Conquest (1937)

Wow! Such a good movie.

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

This frivolous epic may be novelettish at best but it is also sumptuous and highly entertaining and with Garbo and Boyer in the leads it couldn't be anything less. He's Napoleon, (and Oscar-nominated for his performance) and she's a Polish countess called Marie Walewska, (the film's alternative title), with a husband over twice her age, (the great Henry Stephenson). Initially she just admires Napoleon but then falls in love with him, leaving her husband and risking scandal and the movie works as a likeable if trite romance greatly helped, of course, by the chemistry between its stars, both of whom are outstanding. A splendid supporting cast and the kind of art direction that only money can buy also go to making this something of a treat.

CONQUEST (1937) directed by one of Garbo's favorite directors, Clarence Brown, is a movie that appears to have multiple levels of analysis. It is a historical epic, it is a romance, it is a Garbo movie and a Charles Boyer movie at the same time. Moreover, it is a Hollywood classic production from the days when art meant something more than automatic computerized techniques. I had usually wondered why many modern movie buffs turn to old films until I myself came across one or two true silver screen classics and fell in love with them. Now, for me, the most obvious answer to that question is that these films had a soul, they were made for beauty and passed this beauty to the world. In other words, they really had something to offer. However, they were also vehicles for stars. Among the actresses that still stands as a symbol of that cinema is Greta Garbo.Garbo, however, does not appear to be so good here as in her other films. She has a difficult role that, logically, occurs quite vague for the Swede. She portrays a very specific patriot, a Polish patriot, Marie Walewska whose love to her nation is psychologically torn by the love to a great conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte (Charles Boyer). He was, historically speaking, a great hope for the Poles since Poland did not exist at the map at the time and patriots hoped that by gaining Europe, he will help Poland rise again from the oppression of three neighboring empires. And that is mentioned clearly in the movie; yet Garbo turns out to be better in the romantic side of the role than in the historical one.Charles Boyer as Napoleon is perfect. He truly portrays an ambitious unstable character: proud, inconsistent, emotional, sometimes furious, strong yet easily broken conqueror whose psyche is built upon power and madness, upon courage and fear. He is the one who shakes the very fundamentals of Europe and, to the contrary, the one who is shaken within. His performance is truly one among the very best in the history of cinema and, as a result, his character is usually dominant in CONQUEST even though the film is not solely on Napoleon. There are roles everlasting, like Peter Ustinov's in QUO VADIS (1951), Garbo's in QUEEN Christina (1933), Bergman's in CASABLANCA (1942). So is it with underrated Charles Boyer's in CONQUEST (1937).Except for the aforementioned advantage of the movie, the historical events appear to be shadowed in the movie, directed towards background, like in many Hollywood movies of the time. Therefore, history is not a strong point of the film. Yet, the two other strengths about CONQUEST that should still be appreciated and cherished are stunning visuals and memorable moments. Clarence Brown was very good at directing elegant sequences in royal courts. He proved that in ANNA KARENINA a few years earlier as well as in other of his productions and that is exactly what we have here in CONQUEST: exceptionally beautiful picture of a "luxurious life" with lavish sets. Consider, for instance, the Schonnbrunn scenes or a visually symbolic pearl when the map of Europe is shadowed by the figure of Napoleon. As far as memorable moments are concerned, I most admired the romantic short scene when Napoleon tells Walewska "I love you" - such a well known sentence in cinema, yet presented in a beautiful way: snow falls as if it sealed their words. Among funny moments, the one worth considering is the hilarious conversation between Napoleon and Countess Pelagia Walewska: when she asks him who he is and he tells her "Napoleon", that does not make sense to her at all. I also laughed at the scene when Napoleon learns to dance with Walewska. Among the supporting cast, the performance that I find worthy attention is Dame May Witty's as Laetitia Bonaparte, Napoleon's mother.CONQUEST is a very beautiful film, a classic like many other movies of the time. However, as I have already mentioned, do not treat it as Garbo vehicle or your first Garbo movie for it is not. CONQUEST is the last film Garbo made with Clarence Brown, her last great love story but it is not at all similar to ANNA KARENINA or QUEEN Christina. CONQUEST is foremost an epic, a romance, a picture of sentimental patriotism and a Charles Boyer splendid manifestation of talent. 9/10

I've often thought that those first twenty minutes of Conquest are the most important of the film. When those Cossacks invade the civilized home of Count Walewska, their actions there establish the reason for all that follows in the film. They are one greasy, slovenly, disreputable lot, set against the urbane Henry Stephenson as the Count and his young wife Maria, played by Greta Garbo.After what we see of the Cossacks, no wonder the Poles welcome the armies of Napoleon Bonaparte as liberators, restorers of their country which had been carved up about 40 years earlier by Russia, Prussia, and Austria. And when it seems that Greta Garbo is the best thing the Poles have to offer Charles Boyer, it becomes her patriotic duty, even Stephenson unwillingly goes along with the liaison.But she really loves the Little Corporal as it turns out. They even have a son together. But unfortunately Boyer is about himself first last and always.Maria Walewska was not the first or last of Napoleon's amours. In fact this film ought to be seen back to back with Desiree, a lost love of Bonaparte's from an earlier time. Both of his marriages were for political reasons, Garbo should have known about the first one going in.Conquest is one of the few Garbo films where she is not number one, what holds the film together is Charles Boyer as Napoleon. Boyer captures perfectly both the idealism and ambition that was Bonaparte, he got an Oscar nomination for Best Actor, but lost to Spencer Tracy for Captains Courageous. Not that Garbo's bad, but I can't recall any other film where her leading man overshadowed her.Although Conquest takes quite a few liberties with the historical record, it's still a fine costume drama, one of the best that MGM put out back in its height.

This film reminded me of another MGM costume drama--MARIE ANTOINETTE. Both were late 30s MGM epics with lavish costumes and the full MGM treatment (the typical high-budget music, dialog, pacing, direction, etc.). And, both were pretty boring--at least to me. Now I know these films were well-received at the time and they both starred MGM divas (Norma Shearer in MARIE ANTOINETTE and Greta Garbo in CONQUEST), but didn't change the fact that these were very stagy and unengaging films. To put this in some perspective, I love movies from Hollywoods Golden Age and I am a history teacher and I still was bored to tears by the films. I think it is films like these that got students to really hate history! My advice--watch a documentary about Napoleon or watch a romance but don't combine the two into a static and unappealing film like this.