Sat 12 Nov 2022
A Movie Review by Dan Stumpf: UNDER THE RED ROBE (1937).
Posted by Steve under Films: Drama/Romance , Reviews[5] Comments
UNDER THE RED ROBE. 20th Century Fox, UK/US, 1937. Conrad Veidt, Annabella, Raymond Massey, Romney Brent, Sophie Stewart, Wyndham Goldie. Based on the 1894 novel by Stanley J. Weyman. Director: Victor Seastrom.
Everyone remembers Conrad Veidt as the Nasty Nazi in Casablanca; a few recall him as the baddie in Thief of Baghdad, and, at a stretch, might recollect his forays into Warner Brothers villainy in A Woman’s Face or All Through the Night.
There was a time, though, when Veidt was a Big Star in the early German Cinema, starting in Cabinet of Caligari, and on through Student of Prague and Hands of Orlac, and when he and his Jewish wife exiled themselves from Germany in the 30s, there was a serious attempt to translate his stardom to English-speaking moviegoers.
He even became something of a cause celebre when he visited Germany just prior to World War II and was “detained” by the Nazis for “health reasons”, eventually being rescued by a team of British doctors.
Red Robe is one of the films they were making in England when they thought Veidt would be a Big Star, but weren’t quite sure what to do with him. He plays a 17th century swashbuckler in the sometimes-employ of Cardinal Richelieu (Raymond Massey) who is sent to the Spanish border to capture a rebellious nobleman and ends up enamoured of his target’s sister (Annabella).
Not a very exciting film, but not a bad one either. Victor Seastrom directs with an eye for Pomp and Tapestry, Veidt plays the lethal swordsman in the jaded style of a William S. Hart gunfighter, and there’s a charming turn by Romney Brent as Veidt’s watchdog. With a cast like that, Under the Red Robe has barely enough star-power to illuminate even a tiny TV screen, so it’s not apt to turn up at video stores or on television, but it’s worth catching.
November 12th, 2022 at 8:16 pm
Under the Red Robe was the first film, I saw on broadcast television, in 1949. Nothign helped. What a bore. And Conrad was not a swashbuckling lead. I have no idea what it was about, but there was a scene in which he did some swimming(?) and then dried off. Unbelievable.
November 12th, 2022 at 8:53 pm
The film had something of a second life when VHS became popular and Public Domain movies showed up everywhere in the Dollar Bins. This one showed up everywhere for a while then.
Weyman was a popular author of swashbucklers who is largely forgotten now, but not justifiably so. Many of his books are still worth reading and thanks to ebooks and PD fairly easy to find.
Veidt and Massey are the best reasons to watch this though. All in all, it is a fairly disappointing film of a still worthy book.
November 13th, 2022 at 12:44 am
Veidt was also Victor Hugo’s THE MAN WHO LAUGHS in the old Paul Leni movie, the precursor of SARDONICUS and, it’s said, Batman’s foe The Joker (I don’t know whether that was acknowledged by Bob Kane or Bill Finger, or not–maybe others here do). RED ROBE sounds like the silent-film versions of SCARAMOUCHE and THE PRISONER OF ZENDA, deadly dull compared with the sleek remakes.
November 13th, 2022 at 8:37 pm
I’ve just seen two fairly positive reviews of Under TheRed Robe, from Halliwell and Leonard Maltin. If these people were running studios, the stockholders would shortly return them to writing their meaningless opinions.
November 13th, 2022 at 10:42 pm
“You’re a har-r-r-r-rd man, McGee!”
— Throckmorton P. Gildersleeve