User Reviews

This is a very lovely film to look at--with lots of opulent dresses, a lovely palace locale and pretty people such as Louis Jordan and Grace Kelly. However, once you peel away all the loveliness, the film itself isn't all that special despite a few decent performances here and there. That's because of two serious faults--very stilted and controlled performances as well as occasionally awful dialog. If you take out these factors, the basic fairy tale story is pretty good and I liked the way the movie ended.

Now as far as the stilted acting goes, some of this was definitely required for the film. The royal family was supposed to be stiff and proper but after a while, this just seemed too much--particularly with Grace Kelly. As a result, this good actress just was a pretty person in pretty clothes and that's about all! This was made worse by the less than sparkling dialog between her and Jordan. When they started talking about love and she "let loose", it just sounded syrupy and silly--lacking all realism and sounding like it came straight out of a really bad romance novel. Frankly, I found these scenes, at times, a bit embarrassing--they were that silly.

Fortunately, apart from these problems, the film is still rather enjoyable--particularly Alec Guinness' performance--though I must admit his character was a tad inconsistent. I also wondered if the writers' intent was to make him seem like he might be a latent homosexual--showing no interest in any women--even the lovely Grace Kelly (he must have been gay or insane). This sort of thing never would have been alluded to in the 1950s, but this would have made the film a lot more interesting had they pursued this! Also, the supporting roles were well done and the film did provide a nice, though not especially deep, diversion.

Several other reviews have alluded to this being Grace Kelly's "swan song" to Hollywood. Ironically, in this film she plays a member of the royalty that contemplates giving it all up to become a commoner, whereas in real life it was the opposite--with Kelly marrying the Prince of Monaco.

While there are some very funny moments in the film as well as a wonderful performance by Jesse Royce Landis as a scheming mother, the picture falls flat mainly due to the ending.

Here we are happy to see that convention will be put aside as Grace Kelly would marry her true lover. Instead, we have an ending quite similar to "The Student Prince." It's as if everyone has to do their monarchical duty, no matter what the consequences.

While radiant here and as always, Grace Kelly is rather boring, particularly at the beginning. She appears to be afraid of life. Ditto for Alec Guiness as the prince. With his dull speeches, he seems to finally wake up towards the end of the film.

Brian Aherne does well as the uncle who turned to the priesthood to get away from the royal way of living.

Ms. Landis is wonderful as she shows that even in the royal family, scheming shall prevail. She gets a good run for her money from Agnes Moorehead, who comes in and deftly steals her scenes away as Guiness's royal mother.

No wonder Estelle Winwood lived to 103. Nothing probably ever bothered her and as a royal aunt in the film, she takes her place without misgivings.

With rare exceptions (i.e., 'The Age of Innocence' and 'The Painted Veil,' among a few), too many contemporary movies set in earlier (from Elizabethan to Oscar Wildean) times miss out from a distinct failure to capture apparent period authenticity in manner or speech, be it: 'A Perfect Husband;' 'The Importance of Being Earnest'; 'Moulin Rouge;' 'The Other Boleyn Girl;' etc.

Not so here.

Every moment and character in director Charles Vidor's 'The Swan' (with the possible exception of usually adept Agnes Moorehead) takes one to an aristocratic pre-WW1 middle-Europe - at least, in Ferenc Molnar's stage conceit from 1922.

Fortunate enough to have purchased the laser-disc widescreen issue in the mid-1990s, continue to enjoy every telling exchange among the principals in the exploration of the values of a long by-gone era, politically dated as they might be - which intent might have been the author's, whether Mr. Molnar's or screenwriter John Dighton's. Not for nothing does the introductory scene convey the off-handed delivery of bread from the local baker.

Mr. Guinness is wrong in age as the heir to the throne (after all, 'Kwai;' 'Tunes of Glory,' and 'The Horse's Mouth,' were only a few years away), but acquits himself fairly well, altogether.

Ms. Kelly was slightly past taking on roles of ingénues, but does herself proud in coming across as the well-bred princess but unsophisticated woman in matters of the heart; brought up as she has been in obedient fashion towards her elders, her lack of experience makes feasible her deception towards the initially indifferent Prince Albert, as it certainly does her surprise of the unintentional emotional hurt of Professor Agi (Louis Jourdan), the man whom she makes the unwitting instrument of the deceit.

Jourdan, as a matter of fact, is in best form possible, convincing as he lets down his long-held reserve towards Alexandra and, more importantly for the piece, is assured in the English language, better so than in other performances.

SPOILER: Certain wonderful moments can best be experienced on-screen, particularly during the moment of truth between Alexandra and Professor Agi, as: Alexandra (to Agi): "Don't come any closer Nicholas...I have never seen a man in love...(with sudden awareness) and he happens to be in love with me!" Would not dare spoil any other such quote, such as when Uncle Carl (Brian Aherne), standing near the young lovers, wisely observes that the emotion that they share may never again be as deep or as true, but that nevertheless, it is perhaps already fleeting.

Restoration of 'The Swan' in DVD form is imperative. Leave it to younger audiences to sort out its relevance.

"The Swan" is in that relatively small niche of films in which duty or honor trump love.

Obvious examples of the duty/honor-trump-love genre include "Roman Holiday," "The Prisoner of Zenda," "Casablanca," "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence," "Shakespeare in Love," "Interstellar," (arguably) "Camelot," and some superhero stories (especially Superman). If you like these movies, you will probably like "The Swan." (OK, I'm not too fond of the molasses "Camelot," but I do like the others.)

Here is Why:

(Skip down to the next section if you're not into movie pedantry – I couldn't resist :-).

This genre involves a triangle consisting of at least one worthy hero, a worthy heroine, a clear duty, and a tension involving that duty and love between the hero and heroine. However, the hero or the heroine ends up yielding to the duty rather than seizing the love (a variant is "Liberty Valence," where, instead, perhaps the heroine does not end up with the hero she should). The hero/heroine love need not be romantic, e.g., "Interstellar" involves father- daughter love.

Frequently, a fourth element is added in the form of a second, less sympathetic, suitor for the heroine, forming a more traditional romantic triangle. The second suitor is usually the proxy of the duty, i.e., the duty requires the heroine to choose the second suitor. ("The Swan" falls into this case.)

Also typically, the hero makes the noble decision to not take the prize of the heroine (exceptions include "Roman Holiday," where the heroine makes the decision, "Shakespeare in Love," where the Queen commands it, and "Liberty Valence" where the John Wayne character makes the decision). The great cause requiring the noble sacrifice can be family honor (as in "The Swan"), patriotism, humanity, or religion, among others.

To be clear, there are many tragic themes that do not fall into the duty/honor-trump love genre. These other themes are often sorrowful, but just not do carry the same emotional undertones. Hence, I do not include happy-ending duty/honor-vs-love stories such as "The Four Feathers;" death-for-love sacrifice stories, such as "Titanic," "A Star is Born," "A Tale of Two Cities," or "Five Graves to Cairo," (a relatively common theme); other sacrificial stories such as "Gypsy;" or sacrificial subplots within stories, of which there are gazillions (think "Gone With the Wind" or many war films). I also discard deferred-gratification-with-hope stories such as "The Prince and the Showgirl" or "Hollywood Canteen."

Further, the genre is exactly the opposite of love-trumps-duty stories such as "Romeo and Juliet" and its dozens of derivatives, and "Love Story" and its many wrong-side-of-the-tracks variants, in which characters defy duty to obtain love, with the inference that the duty is improper or even offensive.

Films in the duty/honor-trump-love category tend to have sad and somewhat ambiguous endings, and "The Swan" fits right into that mold.

Truly great and memorable films in the duty/honor-trump-love genre tend to be high tension, powerfully emotional, passionate, moving, and intense, packing a demonstrative wallop and encouraging a wet eye or even a tear. Unfortunately, in this respect, "The Swan" disappoints. It does not drive the poignant punch of most of the examples above.

The letdown in "The Swan" is certainly not due to the cast, the costumes, the pacing, or the sets, all of which are wonderfully first rate and make the film worth watching. Grace Kelly alone makes this film worthwhile.

You will be entertained, you will be hopeful, you will be charmed -- but comes the placard that says "The End," you will be wondering if someone forgot the last reel.

The problem is the story and script, in which the Grace Kelly character spends only a tiny sliver of the film falling, without much motivation, for the Louis Jourdan character. Contrast the significant amount of time "Roman Holiday" spends building the deep connection between the Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck characters. By the end of "Roman Holiday," the audience is so invested in the pair, that their sacrifice, while understandable, is nevertheless heartrending. Similarly, consider the number of scenes in "Casablanca" developing Humphrey Bogart's and Ingrid Bergman's characters. On the other hand, the love of Grace Kelly's princess with the Professor comes across more as shallow puppy love, a brief and contrived infatuation. The audience is simply not upset with the turn of events. The viewer observes the events from afar but does not live it.

Footnote:

BTW, when folks say "they don't make films like that anymore," they are correct about this genre. This category has become even rarer since the 1960s. (Ok, a few remakes here and there, and "Shakespeare in Love," and "Interstellar," and some "Superman" flicks, and a few others). The bulk of the offerings seem to originate in the 1920s through the 1940s.

Perhaps this rarity can be explained either by notions of duty and honor being less strong or popular post-WWII, or maybe by "downer" movies not generating the required revenues. (I tend to lean towards the first explanation; "Titanic," "Shakespeare," and "Interstellar" demonstrate that sad and even tragic endings can be profitable.)

A further observation is that movies in this genre are almost always period or other-world pieces, never in real modernity (with the possible exception of "Roman Holiday," and even that is fairy-tale flavored). The message is that this is the selfish "Me" generation, chivalry and nobility are dead, and nothing in 21st century western civilization can trump love. Even Superman comics have given in (though not yet the films – I predict they will). Simply, in our day and age, we are expected to have no duties, loyalties, or honor greater than love. Perhaps this is why, when we see modern sad films, they are usually "Romeo and Juliet" or "Love Story" or "Titanic" themed films.

Watch this film – it is enjoyable, though not great, and its theme is less common than you think.

Grace Kelly is one of the great icons of the twentieth century, partly on account of her extraordinary beauty but also on account of the fact that she is the only person to have belonged to both of the world's two most glamorous and exclusive elites, the Crowned Heads of Europe and the Crowned Heads of Hollywood. "The Swan" was her penultimate film before her marriage to Prince Rainier (her last was to be "High Society") and it is the only film in which she actually portrays a princess. It is sometimes said, probably inaccurately, that MGM deliberately chose it as a vehicle for Kelly in order to cash in on the publicity surrounding her romance with Prince Rainier. In fact, the decisions to make the film and to cast Kelly in the leading role seem to have been taken before that romance was public knowledge.

The story is one that must have seemed very old-fashioned even in the fifties. It is based on a play by Ferenc Molnár, the Hungarian author who also wrote the drama which served as the basis for "Carousel", the film version of which also appeared in 1956. Two other films, neither of which I have seen, have been based on Molnár's play, a silent from 1925 and an early talkie from 1930. The setting is a kingdom somewhere in Central Europe in the year 1910. The country is never named in the film; we catch a brief glimpse of a Hungarian flag, although the royal family at the centre of the action bears no resemblance to the Habsburg rulers of Austria-Hungary at this period.

Kelly plays Princess Alexandra, the daughter of a junior branch of the ruling dynasty, who is the intended bride of her cousin Prince Albert, the heir to the throne. The exact relationship between the two is never made clear. At one point it is implied that Alexandra's late father was the younger brother of Albert's father, the current King, which would make them first cousins, but at other times it is suggested that at one time Alexandra's branch of the family were monarchs in their own right of a neighbouring country but were deprived of their throne by Napoleon, which would suggest that the kinship of Albert and Alexandra is much more distant.

The two families hope that a true romance will develop between Albert and Alexandra, but she is starting to fall in love with Professor Agi, the handsome young tutor employed to teach her two younger brothers. (I presume that his title of "Professor" is an honorary one; I doubt if the holder of a genuine academic chair at a university would want to abandon it for the dubious privilege of tutoring two minor royals). The situation between Alexandra, Albert and Agi, however, is not really a love-triangle because the only love involved is that of Alexandra and Agi. Albert seems to have no sexual or romantic interest in Alexandra or anyone else, being more interested in duck-shooting and playing football than in women. I wondered, in fact, if Alec Guinness (himself bisexual) were trying to imply that Albert may secretly be gay, something of course which could not have been made explicit in the cinema of the fifties. As another reviewer has pointed out, a man would have to be either gay or mad to show no sexual interest in Grace Kelly. She is as lovely as ever in this film, although in terms of her acting it is not really her best.

This was Guinness's first American film. He had, of course, already become a huge star in Britain, appearing in some of the finest British films of the late forties and early fifties, such as David Lean's "Great Expectations" and Ealing comedies like "The Ladykillers". His appearance here, however, must have come as something of a disappointment to American audiences, as it is one of his least interesting performances. In Guinness's defence, however, it could be said that Albert was written as a stiff, wooden character and that the task of making such a character interesting is a difficult one. (Even Laurence Olivier was to fail in this task the following year in "The Prince and the Showgirl", another film set in the early 1910s about the love-life of a prince from Central Europe). Guinness, moreover, was too old for the role; he was 42 at the time, and Albert is supposed to be 33. His next American film, "Bridge on the River Kwai", was to be a far more successful one. Louis Jourdan is rather better as Agi, although his French accent seems a bit out of place given that Agi is supposed to be a compatriot of Albert and Alexandra, not a foreigner. (It might have been better to have rewritten the script to make the professor a Frenchman).

The film is sometimes described as a romantic comedy, and indeed for much of the time it is played as an amusing trifle, with the princess's relatives being portrayed as comically eccentric. It is, however, a comedy with a serious underlying theme- the choice between love and duty- and without the expected happy ending. Indeed, I felt that the film's major weakness was the inability of the scriptwriter and director Charles Vidor to decide whether it was supposed to be a comedy or a serious psychological drama. The producer Dore Schary had something of a reputation for producing what his boss Louis B Mayer called "message pictures", and there are hints of this in "The Swan" when Agi, who is from a humble family background, starts lecturing the Prince about class distinctions. The film ends up as a sort of mixture of comic operetta and socialist pamphlet, a mixture which never really comes off.

On a final note, I found the background music loud and intrusive, often preventing me from clearly hearing what was being said. 5/10

The plot of "The Swan" isn't very original. However, the idea of it being more of a comedy than drama and romance was a nice twist. But for the character and performance of Alec Guiness as Prince Albert, and some of the wackiness of the family, this would be a dull film indeed. One can't deny that Grace Kelly was a beautiful woman and very good actress. But as Princess Alexandra in this film, she was stiff as a board, cold as an iceberg, and lifeless as a puppet.

The only thing that comes close to saving the film is Guiness in his American film debut. At the proding of his mother, Queen Maria Dominika (played by Agnes Moorhead), the prince has been searching all over Europe for the right mate. By the time he comes to the estate of Princess Alexandra and her family, he's tired and worn out. He doesn't dilly-dally, and on the first evening when they are alone, he makes his move – a gentle placing of his hand on that of the princess. When she pulls away abruptly, Albert backs off and for the rest of his stay he will be happy sleeping late, playing soccer with the princes, and doing other manly things. Come what may, the prince will find his mate, sooner or later.

He isn't a simpleton, as some may think, but has keen insight and understanding of the ways of royalty. He has wisdom in such matters, but for now, instead of working up a lather about courtship with Alexandra, he wants to unwind and enjoy himself. Some of the humor of the film comes from the Prince. The rest comes from Alexandra's family, especially her mother, Princess Beatrix (Jessie Landis) and uncle, Father Carl Hyacinth (Brian Aherne). Louis Jourdan is the tutor to Alexandra's brothers, and in love with the princess. While his character has some life, the performance of Dr. Nicholas Agi is clumsy at times and just barely better than that of Kelly.

The romance between the princess and the tutor is awkward as written and as played by the two, especially Alexandra. Did she really have any feelings for this guy? Except for her intimating such once or twice, how would anyone know because she didn't show it by any of her actions, manners or looks? Remember that at one point, she said she had wanted to be a queen. So, in the end, it all works out as it should. I don't think this film should have been labeled a romance at all, but just a comedy. It is a sort of comedy of manners for nobility in its heyday.

That some reviewers lamented the ending or thought this was a big romance film might explain why such folks missed the humor and the spoofing of the past culture of royalty. One of the few very good aspects of this film was its filming location – at the world's largest mansion – the Biltmore Estate in Asheville, North Carolina.

This film had been made, in various versions in the past – all based on a Hungarian play by Ferenc Molnar. The original Broadway play ran in 1923. Kelly had appeared in a TV production of "The Swan" that aired June 9, 1950 on CBS.

Kelly had only 30 film credits in her short six-year career – half of those in TV serials. But she made some very good films and played opposite some of the top leading men of Hollywood. This clearly was her least movie – really, the only bad one she made. I wonder if her mind wasn't somewhere else. It wasn't a coincidence that MGM released the film on April 18, 1956 – the very day that Grace Kelly was marrying Monaco's Prince Rainier. She gave up her Hollywood career for a crown.

But, even with Princess Grace's seeming fairy-tale romance, wedding, and fan following, MGM wasn't able to salvage this film at the box office. Critics and audiences alike saw it as a glamorous, eye- pleasing production that missed the mark due to a weak script, poor direction and flat performance by a couple of the leads. The box office take was just over $3.7 million worldwide, and but for the larger non-U.S. showings, "The Swan" would have lost more than it did – nearly $800,000. My six stars for this film are generous, but I think Guinness and the other members of the household royalty are deserving for their comedic efforts.

Here are some sample lines from the film. For more humorous dialog, see the Quotes section here on the IMDb Web page for the film.

Queen Beatrix, "Must you still write with a feather? This is the 20th century." Symphorosa, "I don't like the 20th century."

Queen Beatrix, (To Dr. Nicholas Agi) "You're here to give the boys an education, not to fill their heads with a lot of historical gossip."

Queen Beatrix, "I noticed the roses are already beginning to bloom." Head Gardener (David Thursby), "They're just at their best, your highness." Queen Beatrix, "I don't want them at their best until the day after tomorrow. Hold them back."

A "woman's picture" if there ever was one, "The Swan" is an elegant, well-appointed costume comedy, but also quite sluggish, stagey (it IS based on a stage play), and rather lifeless. Grace Kelly, right after her sparkling work in Alfred Hitchcock's "To Catch A Thief", gives one of her blander performances here: she remains an expert at projecting cold fire, but only gets to cut loose in a couple of fencing-training scenes. However, the film does get an extra half-star from me (for a total of **1/2 out of 4) because its seemingly totally predictable path does lead to a surprisingly bitter and cynical ending.

Yes, this movie is dull, dull, dull despite the lovely visuals and talented actors. The writing is banal at best giving the actors precious little to work with. But if I were to really blame someone, it would have to be the director. What could have been a better than run-of-the-mill movie is worse because there is no overriding vision of what the movie is all about. Is Kelly's princess a fencing Amazon pretending to be a shy aristocrat? Is Jourdan's tutor a stuffed-shirt know-it-all or a passionate lover keeping his distance? None of the other actors, except Guiness, are allowed more than one note nor more than one line, repeated over and over again. If Jourdan and Kelly are truly star-crossed lovers then why all the comedic bits-- which are not all that funny anyway?

But returning to Guiness and his crowned prince Albert: Is there a subtext about the character being gay? I think there is an argument to be made here, so I'll make it.

Albert has been set up to marry Alexandra for years, but has never been to see her. When he finally goes to see her, he does not pursue her at all, instead he spends his time playing with the teenage boys and hanging out with the gorgeous tutor and saying over (and over and over) how accomplished the fellow is. Plus he has an odd relationship with his aide with the curious name, Wunderlich, who shows up a various moments to whisk the crowned prince away. He pours himself a drink in the crowned prince's presence without so much as a by-your-leave, indicating more than a little familiarity. And he several times steals into the prince's bedroom on some insignificant mission or other.

In the mode of gay stereotype, the crowned prince dotes on his domineering mother (played marvelously by Agnes Moorhead!) going so far as giving her a neck massage. And at the grand ball climax, he opts to go and play the bass fiddle in the orchestra rather than dance with anyone-- but his aunt.

Maybe I'm projecting too much into this character, but it was the one thing that made this otherwise waste of time interesting to me. And it made Albert's fate of marrying Alexandra as tragic as her having to marry him-- now that would have been a movie!