Charade

I bought a video of this Charade months ago and was almost afraid to watch it after reading Sheridan Morley's comments about it in the biography he wrote about James Mason. (If Morley's account of Mason's life is to be believed, he threw opportunity for real Hollywood stardom away with both hands.) I was pleasantly surprised as it was a delightful film, perfect for the small screen. The stories were charmingly portrayed, the acting was fine, but I doubt Pamela would have had much of an acting career without James' coattails to ride on. I actually liked the last story the best. James as Jeeves was particularly funny to me. You could see him switch gears and Viola - there was Diello from Five Fingers.

Having said that, it is clear to me that James and Pamela really had a desire to be creative above any desire for James to be a Hollywood star. One of their early efforts was an independent film James and Pamela wrote, produced (with her ex-husband, Roy Kellino), starred in and distributed. It's called "I Met A Murderer" and despite the hokey title, it's very good.

If you're wondering the Cary Grant/Audrey Hepburn film Charade is not a remake of this. This Charade is a collection of three short stories where would be film producer James Mason and his Pamela Mason discuss some film projects and they are short stories she's written and filed away in a trunk. Some of them should have stayed there.

The Masons play the leads in all three stories. Of the three the best was the second where Mason who is a crack duelist is goaded into a duel by Scott Forbes over Pamela Mason. Only Forbes has a diabolical scheme in mind since as the challenged party Forbes gets to choose, time, place, and method.

The other two are of lesser quality, but they do show that James Mason was an actor of great versatility. Like I didn't already know that, still this is within a less than 90 minute time frame.

Mason didn't think much of it according to the Citadel Film Series book on his career. But I rather liked the second story and he underrated himself here.

When I saw that James Mason was both starring in and producing Charade I was very interested to check it out. It was interesting in that his wife was the female lead playing opposite him throughout all three shot films. I really wanted to like Charade, and I did to a certain degree, but generally speaking it was a rather disappointing viewing experience. For starters I felt that Pamela Mason has a limited acting range and was not able to convincingly adapt her talents to all three of the short films showcased here. She wasn't bad, but for me she was a weak link overall. Still, it was kind of interesting and if you're curious then check it out and see what you think.

Episodic British film about a couple (James and Pamela Mason) who go through three scenarios as possibilities for a film, with them taking the lead in each scenario.

The best one by far was the first, about a woman who sees her neighbor's killer but doesn't tell anyone. Later he shows up to romance her, and she falls for him.

The second one is a period piece about a soldier challenged to a duel, and the third is about a man with the Midas touch who gives it all up to look for what he really wants in life.

All in all, very good.

I watched this on DVD as a bonus track to the Charade (1963, starring Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn). The James and Pamela Mason Charade(1953) is the main reason I bought the DVD because I have already watched the other Charade many times. I must say this is a very good production. Small budget it may be. Nevertheless, it offers as much suspense as the well-known Charade 1963.

This is a trio of unrelated short stories all starred by James and Pamela Mason. The Mason couple were there to introduce each short story and give comments after it, as if they were talking to each other in a living room. The first is a murder mystery of a divorced painter in Paris, followed by a duel with a twist between two 18th century Austrian Officers and last but not least, a man who is troubled by his wealth. The Masons acted well and the stories well-told. It is a pleasure to see, every once in a while, unsophisticated set and the plot and characters really in the spotlight. There are no distractions - colour, props, special effects, big stars. This could very well be a stage play. The fact that James Mason produced and Pamela Mason wrote the stories lent authenticity and deep understanding to the movie. The Masons proved that they are talented, original thinkers who could bring their brainchild on screen competently.

Among the trio, I like the last one best. Murders and duels might have been too often repeated on screen. Something out of the ordinary as the third one keeps one guessing about its ending.

I strongly recommend the movie, if not for the acting, then for a tribute to the talents of James and Pamela Mason. 9/10