seem like a strange choice for Master of Suspense Alfred Hitchcock to make. But while this movie's genre is not up his sleeve, it DOES contain elements that his other famed films have trademarked: a mysterious household, a sinister housekeeper, dark secrets, illness, a noble lady who demeans herself for a man and, well, there IS an early killing, as well. The difference is all in 'tone' & intent of plot. Australia, 1831: Ingrid Bergman stars as Lady Henrietta Flusky, a severely unhappy Irish wife who is tormented & turned into an alcoholic by her black-hearted landowner husband, Sam Flusky (Joseph Cotten); an ex-con who made good after he was imported to Australia from England to serve in prison.
Enter into the story the initially penniless, but now upper-class Irishman, Charles Adare (Michael Wilding), fresh off the boat in Sydney from England to make a fresh start with the help of his 2nd cousin, Sir Richard, Governor of New South Wales. Charles meets ex-con Sam, who plans a business deal with him. Invited to a lavish party at Sam's palatial home, Charles meets Sam's unsettled, social pariah wife Henrietta, whom he had actually known as a child back in Ireland. He is shocked & dismayed to find that she is constantly drunk, depressed, guilt-ridden & on the verge of losing her mind. To that, Charles sets out to investigate the meaning of her troubled predicament. He warns Henrietta that her jealous, overbearing housemaid, Milly (Margaret Leighton), is purposefully keeping her bedridden. And a long-buried secret about a particular family murder rears its head ... changing everything.
I dug this film for its engaging set-up, intriguing characters & a relatively involving mystery. That said, the plot is in no way hefty enough to warrant the nearly 2 hour run time and, Hitchcock opts to give this film a leisurely pace with long takes that kind of deaden the pacing. The script, written by actor Hume Cronyn, & adapted from a novel, unfolds a bit staticky; which is a disappointment. It also doesn't help this film's legacy that it did not receive the best reviews at the time of its release and, it did poorly at the box office {Hitchcock, himself, was not wild about this movie; finding it humorless and, so he did not make another one like it}. Only over time have audiences today started to take notice of this film and are truly appreciating its strengths now.
Though many think that Ingrid Bergman was miscast, I think she {and the entire cast} manages to bring something special out of their bizarre, atypical roles. Margaret Leighton is a hoot as the tyrannical 'Mrs. Danvers' housekeeper role. The role her role plays in the overall make-up of the plot is inherently similar to Hitchcock's Rebecca & Notorious. One more note on Bergman; though she'd been in several other Hitchcock films & was wildly successful, she butted heads with the director here and, apparently their disagreements over her character work & the filming of the scenes was off the charts.
As for the crafts in the film, I loved Jack Cardiff's Technicolor camerawork, as well as the 19th c. Australian set & costume designs. So yeah, despite many feeling that Bergman was miscast as an Irish aristocrat's drunk wife, I liked her offbeat acting choices. There are many 'offbeat' elements to this film that, while making the film imperfect, also makes it more interesting, in a way. A character-driven darkly romantic film like this is not what you think of when you know Hitchcock is at the helm, but this film is worth seeing BECAUSE of that. Despite clear issues with it, 'Under Capricorn' is an oddly enjoyable & somewhat underrated gem.
Enter into the story the initially penniless, but now upper-class Irishman, Charles Adare (Michael Wilding), fresh off the boat in Sydney from England to make a fresh start with the help of his 2nd cousin, Sir Richard, Governor of New South Wales. Charles meets ex-con Sam, who plans a business deal with him. Invited to a lavish party at Sam's palatial home, Charles meets Sam's unsettled, social pariah wife Henrietta, whom he had actually known as a child back in Ireland. He is shocked & dismayed to find that she is constantly drunk, depressed, guilt-ridden & on the verge of losing her mind. To that, Charles sets out to investigate the meaning of her troubled predicament. He warns Henrietta that her jealous, overbearing housemaid, Milly (Margaret Leighton), is purposefully keeping her bedridden. And a long-buried secret about a particular family murder rears its head ... changing everything.
I dug this film for its engaging set-up, intriguing characters & a relatively involving mystery. That said, the plot is in no way hefty enough to warrant the nearly 2 hour run time and, Hitchcock opts to give this film a leisurely pace with long takes that kind of deaden the pacing. The script, written by actor Hume Cronyn, & adapted from a novel, unfolds a bit staticky; which is a disappointment. It also doesn't help this film's legacy that it did not receive the best reviews at the time of its release and, it did poorly at the box office {Hitchcock, himself, was not wild about this movie; finding it humorless and, so he did not make another one like it}. Only over time have audiences today started to take notice of this film and are truly appreciating its strengths now.
Though many think that Ingrid Bergman was miscast, I think she {and the entire cast} manages to bring something special out of their bizarre, atypical roles. Margaret Leighton is a hoot as the tyrannical 'Mrs. Danvers' housekeeper role. The role her role plays in the overall make-up of the plot is inherently similar to Hitchcock's Rebecca & Notorious. One more note on Bergman; though she'd been in several other Hitchcock films & was wildly successful, she butted heads with the director here and, apparently their disagreements over her character work & the filming of the scenes was off the charts.
As for the crafts in the film, I loved Jack Cardiff's Technicolor camerawork, as well as the 19th c. Australian set & costume designs. So yeah, despite many feeling that Bergman was miscast as an Irish aristocrat's drunk wife, I liked her offbeat acting choices. There are many 'offbeat' elements to this film that, while making the film imperfect, also makes it more interesting, in a way. A character-driven darkly romantic film like this is not what you think of when you know Hitchcock is at the helm, but this film is worth seeing BECAUSE of that. Despite clear issues with it, 'Under Capricorn' is an oddly enjoyable & somewhat underrated gem.