Warner Brothers were clearly eager to give the 1931 public what it wanted and also consolidate the success of SVENGALI made earlier that year by instantly reuniting the leads from that film – John Barrymore and Marian Marsh – in a quickly rehashed potboiler on similar lines. Barrymore is an embittered puppeteer whose lameness had dashed his dreams of a dancing career but, as fate would have it, is provided with the opportunity of living that glory vicariously through the agile street urchin he saves one day from the clutches of his cruel father (a small role for a pre-fame Boris Karloff). Growing up to be a peerless dancer (played by an uncharismatic Donald Cook) through the ruthless patronage of his foster father, he is ready to give it all up for the love of an innocent girl in the show (Marsh) but, needless to say, Barrymore will not let anything stand in the way of art and his ambitious plans for the prized pupil. Amusing sidekick Charles Butterworth helplessly looks on as Barrymore sadistically convinces dope-addicted choreographer (Luis Alberni) to fire Marsh but Cook overhears their heinous scheme and this causes a rift between impresario and protégé. Years pass but more scheming on Barrymore's part enables the estrangement of the lovers and the rekindling of the working relationship between father and son. Once again, however, fate intervenes with Barrymore eventually getting his just desserts at the hands of the distraught Alberni – on stage during the performance of what was to be Cook's crowning achievement! Admittedly, the plot is much inferior to that of SVENGALI but an unhinged Barrymore is always worth watching, Marsh is typically lovely while Michael Curtiz's expressionistic direction (his first of three notable forays in the genre) and Anton Grot's stylish sets lend the production a touch of class that keeps one watching if not exactly enthralled.
31 Reviews
Interesting variation on the "Svengali" theme...good John Barrymore performance...
Doylenf29 January 2008
In this interesting variation on the "Svengali" theme, JOHN BARRYMORE plays a crippled puppeteer with a club foot, who lives vicariously his dream of becoming a great dancer when he assumes responsibility for a runaway boy (FRANKIE DARRO) escaping the clutches of his cruel father (BORIS KARLOFF), well disguised with a thick Russian accent and wig that practically makes his features invisible.
Michael Curtiz has directed with enormous help from Anton Grot's well designed sets and a generous use of background music at a time when it was rare for most films to feature so much music on the soundtrack. Of course, dealing with theatrical productions, this was totally necessary. In many ways, the film is way ahead of its time. Not only are the sets on a grand scale, but the B&W photography is richly detailed and Barrymore gives one of his most intense performances as the Svengali-like puppet master who finds he can't control his discovery once love enters the picture.
Doll-faced MARIAN MARSH makes a lovely sort of "Trilby" character but DONALD COOK looks a bit uncomfortable in the role of Fedor, the dancer. The story is a little cumbersome in getting started, but once the plot starts spinning into high gear the suspense mounts and Curtiz stages all of the scenes involving theatrical productions in a manner that puts the film into the A-film category.
Worth seeing for Barrymore's fascinating performance, Russian accent and all, and remarkable in that "the talkies" were only four years old when the film was made and the technical advances are obvious.
Michael Curtiz has directed with enormous help from Anton Grot's well designed sets and a generous use of background music at a time when it was rare for most films to feature so much music on the soundtrack. Of course, dealing with theatrical productions, this was totally necessary. In many ways, the film is way ahead of its time. Not only are the sets on a grand scale, but the B&W photography is richly detailed and Barrymore gives one of his most intense performances as the Svengali-like puppet master who finds he can't control his discovery once love enters the picture.
Doll-faced MARIAN MARSH makes a lovely sort of "Trilby" character but DONALD COOK looks a bit uncomfortable in the role of Fedor, the dancer. The story is a little cumbersome in getting started, but once the plot starts spinning into high gear the suspense mounts and Curtiz stages all of the scenes involving theatrical productions in a manner that puts the film into the A-film category.
Worth seeing for Barrymore's fascinating performance, Russian accent and all, and remarkable in that "the talkies" were only four years old when the film was made and the technical advances are obvious.
Lurid, Svengali-esque tale from Warner Brothers and director Michael Curtiz.
AlsExGal29 April 2023
John Barrymore stars as Vladimar Tsarakov, a crippled dance enthusiast who runs a traveling marionette show with his partner Karimsky (Charles Butterworth). After a show in Central Europe, they notice a young boy (Frankie Darro) being chased by his abusive father, with the boy displaying strength and grace of movement. Tsarakov smuggles the child away, and raises him to adulthood. Named Fedor (Donald Cook), the young man has become perhaps the greatest name in ballet, but his life is completely dominated by Tsarakov, who does everything in his power to make sure the young man stays focused, even if it means chasing away his new beloved Nana (Marian Marsh). Also featuring Boris Karloff.
Barrymore gets to go wild-eyed and over-the-top, while Cook makes for a leaden leading man. Butterworth's comic relief is amusing but seems out of place. Karloff has a small, unbilled role as the young Fedor's abusive father. I liked how Tsarakov maintains control over manic director Alberni by plying him with cocaine.
Barrymore gets to go wild-eyed and over-the-top, while Cook makes for a leaden leading man. Butterworth's comic relief is amusing but seems out of place. Karloff has a small, unbilled role as the young Fedor's abusive father. I liked how Tsarakov maintains control over manic director Alberni by plying him with cocaine.
Another Bizarre great from Barrymore
kartrabo28 May 2000
In another of John Barrymore's bizarre characterizations the great actor portrays a club-footed itinerant puppeteer who rescues an abused boy from vile existence,recognizes the lad's incredible of agility and footwork and begins to train the youngster to be a "new" Nijinsky.Years go by,the boy reaches manhood,and Barrymore the impresario of a successful ballet company.But when the ballet dancer begins to have ideas of his own,falls in love with pretty Marian Marsh,Barrymore,consumed with madness and jealousy attempts to manipulate their lives leading to shocking results. This extraordinary film oscillates between intriguing drama and moments of near horror with Barrymore in masterly control of his human puppets. Boris Karloff is the boy's monstrous father and Luis Alberni stands out as the drug-addicted ballet director.Magnificent direction by Michael Curtiz
Barrymore strong in a dark, twisted role
gbill-7487718 September 2018
This film feels a little like a Tod Browning production, with John Barrymore in the role of a dark, twisted man that we could imagine Lon Chaney playing for Browning, but it's actually directed by Michael Curtiz. Barrymore leads a ballet troupe and jealously guards his young protégé (Donald Cook), who he's raised from a boy since essentially stealing him from his abusive peasant father (Boris Karloff, briefly). He wants to use him to live out his own frustrated dreams of being a great dancer. He has no problem supplying the young man with lovers from the troupe, but doesn't want him to form any attachments, for fear it will impact his artistic abilities, and also of course because he's afraid of losing control. Enter Marian Marsh, a sweet young dancer who he falls in love with, thus setting up the central conflict in the film.
When he's not busy trying to control the young man, Barrymore is up to no good elsewhere. He supplies drugs to his conductor (Luis Alberni), who is desperately addicted. He makes it clear to young ballerinas (Mae Madison and later Carmel Myers) that if they want to get ahead, they need to "see him" in his private office. He also berates his secretary (Charles Butterworth, who provides some comic relief with his bumbling), responding to one of his ideas by saying "It's incredible. It's unbelievable... that there should be any human being living who is such a stupid ass." Barrymore is excellent throughout the film and turns in a performance that dominates, though Cook and Marsh are reasonably good as well. The brief segments of ballet scenes, often in practice, show realistic and solid dancing.
The film starts strong, but loses a little bit of its steam in the second half, and not completely living up to its potential. The direction from Curtiz is great, with creative shot angles and editing, but the plot is a little simple. It's hard to believe I'd say that a film with open drug use, predatory sexual behavior, and an axe murder wouldn't be dark enough, and yet, somehow I wanted more. Maybe I've been watching too many pre-code movies lately.
When he's not busy trying to control the young man, Barrymore is up to no good elsewhere. He supplies drugs to his conductor (Luis Alberni), who is desperately addicted. He makes it clear to young ballerinas (Mae Madison and later Carmel Myers) that if they want to get ahead, they need to "see him" in his private office. He also berates his secretary (Charles Butterworth, who provides some comic relief with his bumbling), responding to one of his ideas by saying "It's incredible. It's unbelievable... that there should be any human being living who is such a stupid ass." Barrymore is excellent throughout the film and turns in a performance that dominates, though Cook and Marsh are reasonably good as well. The brief segments of ballet scenes, often in practice, show realistic and solid dancing.
The film starts strong, but loses a little bit of its steam in the second half, and not completely living up to its potential. The direction from Curtiz is great, with creative shot angles and editing, but the plot is a little simple. It's hard to believe I'd say that a film with open drug use, predatory sexual behavior, and an axe murder wouldn't be dark enough, and yet, somehow I wanted more. Maybe I've been watching too many pre-code movies lately.
A real puppet master
bkoganbing21 January 2015
The Mad Genius is far from the best of John Barrymore's sound films. But it certainly provides a character for him to go full blast in terms of style and yet not seem overacted. Barrymore's plays a cripple who wanted to be a great ballet dancer, but only is confined to doing puppet shows with his sidekick Charles Butterworth.
One day he and Butterworth rescue young Frankie Darro from a cruel father Boris Karloff. Barrymore sees in young Darro the promise and form of the dancer he wanted to be. This was before the Code so the homoerotic ideas in the scene are exploited to the max.
Fast forward a dozen years and Darro is now Donald Cook at the top of his game as a ballet dancer, a veritable Nijinsky. He's also got eyes for pretty Marian Marsh, but so has Barrymore.
Barrymore's years of training in the puppet theater have stood him in good stead as he's now a real puppet master, scheming and manipulating people to his will. His scene with Luis Alberni who is manager of the company to get him to do something he doesn't want to do is unforgettable. I won't reveal what he has over him, but this also was a subject later banned by the Code.
Not the best of Barrymore's work, but it should provide a real introduction to his acting. And he's given great support by the ensemble Warner Brothers and director Michael Curtiz gave him.
One day he and Butterworth rescue young Frankie Darro from a cruel father Boris Karloff. Barrymore sees in young Darro the promise and form of the dancer he wanted to be. This was before the Code so the homoerotic ideas in the scene are exploited to the max.
Fast forward a dozen years and Darro is now Donald Cook at the top of his game as a ballet dancer, a veritable Nijinsky. He's also got eyes for pretty Marian Marsh, but so has Barrymore.
Barrymore's years of training in the puppet theater have stood him in good stead as he's now a real puppet master, scheming and manipulating people to his will. His scene with Luis Alberni who is manager of the company to get him to do something he doesn't want to do is unforgettable. I won't reveal what he has over him, but this also was a subject later banned by the Code.
Not the best of Barrymore's work, but it should provide a real introduction to his acting. And he's given great support by the ensemble Warner Brothers and director Michael Curtiz gave him.
Barrymore proves why he was a legend
dbborroughs29 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
John Barrymmore plays a puppeteer who takes in a small boy who grows to be a great dancer. Things get dicey when the boy's eye strays from dancing toward one girl in particular.
Intrguing pre-code film that, at times, has Barrymore giving a great performance. Watch his early scenes and you'll see just how good he was. During bits later in the film he seems to be phoning it in but he's still a joy to behold. The movie itself is a potboiler in the Svengali mode, but it's entertaining. I love the ballet sets which are decidedly of the time the film was made.
Worth a peak.
Intrguing pre-code film that, at times, has Barrymore giving a great performance. Watch his early scenes and you'll see just how good he was. During bits later in the film he seems to be phoning it in but he's still a joy to behold. The movie itself is a potboiler in the Svengali mode, but it's entertaining. I love the ballet sets which are decidedly of the time the film was made.
Worth a peak.
barrymore & butterworth... its okay.
ksf-223 March 2018
Stars John Barrymore and Charles Butterworth as a team of performing puppeteers. They see a man whipping a child, and come to his rescue. and yes, that's the monster-master Boris Karloff, as the boy's terrible father we see right at the opening. Some elaborately staged scenes, with large casts of uncredited roles, as they choreograph dance numbers on stage. Butterworth had a dry, sarcastic, under-stated humor, and had a career in Broadway before entering film. Has an interesting bio here on imdb... died quite young in a car crash. While wikipedia.org states it was an accident, imdb claims it may be been intentional. The story shows a russian cast putting together a show in berlin. Trials, tribulations, ups, downs, love triangles. Lots of talk... proving that this started out as a play. It's okay. Directed by Michael Curtiz, who had started out in the silent films, as had Barrymore and Karloff. Curtiz' best known work was probably the oscar winning Casablanca in 1944 !
The Follow - Up To SVENGALI
theowinthrop29 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
When Michael Curtiz directed this odd ballet and horror film he presumably had the recent success of the John Barrymore - Marian Marsh film SVENGALI (from George Du Maurier's TRILBY) in mind. That story was based on a novel wherein a great singer is actually controlled (by hypnosis) by her impresario. Although Svengali's character in the novel was quite obnoxious, the film version softened it to make one realize he was in control of Trilby but loved her and could not be certain if she loved him back. In the end it turned out she did. The story of THE MAD GENIUS was similar - Donald Cook is a brilliant ballet dancer who was trained by impresario Barrymore, and the latter is determined to get his protégé the career he deserves - by all means necessary. This means derailing anything or anyone who Barrymore concludes will prevent this. Marsh is a female member of the ballet company that Cook is falling for, and Barrymore is willing to push her out of the company, and even turn her into a wealthy nobleman's mistress to keep Cook in line.
The film actually works. In the background was a misunderstanding of the relationship between Diaghilev and Nijinski (who many thought was that impresario's puppet). Here one realizes Barrymore is a man who is so hung up on the success of his adopted son that he does not stop even while he realizes he is doing harm to so many others. To perfect the boy's dancing (and the company's) he is willing to be the drug supplier to dance master Luis Alberni (one of the first examples of cocaine use in movies). When not pimping for his wealthy aristocratic backer, he runs a tight ship on all the dancers and his factotum associate Charles Butterworth. But he is human. One of the funniest aspects of the film is how Barrymore picks up his own sexual partners from starry eyed young woman coming in to join the ballet company. He always uses the same line with them, and even the same hour the next day to visit his office (three o'clock). Butterworth adds his bit too, as he tries constantly to interest Barrymore or anyone in a really bad ballet he's written (Barrymore, who is happy and drunk when Butterworth finally corners him, slowly sobers up when hearing this idiotic story line, and ends up saying he never realized what an ass Butterworth really was).
Finally there is a cameo that I find fascinating. This is the film wherein Boris Karloff (for about one minute) shares screen time with John Barrymore. They never did so again.
The film actually works. In the background was a misunderstanding of the relationship between Diaghilev and Nijinski (who many thought was that impresario's puppet). Here one realizes Barrymore is a man who is so hung up on the success of his adopted son that he does not stop even while he realizes he is doing harm to so many others. To perfect the boy's dancing (and the company's) he is willing to be the drug supplier to dance master Luis Alberni (one of the first examples of cocaine use in movies). When not pimping for his wealthy aristocratic backer, he runs a tight ship on all the dancers and his factotum associate Charles Butterworth. But he is human. One of the funniest aspects of the film is how Barrymore picks up his own sexual partners from starry eyed young woman coming in to join the ballet company. He always uses the same line with them, and even the same hour the next day to visit his office (three o'clock). Butterworth adds his bit too, as he tries constantly to interest Barrymore or anyone in a really bad ballet he's written (Barrymore, who is happy and drunk when Butterworth finally corners him, slowly sobers up when hearing this idiotic story line, and ends up saying he never realized what an ass Butterworth really was).
Finally there is a cameo that I find fascinating. This is the film wherein Boris Karloff (for about one minute) shares screen time with John Barrymore. They never did so again.
Different Take on the Mad Genius Idea and the Darkness of Characters
Reviews_of_the_Dead13 May 2021
Here is another movie that I never heard of until I was looking through Letterboxd for all of the horror movies released in the year of 1931. This one intrigued me when I saw that it starred John Barrymore as well as Marian Marsh, as they starred together in another horror film from this year of Svengali. So aside from that information, I came into this one blind with just having read the synopsis right before starting it. That synopsis is a crippled man finds a boy and vows to make him a great dancer.
The prologue here is Central Europe and 15 years in the past. Vladimar Ivan Tasarakov (Barrymore) is a puppeteer and he works with Karimsky (Charles Butterworth). He's quite mean to him as well. Watching them is a boy by the name of Fedor (Frankie Darro) as they practice. Their puppet show is part of a traveling group. They're interrupted when Fedor's father shows up, scolding and whipping him. His father is played by an uncredited role of Boris Karloff. Fedor gets away and Ivan is impressed with how graceful he is. He ends up hiding the boy and when they leave, he comes with them.
We then shift to the present in Berlin. Ivan's mother was a famous Russian ballet dancer, but he was born crippled, making him unable to dance. This upset her and she ended up leaving him while he was a child. This is quite scarring. Ivan saw the potential in Fedor (Donald Cook) and trained him to be the best. He is now one of the greatest dancers in Europe. Fedor is interested in Nana Carlova (Marsh). Ivan is fine with them being together as long as Fedor doesn't fall in love. He needs his release, but falling for her will ruin his career according to Ivan. He even rebuffs the advances of Count Robert Renaud (André Luguet) who is interesting in Nana, wanting to ensure that Fedor is always happy.
When Ivan learns that his prized pupil has fallen for Nana, he wants her to leave the production and marry Count Renaud though. He believes love will make people do bad things, at least to what he wants. This upsets Fedor who threatens to quit dancing if she is sent away. He has to make a decision, leave the only thing he knows how to do for the love of his life where he will be black-balled by his father figure or play pawn to this mastermind in Ivan.
That is where I'm going to leave my recap as that is really the main story of this movie. There are some deep seeded things with characters under this and that is where I'm going to start. The character of Ivan is interesting. He always wanted to be a dancer and part of this is the fact that his mother was bothered by his affliction. He's been harboring that and sees his chance to live through Fedor. Ivan's mother abandoning him is bad and kidnapping Fedor is as well. Aside from that, wanting to give Fedor a good life is a good thing. It is when he is manipulating those around him to continue to be successful is where this becomes an issue.
Seeing the title of this movie, I figured this would be a mad scientist film. I was pleasantly surprised that we are dealing with someone being very intelligent, but in a different sort of way. Ivan manipulates everyone he encounters to an extent. Nana he tries to send away multiple times. He is mean to Karimsky and bosses him around. Fedor is a character he doesn't necessarily do anything toward directly, but tries to remove obstacles without his knowledge. Sergei Bankieff (Luis Alberini) is the stage manager for his productions and he actually uses drugs to control him. I'm assuming it is opium from the paper it is kept in. He also lies to Sonya Preskoya (Carmel Myers) and Olga Chekova (Mae Madison), who are both dancers that want to be famous. There is also a bit with Count Renaud as well. It is interesting how his conduct leads to his downfall in the end.
Since there isn't much to the story and more to the interactions, I'll go to the acting next. Barrymore is really good as Ivan. I like how he plays the character and I believe he could be this mastermind. Marsh is cute and I feel bad for what she has to decide to do for the betterment of Fedor's life. Butterworth adds some levity. I feel bad for him though. Cook is solid as Fedor who has people being used around him to influence his decisions. I'd say from there that Alberini, Myers, Luguet and the rest round this out for what was needed.
Then really the last thing to bring up here would be the cinematography, effects and the musical selections. I would say that the cinematography is fine. We are getting some interesting looks at the ballet as they are rehearsing. I'm glad they didn't focus on this too much though. It would have felt like filler if they did. This really isn't a movie that has much in the way of effects and the soundtrack also fits for what was needed. It just doesn't necessarily stand out to me.
In conclusion here, this is going to be a bit shorter of a review, but that is mostly due to a simple story. That isn't to say it is bad though. This movie is really focused on the acting which I think is good across the board. It is interesting to see this concept of a mad genius like Ivan who is living through his protégé and seeing what he does to keep this golden goose working for him. I'd say that the technique here of filmmaking is fine. This is quite light in the horror elements, but it makes sense for the era. I would say though that this is movie is over average for me. It is lacking though to go any higher than that personally.
The prologue here is Central Europe and 15 years in the past. Vladimar Ivan Tasarakov (Barrymore) is a puppeteer and he works with Karimsky (Charles Butterworth). He's quite mean to him as well. Watching them is a boy by the name of Fedor (Frankie Darro) as they practice. Their puppet show is part of a traveling group. They're interrupted when Fedor's father shows up, scolding and whipping him. His father is played by an uncredited role of Boris Karloff. Fedor gets away and Ivan is impressed with how graceful he is. He ends up hiding the boy and when they leave, he comes with them.
We then shift to the present in Berlin. Ivan's mother was a famous Russian ballet dancer, but he was born crippled, making him unable to dance. This upset her and she ended up leaving him while he was a child. This is quite scarring. Ivan saw the potential in Fedor (Donald Cook) and trained him to be the best. He is now one of the greatest dancers in Europe. Fedor is interested in Nana Carlova (Marsh). Ivan is fine with them being together as long as Fedor doesn't fall in love. He needs his release, but falling for her will ruin his career according to Ivan. He even rebuffs the advances of Count Robert Renaud (André Luguet) who is interesting in Nana, wanting to ensure that Fedor is always happy.
When Ivan learns that his prized pupil has fallen for Nana, he wants her to leave the production and marry Count Renaud though. He believes love will make people do bad things, at least to what he wants. This upsets Fedor who threatens to quit dancing if she is sent away. He has to make a decision, leave the only thing he knows how to do for the love of his life where he will be black-balled by his father figure or play pawn to this mastermind in Ivan.
That is where I'm going to leave my recap as that is really the main story of this movie. There are some deep seeded things with characters under this and that is where I'm going to start. The character of Ivan is interesting. He always wanted to be a dancer and part of this is the fact that his mother was bothered by his affliction. He's been harboring that and sees his chance to live through Fedor. Ivan's mother abandoning him is bad and kidnapping Fedor is as well. Aside from that, wanting to give Fedor a good life is a good thing. It is when he is manipulating those around him to continue to be successful is where this becomes an issue.
Seeing the title of this movie, I figured this would be a mad scientist film. I was pleasantly surprised that we are dealing with someone being very intelligent, but in a different sort of way. Ivan manipulates everyone he encounters to an extent. Nana he tries to send away multiple times. He is mean to Karimsky and bosses him around. Fedor is a character he doesn't necessarily do anything toward directly, but tries to remove obstacles without his knowledge. Sergei Bankieff (Luis Alberini) is the stage manager for his productions and he actually uses drugs to control him. I'm assuming it is opium from the paper it is kept in. He also lies to Sonya Preskoya (Carmel Myers) and Olga Chekova (Mae Madison), who are both dancers that want to be famous. There is also a bit with Count Renaud as well. It is interesting how his conduct leads to his downfall in the end.
Since there isn't much to the story and more to the interactions, I'll go to the acting next. Barrymore is really good as Ivan. I like how he plays the character and I believe he could be this mastermind. Marsh is cute and I feel bad for what she has to decide to do for the betterment of Fedor's life. Butterworth adds some levity. I feel bad for him though. Cook is solid as Fedor who has people being used around him to influence his decisions. I'd say from there that Alberini, Myers, Luguet and the rest round this out for what was needed.
Then really the last thing to bring up here would be the cinematography, effects and the musical selections. I would say that the cinematography is fine. We are getting some interesting looks at the ballet as they are rehearsing. I'm glad they didn't focus on this too much though. It would have felt like filler if they did. This really isn't a movie that has much in the way of effects and the soundtrack also fits for what was needed. It just doesn't necessarily stand out to me.
In conclusion here, this is going to be a bit shorter of a review, but that is mostly due to a simple story. That isn't to say it is bad though. This movie is really focused on the acting which I think is good across the board. It is interesting to see this concept of a mad genius like Ivan who is living through his protégé and seeing what he does to keep this golden goose working for him. I'd say that the technique here of filmmaking is fine. This is quite light in the horror elements, but it makes sense for the era. I would say though that this is movie is over average for me. It is lacking though to go any higher than that personally.
An episode of ANGEL did this story better
1930s_Time_Machine27 July 2023
Firstly, this is nothing like SVENGALI. Apart from the same cast and art director, this is completely different. Secondly it's really rather dull.
Besides a cracking episode of ANGEL (Waiting in the Wings), the most similar story to this is the section in the 1940 version of WATERLOO BRIDGE where Vivienne Leigh is a struggling ballerina bullied by Mdm. Olga. Here John Barrymore does a pretty decent job of playing the role Mara Ouspenskaya did as the tyrannical principal of a ballet troupe. The problem is that in WATERLOO BRIDGE that was a ten minute section of the film - in this, that's all the film is. There's just not enough story to fill out an hour and a half.
Crippled John Barrymore vicariously lives out his own dream of being a great dancer through a young man he discovers. He is so manically driven that he won't let anything, including this dancer falling in love, deviate him from his plan for him to be the world's greatest ballet dancer. If this young dancer or the girl he loves were in any way interesting characters this might itself be an interesting film but it transpires that they are Hollywood's dullest couple. You simply couldn't care less about them so just want this tedium to end (possibly to then go and search out that old episode of ANGEL?)
It's no surprise that this picture performed so badly at the box office. It was rushed into production following the moderate success of SVENGALI a few months earlier and you can tell it's a rush job. Warners just wanted to cash in by making something which looked, as least in terms of visuals, the same. Whereas SVENGALI had an annoyingly stupid story with lazy direction, this was directed a little better but didn't even have a story.
Besides a cracking episode of ANGEL (Waiting in the Wings), the most similar story to this is the section in the 1940 version of WATERLOO BRIDGE where Vivienne Leigh is a struggling ballerina bullied by Mdm. Olga. Here John Barrymore does a pretty decent job of playing the role Mara Ouspenskaya did as the tyrannical principal of a ballet troupe. The problem is that in WATERLOO BRIDGE that was a ten minute section of the film - in this, that's all the film is. There's just not enough story to fill out an hour and a half.
Crippled John Barrymore vicariously lives out his own dream of being a great dancer through a young man he discovers. He is so manically driven that he won't let anything, including this dancer falling in love, deviate him from his plan for him to be the world's greatest ballet dancer. If this young dancer or the girl he loves were in any way interesting characters this might itself be an interesting film but it transpires that they are Hollywood's dullest couple. You simply couldn't care less about them so just want this tedium to end (possibly to then go and search out that old episode of ANGEL?)
It's no surprise that this picture performed so badly at the box office. It was rushed into production following the moderate success of SVENGALI a few months earlier and you can tell it's a rush job. Warners just wanted to cash in by making something which looked, as least in terms of visuals, the same. Whereas SVENGALI had an annoyingly stupid story with lazy direction, this was directed a little better but didn't even have a story.
"The Mad Genius"
MarcoAntonio15 August 2005
I've always liked the John Barrymore/Marian Marsh film "Svengali" and have always wanted to see Warner Brothers' re-teaming of the two in "The Mad Genius". Thankfully, Ted Turner seems to own it and shows a very nice print of it on TCM. I've got it recorded and I like to watch it now and again. Although it's not a favorite of mine like "Svengali" is, "The Mad Genius" is still a film that I enjoy. Tsarakov (Barrymore) rescues a small boy from his abusive father (Boris Karloff). As the years pass the boy, Fedor (Donald Cook), grows up to become a seasoned ballet dancer and Tsarakov is the ballets impresario. Tsarakov pampers every move in Fedor's life; getting him leads in ballets and encouraging him to have a steady supply of young women lovers. However, Fedor loves Nana (Marian Marsh) and Tsarakov, seeing this as the ruination of Fedor's career, forces Nana to take up with Count Renaud (André Luget), a good-natured, understanding man. Will Fedor and Nana reunite? What will happen to Tsarkov? Watch "The Mad Genius" and you'll find out. You may marvel at the films casual pre-code approach to sex. Very good film, but not as charming as the classic "Svengali".
Puppets on a string
guswhovian19 May 2020
Warning: Spoilers
A crippled puppeteer (John Barrymore) tries to control the life of of a dancer (Donald Cook) he discovered and trained.
A follow up to his earlier 1931 film Svengali, The Mad Genius more than lives up to its title. It's absurdly pre-code: there's drug use, swearing, prostitution and a brutal axe murder. Barrymore is fantastic; he bugs his eyes out and has an absurd Russian accent (he's the only cast member to try an accent).
Charles Butterworth provides good comic relief, and Luis Alberni is good as the drug-addled stage choreographer. Mariah Marsh and Donald Cook are a bit wooden as the co-leads.
Michael Curtiz's direction is excellent. There's several nice directorial choices, such as showing the aforementioned axe murder only in shadow. Boris Karloff appears in an uncredited role in the beginning.
Don't miss this one. First time viewing. 3.5/5
A follow up to his earlier 1931 film Svengali, The Mad Genius more than lives up to its title. It's absurdly pre-code: there's drug use, swearing, prostitution and a brutal axe murder. Barrymore is fantastic; he bugs his eyes out and has an absurd Russian accent (he's the only cast member to try an accent).
Charles Butterworth provides good comic relief, and Luis Alberni is good as the drug-addled stage choreographer. Mariah Marsh and Donald Cook are a bit wooden as the co-leads.
Michael Curtiz's direction is excellent. There's several nice directorial choices, such as showing the aforementioned axe murder only in shadow. Boris Karloff appears in an uncredited role in the beginning.
Don't miss this one. First time viewing. 3.5/5
John Barrymore's final film for "Warner Bros."
alexanderdavies-9938229 August 2017
John Barrymore was easily the most suitable actor for film, in comparison with his older brother and sister. He knew when it was right to town down the theatrical approach and when to be a bit larger-than-life. "The Mad Genius" was Barrymore's final film for "Warner Bros." He was paid the rather handsome sum of about $70,000 a film and gave some fine performances. "The Mad Genius" is a remake of a previous film for the studio, "Svengali." The former movie is far better than this inferior remake. The above film suffers from a very poor plot, leaden pacing and disappointing dialogue. Only the performance of John Barrymore and the direction from Michael Curtiz save this film. Boris Karloff is completely wasted in a brief appearance at the beginning of the film. "The Mad Genius" has no imagination or much in the way of sustaining the viewer's interest.
The story of the story
benoit-330 September 2003
This film is an ideal companion piece to Barrymore's other mad manipulator "Svengali". It is just as eerie but unfortunately all but unavailable on the video market. I saw it one time on the late show and it stayed with me all my life. It is really an exaggeration of the relationship between impresario Diaghilev and his protégé Nijinski but it also inspired (is there a better word?) the Powell-Pressburger ballet epic "The Red Shoes". Funny how one story gets around...
BORIS KARLOFF IS AN ABUSIVE PARENT!
whpratt121 March 2003
Taped this picture on the late-late-late movie channel on the NY TV stations and have never seen it again. John Barrymore(Tsarakov) plays a crippled, half-mad puppeteer, who yearns to dance. Upon saving the young boy Fedor(Frankie Darro) from his foster father's (Boris Karloff) abuse, he recognizes the youth's ability and hopes to make him a famous dancer. Karloff's role was very minor, and he did not reappear after the opening sequence. There was a mention of Frankenstein in the script where it refers about a Golem fashioned from mud and given a human soul and is asked by Tsarakov " Frankenstein's man? John Barrymore dominates the entire screen, but they still need Karloff to bring the 193l audiences into the movie houses.
Sad to say, Barrymore is a bit of a bore!
JohnHowardReid30 November 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I quite enjoyed this one when I first saw it many years ago, but it doesn't stand up well. Barrymore is the main problem. His is a ranting, self-glorifying, drown out everyone else in the cast performance, which, to my surprise, director Mike Curtiz indulges rather than trying to keep a lid on it. And I don't know that it was a good idea of the screenwriters not only to keep so much of the moribund stage play in the action, thus slowing it down, and then pandering Barrymore with long speeches, and thus slowing things down even further. Director Mike Curtiz seems to be in awe of Barrymore and favor him with eye- rolling close-ups and long takes at the expense of other members of the cast, especially Marian Marsh. In fact some of our favorite people have very little footage, including Boris Karloff who makes a significant entrance and then totally disappears. We do see a lot of Donald Cook, however, despite the fact that he is, at best, a rather stodgy, humdrum actor with – at least in this movie – little in the way of charisma. I'm not surprised the movie failed dismally at the box office. Sometimes, not often, mind you, audiences showed good taste! This movie is available on very good Warner Brothers DVD, but with no extras, alas!
John Barrymore and Boris Karloff
kevinolzak30 March 2021
1931's "The Mad Genius" was a follow up to John Barrymore's box office success "Svengali," again paired with porcelain beauty Marian Marsh, no longer the crazed mesmerist whose obsession with the woman he loves leads him to the fatal deception that Trilby loves him in return (only by hypnosis does she obey his bidding). This time, The Great Profile is again evident as embittered puppeteer Ivan Tsarakov, working in tandem with partner Karimsky (Charles Butterworth), remembering the ballerina mother who disowned her son at an early age due to his club foot yet still yearns for the career of a dancer, finding just the right lad in Fedor, whose abusive father (Boris Karloff) hasn't the ghost of a chance to catch his elusive quarry. Spiriting the youngster away to essentially live as his own offspring, Tsarakov waxes poetic about The Golem, Homunculi, and even (ironically, with Karloff having made his exit) Frankenstein, fully intent to make Fedor the greatest dancer who ever lived, provided he avoid the annoying pitfalls of falling in love. The now adult Fedor (Donald Cook) happens to have done just that with leading lady Nana Carlova (Marian Marsh), despite every attempt by Tsarakov to find other playmates to seduce his foster son. Genuine pre-Code shocks are generated by Luis Alberni's feverish role as dance instructor Sergei Bankieff, a hopeless addict forced to terminate Nana's employment rather than risk cold turkey for his affliction, only for Fedor to learn the truth and depart with her for love in Paris. Tsarakov does not give up so easily, maintaining an iron clad contract to prevent Fedor from earning steady employment, then convincing a tearful Nana to leave for Berlin with the smitten Count Renaud (Andre Luguet) to ensure Fedor's return to the fold. John Barrymore again relishes every little nuance for humor to make his reprehensible character palatable and highly entertaining, well matched with Butterworth's low key enquiries about being repeatedly fired when not trying to foist off a self penned opera that no one cares to hear. Donald Cook hasn't the charisma for his role, all wrong for a dancer and looking very silly in his final costume, but Marian Marsh proves herself a fine actress who makes every line believable; when Tsarakov phones the amorous Count with news that she intends to join him on his return to Berlin, her tears are truly heartbreaking. How intriguing that Boris Karloff and Frankenstein should be joined only a few moments apart, in and out rather quickly after 2 minutes on screen during the opening reel, cast for his eagerness by director Michael Curtiz despite not looking the least bit Russian as indicated by his last name. Barrymore's soliloquy about Fedor offering him the opportunity to create 'a being' also predates the James Whale classic, which would not begin shooting for at least two months after this picture's completion. Marian Marsh had previously worked with a deceptive Boris in the Warners classic "Five Star Final," and would be his leading lady by 1935's Columbia entry "The Black Room." Unbilled Mae Madison plays one of the chorus girls required to entice Fedor, she too had already worked with Karloff in "Smart Money," he as a pimp eager to get into the big game with Edward G. Robinson, she one of his girls who wangles $100 out of an agitated Robinson to use against him.
Michael Curtiz Always Draws Me
Hitchcoc14 February 2022
This film features John Barrymore as a monomaniacal angel of destruction. When he sees a young boy exhibiting great grace and dexterity, chased and beaten by a horrible father (Boris Karloff) he rescues him. As a two bit puppeteer he decides to set the boy on stage as a dancer (and it works). But Barrymore has no guile or gentleness. He doesn't believe an artist can be successful with distraction. The boy, now a man, falls for a pretty ballerina and his surrogate father destroys the relationship. But the acting is bad and the kid doesn't seem to have much dramatic talent, although the film promotes him as great. They should have cast an actual dancer. It's kind of silly at times but certainly interesting.
"I Will Make Him the Greatest Dancer of All Time"!!!
kidboots19 September 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was so obviously an attempt by Warners to cash in on John Barrymore's earlier "Svengali", they even reunited a lot of the cast - Barrymore, Marian Marsh, Carmel Myers and Luis Alberni. This movie was to ballet what "Svengali" was to opera, purportedly based on the relationship between Diaghilev and Nijinsky, although in reality Nijinsky had already created a stir in the ballet world before he met Diaghilev.
John Barrymore gets a chance to play another "warped" genius and his performance dominates the film, without him it would be just a forgettable romance played out against a ballet background. This time he is a crippled puppeteer who, as a child, was rejected by his ballerina mother because of his clubfoot. Since then he has crushed his dreams and now runs a traveling marionette circus. When he gives shelter to a village boy, Fedor, (Frankie Darro) who is hiding from his cruel father (Boris Karloff), Tsarakov (Barrymore) vows "I will make him the greatest dancer of all time"!!! and within 15 years, Fedor (now played by Donald Cook) has taken the ballet world by storm. You definitely don't see Cook perform many intricate steps but he handles the dramatic part of the story okay. Tsarakov is now manager of a "Ballet Russe" (shades of Diaghilev) but behind his kindly uncle demeanor is an evil tyrant who manipulates people through their own weaknesses.
Fedor is in love with the beautiful Nana (Marsh) but that does not fit in with Tsarakov's plans and he plots to have Nana expelled from the company. He forges a letter and forces drug addicted choreographer Bankieff (Luis Alberni) to sign - or he will withhold the drugs that he knows Bankieff craves. His plan backfires however and Fedor and Nana run away together, Fedor getting a job in a seedy cafe (a rare chance to hear Cole Porter's "You've Got That Thing") and sinking into a depression when he realises that ballet is in his blood. There is an interesting plot development when Fedor starts to exhibit the same characterizations as Tsarakov, in his voice and speech but apart from a couple of characters remarking on it, it doesn't go anywhere. It all ends in a completely melodramatic way that would have pleased Barrymore no end.
In a 1985 Films in Review article, Marian Marsh recalled the happy memories she had of working with Barrymore. He was enjoying a period of great calm, he was happily married to Dolores Costello, he wasn't drinking (much) and his wife and little daughter "Dee Dee" often visited him on the set. Miss Marsh said that far from being "the Great Actor" he was very kind to her and helped her in her craft.
John Barrymore gets a chance to play another "warped" genius and his performance dominates the film, without him it would be just a forgettable romance played out against a ballet background. This time he is a crippled puppeteer who, as a child, was rejected by his ballerina mother because of his clubfoot. Since then he has crushed his dreams and now runs a traveling marionette circus. When he gives shelter to a village boy, Fedor, (Frankie Darro) who is hiding from his cruel father (Boris Karloff), Tsarakov (Barrymore) vows "I will make him the greatest dancer of all time"!!! and within 15 years, Fedor (now played by Donald Cook) has taken the ballet world by storm. You definitely don't see Cook perform many intricate steps but he handles the dramatic part of the story okay. Tsarakov is now manager of a "Ballet Russe" (shades of Diaghilev) but behind his kindly uncle demeanor is an evil tyrant who manipulates people through their own weaknesses.
Fedor is in love with the beautiful Nana (Marsh) but that does not fit in with Tsarakov's plans and he plots to have Nana expelled from the company. He forges a letter and forces drug addicted choreographer Bankieff (Luis Alberni) to sign - or he will withhold the drugs that he knows Bankieff craves. His plan backfires however and Fedor and Nana run away together, Fedor getting a job in a seedy cafe (a rare chance to hear Cole Porter's "You've Got That Thing") and sinking into a depression when he realises that ballet is in his blood. There is an interesting plot development when Fedor starts to exhibit the same characterizations as Tsarakov, in his voice and speech but apart from a couple of characters remarking on it, it doesn't go anywhere. It all ends in a completely melodramatic way that would have pleased Barrymore no end.
In a 1985 Films in Review article, Marian Marsh recalled the happy memories she had of working with Barrymore. He was enjoying a period of great calm, he was happily married to Dolores Costello, he wasn't drinking (much) and his wife and little daughter "Dee Dee" often visited him on the set. Miss Marsh said that far from being "the Great Actor" he was very kind to her and helped her in her craft.
Light Weight "Svengali"
view_and_review8 February 2024
Warning: Spoilers
I'm sure you know, or have heard of, those parents who live vicariously through their children. They could be athletes who had their careers cut short due to injury, actors who never made it big, or simply a parent who has big dreams for their children in some other profession. Vladimar Ivan Tsarakov (John Barrymore) had such dreams for his adopted son, Fedor Ivanoff (Donald Cook).
Vladimar was born with a lame leg therefore he could never become the dancer he desired to be. Instead he made wooden dummies and made them dance by pulling the right strings. When he saw a young Fedor running away from his abusive father/guardian/boss he saw in Fedor the dancer he always pined to be.
Vladimar poured his heart, soul, ambitions, and obsession into Fedor and Fedor accepted it all. He was the greatest ballet dancer in all of Russia, if not the world.
Vladimar saw trouble on the horizon when Fedor fell in love with another dancer named Nana Carlova (Marian Marsh). For Fedor to remain great he could love nothing but dancing. Women were fine for recreation and relief, but they were not to be fallen in love with. No matter how hard Vladimar tried to impress that upon Fedor, he still fell in love, and Nana loved him.
Then Vladimar tried something that he had to reasonably expect to fail. He tried to chase off Nana in hopes that with her out of the picture Fedor could refocus on dancing. Maybe it's my years of movie watching or common sense, but once a person is in love, simply removing the object of that love does not refocus the individual in love. Out of sight, out of mind does not work in the case of love. If anything, you only cause angst, pain, and longing which is probably worse than the lack of commitment from the individual.
So, Vladimar caused himself a worse problem by trying to get rid of Nana because, as I suspected, Fedor went with Nana. He was in love, so if she had to leave, he was leaving. Vladimar was so convinced of his own wisdom and knowledge that he suffered under the weight of his own hubris.
"Mad Genius" was one of the better movies dealing with obsession--particularly the obsession of the artist. John Barrymore was wonderful in the role of Vladimar although the character reminded of his role as Svengali. Both were older, bearded foreigners and he employed the same accent for both. They were also both obsessed (Svengali with a woman and Vladimar with dancing), into arts (Svengali was a conductor), and controlled someone else (Svengali used hypnotism while Vladimar used his position). Coincidentally Marian Marsh was also in the movie "Svengali" alongside John Barrymore. "Mad Genius" and "Svengali" were eerily similar, but just different enough to set them remarkably apart.
Free on Daily Motion.
Vladimar was born with a lame leg therefore he could never become the dancer he desired to be. Instead he made wooden dummies and made them dance by pulling the right strings. When he saw a young Fedor running away from his abusive father/guardian/boss he saw in Fedor the dancer he always pined to be.
Vladimar poured his heart, soul, ambitions, and obsession into Fedor and Fedor accepted it all. He was the greatest ballet dancer in all of Russia, if not the world.
Vladimar saw trouble on the horizon when Fedor fell in love with another dancer named Nana Carlova (Marian Marsh). For Fedor to remain great he could love nothing but dancing. Women were fine for recreation and relief, but they were not to be fallen in love with. No matter how hard Vladimar tried to impress that upon Fedor, he still fell in love, and Nana loved him.
Then Vladimar tried something that he had to reasonably expect to fail. He tried to chase off Nana in hopes that with her out of the picture Fedor could refocus on dancing. Maybe it's my years of movie watching or common sense, but once a person is in love, simply removing the object of that love does not refocus the individual in love. Out of sight, out of mind does not work in the case of love. If anything, you only cause angst, pain, and longing which is probably worse than the lack of commitment from the individual.
So, Vladimar caused himself a worse problem by trying to get rid of Nana because, as I suspected, Fedor went with Nana. He was in love, so if she had to leave, he was leaving. Vladimar was so convinced of his own wisdom and knowledge that he suffered under the weight of his own hubris.
"Mad Genius" was one of the better movies dealing with obsession--particularly the obsession of the artist. John Barrymore was wonderful in the role of Vladimar although the character reminded of his role as Svengali. Both were older, bearded foreigners and he employed the same accent for both. They were also both obsessed (Svengali with a woman and Vladimar with dancing), into arts (Svengali was a conductor), and controlled someone else (Svengali used hypnotism while Vladimar used his position). Coincidentally Marian Marsh was also in the movie "Svengali" alongside John Barrymore. "Mad Genius" and "Svengali" were eerily similar, but just different enough to set them remarkably apart.
Free on Daily Motion.
"Svengali II: The Next Generation"...
planktonrules21 January 2015
John Barrymore had some wonderful performances over his film career. But, he also had some really terrible performances as well--ones which were far from subtle and terribly overacted. One of these embarrassingly bad performances was his famous "Svengali" and another was the follow-up film, "The Mad Genius". In fact, both performances seem just about identical--with Barrymore playing essentially the same sort of guy--a creepy manipulator who is troll- like and with a thick, thick accent. The plot of "Svengali" involves a creepy guy using his hypnotic-like powers to bend a woman to his will and make her a star. Here, it's a guy instead...but otherwise it's the same 'ol same 'ol.
The bottom line is the film lacks subtlety and originality. While it might have played well back in the day, today it just seems very dated and dumb. Barrymore was capable of so much better than this and the film is extremely difficult to finish.
The bottom line is the film lacks subtlety and originality. While it might have played well back in the day, today it just seems very dated and dumb. Barrymore was capable of so much better than this and the film is extremely difficult to finish.
The Ballet Master
lugonian28 September 2019
THE MAD GENIUS (Warner Brothers, 1931), directed by Michael Curtiz, reunites the cast of John Barrymore, Marian Marsh, Luis Alberni and Carmel Myers from their previous effort of SVENGALI (1931), directed by Archie Mayo. With SVENGALI being a classic by today's standards, with frequent television revivals and availability on both video cassette and DVD, THE MAD GENIUS is virtually forgotten and almost unknown. Not quite a horror film as the title implies, making one think of Boris Karloff or Bela Lugosi, who specialized in playing mad doctors as such, THE MAD GENIUS, from the play "The Idol" by Martin Brown, very well depicts that of its leading actor, John Barrymore, who is not only mad, but obsessed in helping another become a popular ballet dancer, a possession he wanted for himself but unable to achieve, only to live his life for another.
PROLOGUE: Locale: Central Europe; Time: Fifteen years ago; Scene: A peasant village. As Vladimir Ivan Tsarakov (John Barrymore) and his partner, Karimsky (Charles Butterworth), work on puppets hung on strings doing ballet images, at a near distance, both men witness a brutal father (Boris Karloff) whipping and chasing after his son (Frankie Darro). Falling unconscious due to a fall, the boy is assisted and properly hidden away by Vladimir and Karrimsky, forcing the father to go away when the boy is unable to be found. Seeing the youngster's run and jumping over high fences to avoid his father finds Ivan, whose handicap is his club foot, believing the boy, under his guidance, can become a successful ballet dancer. Almost immediately, the men take their horse and wagon to another destination. THE STORY: Locale: Berlin; Time: Present; Scene: Staatsoper. Now a young man, Feodor (Donald Cook), who has grown to love and respect Ivan as his guide and protector, has become a ballet dancer performing opposite Nana Carlova (Marian Marsh), whom he has grown to love. Because of their relationship, Ivan tries to break them up by firing Nana. Feodor overhears what's going on and leaves Ivan's company, taking Nana with him. Unable to succeed on his own in cabarets, and practically living in poverty, Nana comes to Ivan to have him take Feodor back with him, but will do so if she would do something very much against her wishes. Also in the supporting cast are: Luis Alberni (Serge Bankieff); Andre Luget (Count Robert Renard); Mae Madison (Olga Checkova); and Lee Moran (The Cabaret Director). Carmel Myers as Sonya assumes a smaller role as she did in SVENGALI where she plays a woman who wants but loses the affections of the impresario, Barrymore, while Boris Karloff, receiving no cast credits for his role, is virtually unrecognizable for his few minutes on screen playing an abusive father, yet its his familiar voice that gives him away.
Through nowhere in the same league as SVENGALI, where Marian Marsh was the center of attention, THE MAD GENIUS holds it own in a different light. Marsh's role here, introduced 13 minutes into the story with camera focusing on her ballet dancing feet, isn't much of a main focus as she was in the previous film, that actually going to Donald Cook. Cook seems miscast as a ballet dancer, though some dancing scenes depicted are naturally captured in long shot performed by a stunt double, only using Cook's face in closeup for mood reactions. Barrymore, on the other hand, assumes his obsession on his protege, Cook, as he did as the hypnotist, Svengali, for Marion Marsh's Trilby, and excels in it. As with SVENGALI where Barrymore sports a pointy beard, for his MAD GENIUS, is pointy beard style only appears on bis bottom chin. The only moment of comedy used for THE MAD GENIUS is the support given by Charles Butterworth where his tells him some long-winded story that has the Barrymore character trying desperately to stay awake, calling him an "ass" when the story is completed, otherwise THE MAD GENIUS is straight drama, with shadowy images, haunting score, and some fine staged dance sequences provided. For Barrymore's final film for the Warner Brothers studio, THE MAD GENIUS, which followed SVENGALI (interesting both clocked at 81 minutes) are fine exits for his unusual acting talent.
Never distributed on video cassette, but available on DVD (though this would make a good companion piece on DVD on the flip side of SVENGALI), THE MAD GENIUS is shown occasionally on Turner Classic Movies cable channel. (***)
PROLOGUE: Locale: Central Europe; Time: Fifteen years ago; Scene: A peasant village. As Vladimir Ivan Tsarakov (John Barrymore) and his partner, Karimsky (Charles Butterworth), work on puppets hung on strings doing ballet images, at a near distance, both men witness a brutal father (Boris Karloff) whipping and chasing after his son (Frankie Darro). Falling unconscious due to a fall, the boy is assisted and properly hidden away by Vladimir and Karrimsky, forcing the father to go away when the boy is unable to be found. Seeing the youngster's run and jumping over high fences to avoid his father finds Ivan, whose handicap is his club foot, believing the boy, under his guidance, can become a successful ballet dancer. Almost immediately, the men take their horse and wagon to another destination. THE STORY: Locale: Berlin; Time: Present; Scene: Staatsoper. Now a young man, Feodor (Donald Cook), who has grown to love and respect Ivan as his guide and protector, has become a ballet dancer performing opposite Nana Carlova (Marian Marsh), whom he has grown to love. Because of their relationship, Ivan tries to break them up by firing Nana. Feodor overhears what's going on and leaves Ivan's company, taking Nana with him. Unable to succeed on his own in cabarets, and practically living in poverty, Nana comes to Ivan to have him take Feodor back with him, but will do so if she would do something very much against her wishes. Also in the supporting cast are: Luis Alberni (Serge Bankieff); Andre Luget (Count Robert Renard); Mae Madison (Olga Checkova); and Lee Moran (The Cabaret Director). Carmel Myers as Sonya assumes a smaller role as she did in SVENGALI where she plays a woman who wants but loses the affections of the impresario, Barrymore, while Boris Karloff, receiving no cast credits for his role, is virtually unrecognizable for his few minutes on screen playing an abusive father, yet its his familiar voice that gives him away.
Through nowhere in the same league as SVENGALI, where Marian Marsh was the center of attention, THE MAD GENIUS holds it own in a different light. Marsh's role here, introduced 13 minutes into the story with camera focusing on her ballet dancing feet, isn't much of a main focus as she was in the previous film, that actually going to Donald Cook. Cook seems miscast as a ballet dancer, though some dancing scenes depicted are naturally captured in long shot performed by a stunt double, only using Cook's face in closeup for mood reactions. Barrymore, on the other hand, assumes his obsession on his protege, Cook, as he did as the hypnotist, Svengali, for Marion Marsh's Trilby, and excels in it. As with SVENGALI where Barrymore sports a pointy beard, for his MAD GENIUS, is pointy beard style only appears on bis bottom chin. The only moment of comedy used for THE MAD GENIUS is the support given by Charles Butterworth where his tells him some long-winded story that has the Barrymore character trying desperately to stay awake, calling him an "ass" when the story is completed, otherwise THE MAD GENIUS is straight drama, with shadowy images, haunting score, and some fine staged dance sequences provided. For Barrymore's final film for the Warner Brothers studio, THE MAD GENIUS, which followed SVENGALI (interesting both clocked at 81 minutes) are fine exits for his unusual acting talent.
Never distributed on video cassette, but available on DVD (though this would make a good companion piece on DVD on the flip side of SVENGALI), THE MAD GENIUS is shown occasionally on Turner Classic Movies cable channel. (***)
Barrymore Dominates and Butterworth Loves It
learningwithmrsmith15 March 2022
Not much here to recommend beyond the set pieces. Allow me to pick over the other bits I found interesting, even if not enjoyable. The couple we're supposed to care about are overshadowed by Barrymore and Butterworth, the actual love story in this film. B&B see a boy running from his father and notice that he has a unique way of hurdling a gate (is that slow motion?). They decide on the spot to become kidnappers and develop him into a dancer, well Barrymore decides and Butterworth complies.
There's a flash forward to allow the boy to grow up. There is a moment of confusion when the human dancers in current time resemble the puppet dancers from the opening scene. An expensive visual trick that was likely missed by many.
The 2 young lovers are apparently meeting in an aviary. The incessant chirping makes their dialogue hard to follow. I bet the birds' lines were more interesting than anything these two had to say.
Butterworth tries to explain his idea for a ballet. When we finally hear him explain the plot, it is stranger and much more interesting than the story through which we're suffering. In his story a man removes a pearl gray derby and 30 or 40 pigeons fly out. One character delivers the line, "You go to your church and I'll go to mine." Barrymore listens intently and then calls his friend a "stupid *ss." They are the perfect S/M match.
Barrymore sees Fidor's lover as a distraction. He encourages her to leave her young dancer and become a sugar baby for the Count, a slimy mustachioed character who says "A-Gain" instead of "again." Don't you hate that?
There's a final scene where we see Butterworth without Barrymore and the sadness is palpable. Who will treat him like garbage now?
There is some pre-code racy dialogue. A comparison of alcohol and sex as addictive behaviors. Some weird projected shadow scenes. And we never get to see Fidor, the great dancer, dance a lick.
Butterworth has always reminded me vaguely of Stan Laurel. Here he seems to go even further into his Stan Laurel persona. Not sure what to make of it. I imagine he was older than Laurel. Maybe this is just a standard character type from that time.
There's a flash forward to allow the boy to grow up. There is a moment of confusion when the human dancers in current time resemble the puppet dancers from the opening scene. An expensive visual trick that was likely missed by many.
The 2 young lovers are apparently meeting in an aviary. The incessant chirping makes their dialogue hard to follow. I bet the birds' lines were more interesting than anything these two had to say.
Butterworth tries to explain his idea for a ballet. When we finally hear him explain the plot, it is stranger and much more interesting than the story through which we're suffering. In his story a man removes a pearl gray derby and 30 or 40 pigeons fly out. One character delivers the line, "You go to your church and I'll go to mine." Barrymore listens intently and then calls his friend a "stupid *ss." They are the perfect S/M match.
Barrymore sees Fidor's lover as a distraction. He encourages her to leave her young dancer and become a sugar baby for the Count, a slimy mustachioed character who says "A-Gain" instead of "again." Don't you hate that?
There's a final scene where we see Butterworth without Barrymore and the sadness is palpable. Who will treat him like garbage now?
There is some pre-code racy dialogue. A comparison of alcohol and sex as addictive behaviors. Some weird projected shadow scenes. And we never get to see Fidor, the great dancer, dance a lick.
Butterworth has always reminded me vaguely of Stan Laurel. Here he seems to go even further into his Stan Laurel persona. Not sure what to make of it. I imagine he was older than Laurel. Maybe this is just a standard character type from that time.
tasty ham, attractively served; side dishes not bad
mukava9911 February 2015
In "The Mad Genius" John Barrymore delivers one of his most enjoyable screen performances, playing a club-footed, alcoholic, womanizing Russian puppeteer who takes an abused youth under his wing and molds him into a great star with the Ballet Russe, an accomplishment he could never attain himself due to his deformity. Some may consider his performance hammy, but at least it's Grade A.
The film opens expressionistically somewhere in "Central Europe" on a rain-drenched night with Barrymore and his dim-witted sidekick (the deadpan Charles Butterworth) rehearsing a traveling puppet show when a barefoot youth (Frankie Darro), fleeing a beating from his insanely sadistic father (Boris Karloff), stumbles into their tent. Barrymore and Butterworth hide him and leave town in a horse-drawn wagon shot at a tilted angle as it creaks along a muddy road.
Zip to Berlin several years later. The youth is now a young man (Donald Cook) who is in love with a fellow dancer (Marian Marsh). Barrymore, still the puppeteer but of humans now, wants no one interfering with his controlling relationship and maneuvers Marsh out of the company while elevating a lesser dancer to her position. Meanwhile, Barrymore's dance director (Luis Alberni) is slowly going mad from a cocaine addiction enabled by his employer. The two are locked together, feeding on each other's weaknesses, paralleling the central relationship between teacher-mentor and star-protégé. Barrymore needs Alberni's skills as a dance master; Alberni can't function without the drugs Barrymore provides.
The camera often shoots from low angles, with ceilings visible. Lots of chiaroscuro. Pre-Code subject matter includes extramarital cohabitation, prostitution, drug addiction, and (for the time) grisly violence. Suggestive dialogue abounds.
Barrymore feasts on the role. Luis Alberni plays the frenzied addict to the hilt. Marian Marsh and Donald Cook are sometimes mechanical and artificial but not to the extent that they undermine their roles and both have strong moments. Carmel Myers is excellent in a brief drunken scene with Barrymore.
Donald Cook looks so much like the Warners contract actress Kay Francis that they should have been cast in a movie together as siblings. Just sayin'.
The film opens expressionistically somewhere in "Central Europe" on a rain-drenched night with Barrymore and his dim-witted sidekick (the deadpan Charles Butterworth) rehearsing a traveling puppet show when a barefoot youth (Frankie Darro), fleeing a beating from his insanely sadistic father (Boris Karloff), stumbles into their tent. Barrymore and Butterworth hide him and leave town in a horse-drawn wagon shot at a tilted angle as it creaks along a muddy road.
Zip to Berlin several years later. The youth is now a young man (Donald Cook) who is in love with a fellow dancer (Marian Marsh). Barrymore, still the puppeteer but of humans now, wants no one interfering with his controlling relationship and maneuvers Marsh out of the company while elevating a lesser dancer to her position. Meanwhile, Barrymore's dance director (Luis Alberni) is slowly going mad from a cocaine addiction enabled by his employer. The two are locked together, feeding on each other's weaknesses, paralleling the central relationship between teacher-mentor and star-protégé. Barrymore needs Alberni's skills as a dance master; Alberni can't function without the drugs Barrymore provides.
The camera often shoots from low angles, with ceilings visible. Lots of chiaroscuro. Pre-Code subject matter includes extramarital cohabitation, prostitution, drug addiction, and (for the time) grisly violence. Suggestive dialogue abounds.
Barrymore feasts on the role. Luis Alberni plays the frenzied addict to the hilt. Marian Marsh and Donald Cook are sometimes mechanical and artificial but not to the extent that they undermine their roles and both have strong moments. Carmel Myers is excellent in a brief drunken scene with Barrymore.
Donald Cook looks so much like the Warners contract actress Kay Francis that they should have been cast in a movie together as siblings. Just sayin'.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
