Silver Screen Book Club discussion

9 views
Movie Discussions > APRIL 2019: Raffles

Comments Showing 1-10 of 10 (10 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Samantha (new)

Samantha Glasser | 418 comments Mod
TCM is showing Raffles on April 18 at 8:00 p.m. Let's all watch/record it and discuss it here in celebration of our spring subject David Niven.


message 2: by Barry (new)

Barry Lane | 18 comments Good idea.


message 3: by Michael (new)

Michael Sparrow | 51 comments Ready for discussion--any time!


message 4: by Samantha (new)

Samantha Glasser | 418 comments Mod
What did you think of the movie? How was the chemistry between deHavilland and Niven? This film was released during Hollywood's pinnacle year (1939). Does it stand up to the hype? Does seeing Niven in action increase your enjoyment of his memoirs?


message 5: by Michael (new)

Michael Sparrow | 51 comments Samantha wrote: "What did you think of the movie? How was the chemistry between deHavilland and Niven? This film was released during Hollywood's pinnacle year (1939). Does it stand up to the hype? Does seeing Niven..."

I liked it--it had very little padding and told its story cleanly. There didn't seem to be a lot of chemistry between David and Olivia, I got the sense that there was a leading lady only because there had to be one. I'd be curious how deHavilland compared Niven to her frequent (and his occasional) co-star Errol Flynn, Actually, I enjoyed the chemistry between David and Duddly Digges more. I don't think it was one of the best of 1939, and the 73-minute running time was atypical for a 1939 "A" movie, but it it did work to the film's advantage. Niven seemed relaxed, I got the sense from his book that he was often on edge during these years. Glad I watched it.


message 6: by R (last edited Apr 21, 2019 04:00AM) (new)

R Pyle | 28 comments Frankly, I think the whole thing is like padding. It doesn't even come close to the 1930 "Raffles" with Ronald Colman and Kay Francis. The leads, Niven and de Havilland are good, but they're not great in this - IMO only. I've seen it twice before, and was disappointed the first time, then liked it a tad better the second time, which was just a couple of years ago. As far as chemistry is concerned between de Havilland and Niven: de Havilland had chemistry with only one man in the movies, Errol Flynn...


message 7: by Samantha (new)

Samantha Glasser | 418 comments Mod
I liked the movie. I thought Niven was very much like Ronald Coleman, but I didn't know it had indeed been made before with him. The supporting cast is very good in this one. I wonder how the earlier one compares that way.

The editing is very tight and the story starts off quickly and strongly. The ending was somewhat abrupt. I wanted to know what happens next. I wouldn't say that it ranks among the greats of 1939. But it wasn't a bad way to spend 72 minutes.


message 8: by Michael (new)

Michael Sparrow | 51 comments Samantha wrote: "I liked the movie. I thought Niven was very much like Ronald Coleman, but I didn't know it had indeed been made before with him. The supporting cast is very good in this one. I wonder how the earli..."

Agreed!


message 9: by R (last edited Apr 22, 2019 02:28PM) (new)

R Pyle | 28 comments It had also been made twice as a silent, first in 1917 with John Barrymore, then again 1925 with House Peters, Sr. I've got both versions, and they're both rather boring compared to the 1930 version. The 1925 version is like the 1939 version, both good, but... The Barrymore version is a tad antiquish, and a tad too much Barrymore overacting, but it's still quite watchable. Another rather good version is the 1975 British TV series with Anthony Valentine. There was a 1905 silent short, too... with J. Barney Sherry as Raffles, directed, believe it or not, by "Bronco Billy" Anderson.


message 10: by Barry (new)

Barry Lane | 18 comments Anthony Valentine was a charmer as was his series.


back to top