Siegfried (1924) Is a Masterpiece, But the Princesses -- Ouch!
I just watched Siegfried in a wonderful restored KINO edition of 149 minutes. What a masterpiece of cinematography! Well worth the money. But is it just me, or are the leading women, ah -- er -- homely?
Kriemhild -- I honestly thought this -- looked like a man playing the role of a woman (as I'm told they did in Elizabethan times, centuries ago); and even the handmaid of Kriemhild who takes the bowl of water away from her after she gives Siegfried a drink looked like a man dressed up as a woman. And Brunhyld was no beauty prize either. Of course, Brunhyld being a warrior-queen, maybe we shouldn't expect that, but sheesh! The King is so in love with Brunhild (apparently by reputation) that he travels miles and hires Siegfried to win her. It's a wonder he didn't turn around the moment he actually laid eyes on her, and look for a more local girl.
Did German audiences in 1924 actually find women like these *beautiful*? I can't imagine that; the other actresses I've seen in German films of the period look more conventionally feminine. And certainly most American silent actresses of the time looked conventionally feminine. These women just weren't believable to me as love interests. So in watching the film, I had to engage in a "suspension of disbelief" such as one engages in when watching science fiction or fantasy. An anti-gravity ray is no harder to swallow than that a man would risk his life for the beauty (cough) of Kriemhild.
Yes, I know some feminist may well jump on me for valuing a woman's looks more than her "inner qualities"; but that's not the point here. I grant that in real life a plain woman with inner nobility is better than a gorgeous woman who is mindless or evil. But this is a *movie*, and a *fantasy* movie, about dragons, princes, princesses, undying love between lovers, etc. There are certain conventions to be followed. Why is Cleopatra -- who by all accounts was an ugly woman -- played by Claudette Colbert or Elizabeth Taylor? Because we -- *modern* audiences with a *modern* sense of feminine beauty -- have to believe that Mark Antony would throw away the rule of the entire world for such a woman. If they used an actress who looked like the real historical Cleopatra, no one would believe that.
I have no idea what Fritz Lang was thinking when he made Brunhild look like a ticked-off, middle-aged woman with a chip on her shoulder, and Kriemhild a moody unisex type with a very fake-looking wig. It is almost as if he was thinking of stage performance (where the audience is often so far back it can't see the details of actresses' faces anyway) rather than film performance (where close-ups make the look of the actress's face more important). Bad directorial judgment, I'd say.