Forever Amber

If Forever Amber were being made today the results would have been quite different. Without The Code and the Catholic Legion of Decency inspecting all the product that came from Hollywood, Amber St. Clair's sexual escapades during Restoration Great Britain would have been a far better film. Still it's not bad as it is.

Another reviewer compared it to Gone With the Wind. You can look at that in two ways, the interaction between Linda Darnell and Cornel Wilde and compare it to Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable. Lots of similarities there. But also the book itself was a blockbuster best seller in the Forties as Gone With the Wind was in the previous decade and brought in a built-in audience.

Kathleen Winsor when she wrote the novel was married to her first husband a football player who was a history student. For his honor's thesis he was writing about the Stuart Restoration. From his research material, Winsor became fascinated with the period and created her novel.

20th Century Fox and Otto Preminger got the rights and did a fine job in recreating the United Kingdom of the 1660s. Linda Darnell got one of her best roles in her career as Amber, a high spirited and vivacious girl like Scarlett O'Hara, who finds true love, but sacrifices it for ambition.

In class conscious times as those were there were few venues for people to rise, even less if you were a woman. Darnell rises from Newgate Prison to the court of Charles II where she becomes one of Charles's numerous mistresses. Along the way she uses many men, like highwayman John Russell, army captain Glenn Langan, nobleman Richard Haydn and even her own true love nobleman Cornel Wilde with whom she has a son out of wedlock.

Presiding over it all is a world weary and cynical George Sanders who plays Charles II. Sanders would play The Merry Monarch in another and vastly inferior film called The King's Thief. He does capture the jaded cynicism of Charles II so very well, it's one of his top five career parts.

If the title role in the film were about the male lead Bruce Carlton, I'm sure Darryl Zanuck would have cast Tyrone Power in the part as he appeared in several films opposite Linda Darnell. Instead Cornel Wilde steps in and he's a most dashing Restoration nobleman and seeker of fortune in the New World.

The most spellbinding performance and so against type is that of Richard Haydn as the elderly rake, Lord Radcliff. He's a widower who's looking for a 17th century trophy wife and finds one in Linda who at the point in time he first meets her is an actress. He's a coldblooded person of mystery and menace and really registers it well on the screen. He marries Linda and she inherits his title when he dies.

Haydn is killed in a thrilling scene involving the great fire of London which occurred in 1666. It's the highlight of the film and I can't say any more about how and why he's killed, but trust me it was one deserved end.

Though Forever Amber is a good film, it could have been far better, but for censorship problems. Still it provides Darnell, Sanders, and Haydn with some of their best career parts and is worth seeing.

Overlong, overwrought romantic epic that lacks chemistry between the leads. Linda Darnell is passable as Amber -- if not stunningly talented, then at least gifted with screen presence. But Cornell Wilde is as flat as a wet blanket, dousing the fire out of every scene where it might possibly have ignited. Most errors in movies of this type can be overlooked if the attraction between the two lovers is palpable. Sadly, there is no indication that Wilde's Carlton even likes Amber, let alone finds her alluring. Production code aside, there were plenty of movies of this period that portrayed believable epic love, and this isn't one of them.

The real highlight here is George Sanders as the licentious Charles II, a part he was born to play. I have no doubt that Vincent Price, considered for the role, could have done well (he gave the best performance of his career in another Preminger movie, "Laura"), but Sanders brings so much dripping wit and irony to everything he does that he makes every scene he's in come alive. He's not in it much, however.

The production itself is pretty good, some great costumes and sets. The swordfighting scene (with thankfully little dialogue) was excellent and far too short. The story itself is a little choppy. The first scene was a non-sequitur, promising a potentially interesting plot device that never came. And the ending was a complete disaster - abrupt, unresolved, unbalanced, and worst of all, unsatisfying. Overall, the movie leaves a sour taste in the mouth, as if the decadence that was portrayed somehow got hold of the people making it and caused them to focus more on the image than on the story.

Just watched "Forever Amber" the other night on TCM and it was very riveting! I had seen this movie many many years before, and I do vividly recall the final scene when Amber from her window, was watching Carleton and son leaving for Virginia. The movie from the other night closed abruptly with Amber closing the window and the credits appeared. Something didn't seem right! I remember years ago, Amber getting some kind of invitation from the palace, and she immediately shifted her attention from Carleton and the boy to the royal invitation without another thought to her former lover. That scene defined Amber St.Clair in all its essence.

The novel "Forever Amber" was wildly popular after debuting in 1944. But it also was banned in 16 states as well as abroad! Why? Because it was essentially a historical where the leading lady, Amber, sleeps her way from obscurity to the mistress of some of the most important men in the land. Today, it would be seen as somewhat tame...but in the 1940s it caused a sensation.

Now this brings up a serious problem In the Hollywood of 1947, the Production Code made it virtually impossible to film the script unless huge changes were made in the story. Well, apparently Twentieth Century-Fox STILL didn't sanitize the story enough...and the Catholic Legion of Decency condemned the film. The movie was quickly withdrawn from theaters, scenes were re-shot and it returned to theaters....where it was wildly successful. Despite a huge price tag of $6,000,000, it went on to be the top grossing film of the year. I wonder how much of the Catholic Legion of Decency hubbub actually ended up HELPING the film!

Linda Darnell stars as Amber St. Clair, a young girl from a good middleclass English family who lived during the Restoration period (when the monarchy was invited back to rule after the death of Cromwell in 1660). Amber is NOT a normal lady by any standard of the day and her family shocked when she not only refuses to marry the man they picked out for her but she then runs away to make her fortune. This essentially consists of sleeping her way up through the English gentry....with a brief period in which she slummed it with a highwayman. Throughout all her many affairs, she is most devoted to Bruce Carlton (Cornel Wilde)...though they never seem to connect up for long.

When I watched the movie, I could tell some cuts had been made in a few places. One was odd, as she suddenly ended up pregnant...and you really weren't sure what happened there and it remained that way through much of the picture! Well, she obviously slept with a guy....but who? And, after the baby was born you don't hear any more about the baby until late in the story. Was the tike misplaced somewhere or perhaps taken by aliens and then returned? Who knows?!

As far as the film goes, in many ways it's like a reworking of the Pre-Code film, "Red-Headed Woman"...in which Jean Harlow's character sleeps her way up through the social ranks. But of the two, "Red-Headed Woman" is the better film in many ways....mostly because it was much more open about the character's sexuality and the movie ended with the character receiving neither punishment nor learning a thing along the way! But with bowing to the Legion of Decency's demand for cuts, the film comes off as more episodic and confusing about Amber's sex life! Plus, let's be honest, the film is a lot less entertaining when it's less sleazy. As far as the production goes, it looks nice in rich Technicolor...but is also a tad stilted and dull after a while.

I tried reading Kathleen Windsor's famous novel but found it too long and full of excess baggage. It didn't capture my attention the way that other famous historical novel, "Gone with the Wind" did.

And while I can't say I liked this film as much as GWTW, it was nevertheless very entertaining and held my interest the way the book couldn't. There was enough history, drama, romance and intrigue to make it worthwhile, without going overboard and getting bogged down with unnecessary detail and incidents.

What was most interesting about Amber (Linda Darnell at her best) was how you can understand her motives without having to agree with them, like her unwillingness to give up on Bruce, who had more than one opportunity to make an "honest woman" of her but didn't want to take them. At times, she does what she has to do, at others, she chooses her options. Her ambitions and schemes never get her what she truly wants, despite her rise in social position and material wealth.

Cornell Wilde gives a good performance as Bruce Carlton, the love of Amber's life, who prefers his freedom, at least where she's concerned.

I also liked George Sanders as King Charles II, who falls for Amber's charms, yet won't be anyone's fool.

Very entertaining!