7/10
The flaw of greatness is how it reveals imperfection.
1 February 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I doubt in any year that any actor could have beaten out Jose Ferrar for his iconic role of Cyrano de Bergerac, a play that he had performed on Broadway to great acclaim and in a rare show of faith by Hollywood producers got to repeat it on screen. It would be like Judith Anderson getting to do a big screen version of "Medea" rather than just videotape it for television. These performances are among the legendary ones on stage, and are among those still talked about as iconic. The film version of the play, produced by Stanley Kramer and directed by Michael Gordon, shows its age, lack of budget and mostly how theatrical it really all is. Had they cast Olivier or Kirk Douglas or other iconic screen stars of the time, it probably wouldn't have had the same impact.

The other leading players, William Prince and Mala Powers, playing Christian and Roxanne, are merely just decent, nothing award-worthy, and they basically become invisible when sharing scenes with Ferrer. Minor players, especially familiar character actors like Lloyd Corrigan, Percy Helton and Francois Pierot, have the inate ability to make even their smallest of scenes memorable, so they are able to stand toe to toe with Ferrer. His greatest asset is making Cyrano watchable in spite of the fact that he's a pompous bore, a total narcissist, utilizing his physical appearance to be smug, something that knocks him in his place when his love for cousin Roxanne is threatened by the presence of the more handsome Prince.

So how does this not quite perfect film retain a classic status? Outside of its leading man, that's not really easy to answer, but when he is on screen, Ferrer dominates, commanding every moment and making you remember him even though he's one of the most arrogant leading characters in a classic film. The vulnerability that this character secretly hides in spite of a bravado facade manages to humanize him as the film goes on, and even though the photography makes a film often seem a bit blurry and limited in scope, the bigger than life presence of the title character grows on the viewer as the film reaches its tragic twists near the conclusion. Even though 1950 had greater films with equally great leading men, I can't imagine anybody else being honored than Ferrer. It is definitely a choice for the leading actor award of that year that makes sense in every way although it would be difficult for me to choose other elements of the film to honor.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed