Anna and the King of Siam (1946)

What a waste of my time!!!

The greatest movie ever!

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Producer: Louis D. Lighton. Executive producer: Darryl F. Zanuck. Copyright 20 June 1946 by 20th Century Fox Film Corp. U.S. release date: August 1946. New York opening at the Radio City Music Hall: 20 June 1946. U.K. release: 30 September 1946. London opening at the New Gallery, and Tivoli, Strand: 11 August 1946. Australian release: 2 January 1947. 14 reels. 11,548 feet. 128 minutes.SYNOPSIS: English governess meddles in state affairs in 19th century Siam.NOTES: Winner of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' award for Best black-and-white Cinematography: Arthur Miller (defeating George Folsey's The Green Years).Also winner of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' award for Best black-and-white Art Direction (defeating Kitty, and The Razor's Edge). Also nominated for Supporting Actress, Gale Sondergaard (Anne Baxter in The Razor's Edge), Adapted Screenplay (The Best Years Of Our Lives), and Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture (The Best Years Of Our Lives).Number three in The Film Daily annual Poll of U.S. film critics.Cutting-room floor players: Sir C. Aubrey Smith (Sir John Lawford), Margaret Bannerman (Mrs Hillary).Rex Harrison worked out his interpretation of the king in conjunction with his drama coach, Elsa Schreiber, much to the displeasure of director John Cromwell, who complained to studio head, Darryl F. Zanuck. When Harrison was supported by Zanuck, however, the director refused to even speak to Harrison on the set, concentrating all his attention on Irene Dunne.COMMENT: A disappointingly boring piece of feminist propaganda, somewhat overshadowed by its musical remake, The King and I. Cromwell's direction is surprisingly dull and the film would benefit by some sharp cutting. Most of Lee J. Cobb's scenes could go for a start. He is miscast and looks most incongruous as a native head-of-state. Then we would slice into quite a few of Miss Dunne's scenes and eliminate some of her close-ups . Rex Harrison's rounded portrait of the king is the film's chief asset, though he is not as dynamic as Yul Brynner. Gale Sondergaard has a few effective moments as the king's first wife and Linda Darnell is surprisingly powerful as the unstable Tuptim. Originally, Gene Tierney was assigned to this role but she rejected it as she felt "it was too small".The rest of the cast is completely overshadowed by the script's and the director's relentless concentration on Miss Dunne. The film is lavishly produced (though the sets and costumes cry for color).OTHER VIEWS: An exotic soap opera. Irene Dunne and Rex Harrison as the leads are a help but running gags like everyone singing "No Place Like Home" as part of Dunne's campaign for separate accommodation or Harrison's drinking soup from a plate don't really mesh with the remarkably bizarre incident where Linda Darnell as the defecting favorite is burned at the stake; and the child's death finally plunges the whole film into the lavish weepy bracket. Cromwell's direction is indecisive. "Anna and the King of Siam" used to be a must-see experience for Siamese traveling away from their homeland where it was banned. - B.P.

Other comments on this production are very interestingly expressed and I won't add any specific criticism, positive or negative, here. But one thing struck me when I saw this on a TV broadcast years ago, and that was the eerie presaging of the lovely Linda Darnell's death in 1965, as the result of an accidental house fire. In this film, playing the ill-fated Tuptim, she is burned at the stake (something that was not reenacted in "The King and I"...talk about putting a kibosh on any pleasure to be derived from Rodgers & Hammerstein's musical reimagining of this story!) Earlier in "Hangover Square"(1945) her dead body is disposed of by being carried to the top and dumped as a Guy Fawkes Day bonfire is being torched. And later in "Forever Amber"(1947) she narrowly escapes being burned to death in the London mansion of her despised husband, the Earl of Radcliffe, during the Great Fire that consumed huge portions of that city during the reign of Charles II. Talk about CREEPY! Linda's star had suffered a long decline nearly twenty years after this film premiered, but her tragic departure was something that shocked and saddened her many fans.

"Anna And The King Of Siam" is the original, non-musical, version of what was later re-made with Deborah Kerr and Yul Brenner as "The King And I". This is one of the few Irene Dunne originals that is not better than the remake. Irene Dunne was a highly original and intelligent woman and had few equals either before the camera or in her private life. In fact, if you consider all of Irene Dunne's original movies that have been remade into newer versions with the same name: such as "Back Street" 1932 or "Magnificent Obsession" 1935 or "Showboat" 1936 or "Age of Innocence" 1934 - or under a different title: such as "An Affair To Remember" which was a remake of "Love Affair" 1939 or "Something's Got To Give" which was essentially the same plot as "My Favorite Wife" 1940 - it amazes me that she was nominated six times for best actress and NEVER WON! Usually, her original versions are much better than the remakes. Anna and the King of Siam would have been had the remake not included such a lovely musical score and been so beautifully filmed in color.

Summary: BETTER than the King and I This has always been my favorite version of this story. Why? Not just because it was done first (1946); that is, before the King and I (Play-1951; Film-1956), does it make it better. Not because the original story was a drama rather a lively Broadway musical. Not even because the story was written by a woman about a woman and not about a man as was shifted later by Brynner. The performances by Irene Dunne, Rex Harrison, the production values, the direction are all done at such a fine intimate level. The true nuance of the hardship that Anna went through in her dealings with this imperial king is felt throughout. The musical never depicts this which such finely-wrought detail and care. With our 21st century sensibilities we might think that there is something goofy about Rex's performance. Does anyone really know what life was in 19th Century Siam? I believe this even after reading about the difficulty Harrison had with the depiction of this role. There is nothing Charlie Chan-ish about this performance. The strictness and order of the Asian mindset does create a cultural chasm at times for us in the West. The Asian languages are structured differently than our Western languages. The use of articles is almost non-existent, therefore the sometimes stilted manner of vocal delivery may sound staccato. The Asian vocal chords are sometimes different from Western vocal chords. There exists a predominance of higher pitched voices. And so what of it? Was the King and I more real than this movie? The only thing that can be said about Brynner is that he is physically more imposing than Harrison and Brynner has a rather slight Mongolian aspect to him which brings more authenticity to his appearance. Finally and besides my objections above, ANNA AND THE KING OF SIAM is movie full of heart and compassion. Each turn of events is handled with care and not given a Hollywood finish and sheen. ANNA is recommended hands down. The finale, though some jaded observers would dismiss as formulaic, is indeed a grand and quiet moment not to be missed.