I must say I had high hopes of this film, having seen Novello in "The Lodger" and having heard so much in praise of him, but I'm afraid it did not work for me. My copy is of fair quality, which does not help, and the score does not relate directly to the action, which is even worse. I found that the story seemed to slow to a crawl in the ballroom scenes, though they are beautifully shot and include some POV shots as the swing goes back and forth. Zelie's revenge is well carried out and Boucheron suffers all manner of indignity, but with humility and resignation, but the ending is unsatisfactory and a little abrupt. One final complaint; Novello was the darling of the matinée crowd and, when properly photographed, a handsome chap, but in this movie, I felt that the camera had fallen out with him and the result is rather an average looking guy who cannot match the beautiful women who surround him. Still, if I get the chance, I will watch "The Rat."
7 Reviews
not really a triumph!
didi-513 October 2008
Warning: Spoilers
In British silent cinema no male star suffered or shimmered like Ivor Novello, so this second film in the 'Rat' series shows his acting talents off perfectly. From the opening sequences where he is the darling of the smart set, through to the ending where he is an outcast, reduced to catching the scraps of food rejected by the dogs, Novello is never less than compelling.
With beautiful shots in the ballroom, in the underground clubs, or out in the moonlit veranda, the 'Triumph of the Rat' looks great. There are laugh out loud moments and also scenes of sadness, which is just the thing silent cinema could do to perfection.
With beautiful shots in the ballroom, in the underground clubs, or out in the moonlit veranda, the 'Triumph of the Rat' looks great. There are laugh out loud moments and also scenes of sadness, which is just the thing silent cinema could do to perfection.
Novello great in second half; first half a bore
bbmtwist6 August 2016
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILERS AHEAD! ALERT! PLOT SPOILERS AHEAD!
This is a very odd film, almost two different films in its easy split right down the middle. The first half has nothing to do with the former film, THE RAT, Novello's 7th film and his first great hit. This 8th outing for him has him set up in society by an upper class woman, Zelie, who is in love with him. When he looks at the Comtesse Madeleine, she makes a bet he can't win her. He does, but also falls in love with her.
This is the plot of the first half of the film and it is pretty much a bore. Novello is pretty to look at, as is Isabel Jeans, but even in his bit at a costume ball as a Monsieur Beaucaire-type, he has little chance to act.
The second half of the film is much more dramatic and Novello gives an excellent performance. Zelie's revenge has him exposed as his real self before the Countess, hounded by a detective who makes it impossible for him to find work after she engineers his ousting from society, and drop to the dregs, even to doing menial work for the bar he once ruled. He drops lower and lower – Novello's greatest scenes are those in which he is suffering from hunger on a Paris street – and in his final scenes is rejected for the second time by his old pals, after a frame-up, and returns to the streets, to end up we don't know where. A very down beat and tragic ending and the chronicle of the down fall of a society hero.
The camera manages to be a bit experimental, using a number of dolly ins and outs, and some effective angles. There is an interesting mirror shot early on. The second half of the film is quite entertaining and quite dramatic, a triumph for Novello. Too bad the first half is so pointless, meandering and dull.
A must-see for fans of Novello!
This is a very odd film, almost two different films in its easy split right down the middle. The first half has nothing to do with the former film, THE RAT, Novello's 7th film and his first great hit. This 8th outing for him has him set up in society by an upper class woman, Zelie, who is in love with him. When he looks at the Comtesse Madeleine, she makes a bet he can't win her. He does, but also falls in love with her.
This is the plot of the first half of the film and it is pretty much a bore. Novello is pretty to look at, as is Isabel Jeans, but even in his bit at a costume ball as a Monsieur Beaucaire-type, he has little chance to act.
The second half of the film is much more dramatic and Novello gives an excellent performance. Zelie's revenge has him exposed as his real self before the Countess, hounded by a detective who makes it impossible for him to find work after she engineers his ousting from society, and drop to the dregs, even to doing menial work for the bar he once ruled. He drops lower and lower – Novello's greatest scenes are those in which he is suffering from hunger on a Paris street – and in his final scenes is rejected for the second time by his old pals, after a frame-up, and returns to the streets, to end up we don't know where. A very down beat and tragic ending and the chronicle of the down fall of a society hero.
The camera manages to be a bit experimental, using a number of dolly ins and outs, and some effective angles. There is an interesting mirror shot early on. The second half of the film is quite entertaining and quite dramatic, a triumph for Novello. Too bad the first half is so pointless, meandering and dull.
A must-see for fans of Novello!
As Flies To Wanton Boys, So Are We To Women
boblipton15 April 2019
Life is good. Ivor Novello, "The Rat" is now an accepted member of the Parisian elite, thanks to Isabel Jeans' sponsorship, and able to keep his old friends afloat. When he makes a bet with Miss Jeans that he can win the heart of Nina Vanna, he doesn't understand that he will lose either way.
This movie's predecessor, THE RAT, was apparently so wildly successful that it made everyone rich and famous for a while. It didn't last, of course, except for producer Michael Balcon; Novello was out of the movies in eight years -- although he certainly didn't suffer as a writer-performer on the stage -- and director Graham Cutts would make one more "Rat" movie (1929's RETURN OF THE RAT) and then a three year hiatus. He would discover that the people he had alienated when he was on the top -- among them Alfred Hitchcock -- were not anxious to help him out of the Quota Quickies.
In the meantime, of course, he had everything he needed to make a fascinating picture, full of the late-silent floating camera effects that would vanish for a decade when sound came in.
This movie's predecessor, THE RAT, was apparently so wildly successful that it made everyone rich and famous for a while. It didn't last, of course, except for producer Michael Balcon; Novello was out of the movies in eight years -- although he certainly didn't suffer as a writer-performer on the stage -- and director Graham Cutts would make one more "Rat" movie (1929's RETURN OF THE RAT) and then a three year hiatus. He would discover that the people he had alienated when he was on the top -- among them Alfred Hitchcock -- were not anxious to help him out of the Quota Quickies.
In the meantime, of course, he had everything he needed to make a fascinating picture, full of the late-silent floating camera effects that would vanish for a decade when sound came in.
A pretty odd kind of triumph
Igenlode Wordsmith2 March 2004
Warning: Spoilers
It's difficult to discuss why "The Triumph of the Rat" comes across as a rather strange title for this film without divulging major spoilers. Suffice it to say that the climax is a pretty odd kind of triumph...
I have to confess that I was somewhat prejudiced against it as a sequel to "The Rat" by the total omission of the character Odile without any explanation, when she had been so central both to the action and to the climax of its predecessor. This is possibly taking an entirely too serious approach to continuity in such productions! However, given that she was an apparently central part of the Rat's world in the previous film, and particularly (without mentioning spoilers) given the ending of that film, it was very disconcerting to find that not only was she not present, but that her former existence was not even acknowledged by so much as an allusion to her death or disappearance.
Instead, this story opens with the Rat - now 'Monsieur Boucheron' - living it up in high society, apparently the kept man of his old nemesis, Zelie de Chaumet. He is accepted by Paris as both wealthy and respectable; but as Zelie boasts, she made him and if she so chooses she can break him. Understandably, Boucheron is a little touchy on the subject of his origins. However, he still has some of the mischief-making spirit of the former underworld 'apache' in him; and when Zelie mocks his admiration for a titled lady, Madeleine de L'Orme, telling him the aristocracy will always remain above his touch, he gaily takes up the challenge, making a wager of it - "you'll see what a Rat can do!"
The rest of the film consists of the Rat's pursuit of Madeleine in accordance with his bet, and Zelie's revenge when she realises that, wager or no wager, he has switched his attentions to the other woman in earnest. This is not a great deal of plot with which to fill the entire succeeding portion of the film, and it is perhaps not surprising that a lot of the remaining time goes on showcasing Novello's versatility, as he 'suffers beautifully'.
There are some light touches of humour in the opening scenes, with the character of Rene Duval, would-be poet and ladies' man, seen as an unsatisfactory Silenus at the fancy dress ball, and with Boucheron's imperturbable indifference to Zelie's demands on him as he amuses himself reading a book in her boudoir. But a tamed, respectable Rat is dull stuff compared to the feral young gang-leader of earlier days, and to do it justice the script is evidently aware of this.
Even with the eventual return to underworld scenes, however, we never really see the old Rat back. It's a brave, and I think artistically justified, decision to have the hero actually *lose* the knife-fight in the White Coffin Club that marks a final flicker of his old spirit. Victory under those circumstances, while hallowed by cinematic tradition, would in reality have been improbable. But I did feel that beyond that the general air of defeat was taken too far. The Rat's titular triumph may be a moral one, but it came across as less than satisfying to this viewer.
That said, the later part of the plot does provide the opportunity for some effective and memorable scenes: in particular the moment when the girl Mou-Mou (her existence a nod to continuity with the first film) orders the crowd to dance, through her tears, and the Rat's scenes outside the restaurant and final confrontation with Zelie. And Novello *does* suffer beautifully. I couldn't help feeling, however, that the character had been hamstrung on a crucial level by refusing to allow him to be 'bad' - a bold rogue is more appealing than a plaster saint!
A contemporary review comments, tartly, "the climax just fizzles out, obviously to make way for a sequel." Sadly this was not to be the case - the eventual sequel, "Return of the Rat", ignored continuity in that respect altogether, thus leaving the end of this story forever unresolved.
(Edit: the Silent Films Curator suggested that one should regard the character discontinuities as being the alternate-reality version of "The Rat" -- showing what *would* have happened if the hero had accepted Zêlie's invitation to join her world instead of rushing home to rescue Odile. In other words, this is a Dreadful Warning! I'm not sure that Novello ever intended such an interpretation, but it works for me; and armed with such a moral let-out clause and forewarned as to the ending, I found myself thoroughly able to enjoy wallowing in Beautiful Suffering on a second viewing with great music and an enthusiastic audience. The beginning still strikes me as a little flat, but the ball scenes show some truly gorgeous staging, Novello has more mischievous moments than I had remembered, and yes, I did have a tear or two in my eye. Better watched with the lapse of a few months between the first film and the sequel, perhaps, rather than straight in a row as I tried before -- but the 'Rat' reprise was the unexpected highlight of the 'British Silents' festival, and went down to a storm of applause. Original rating upgraded from 6/10 to 8/10.)
I have to confess that I was somewhat prejudiced against it as a sequel to "The Rat" by the total omission of the character Odile without any explanation, when she had been so central both to the action and to the climax of its predecessor. This is possibly taking an entirely too serious approach to continuity in such productions! However, given that she was an apparently central part of the Rat's world in the previous film, and particularly (without mentioning spoilers) given the ending of that film, it was very disconcerting to find that not only was she not present, but that her former existence was not even acknowledged by so much as an allusion to her death or disappearance.
Instead, this story opens with the Rat - now 'Monsieur Boucheron' - living it up in high society, apparently the kept man of his old nemesis, Zelie de Chaumet. He is accepted by Paris as both wealthy and respectable; but as Zelie boasts, she made him and if she so chooses she can break him. Understandably, Boucheron is a little touchy on the subject of his origins. However, he still has some of the mischief-making spirit of the former underworld 'apache' in him; and when Zelie mocks his admiration for a titled lady, Madeleine de L'Orme, telling him the aristocracy will always remain above his touch, he gaily takes up the challenge, making a wager of it - "you'll see what a Rat can do!"
The rest of the film consists of the Rat's pursuit of Madeleine in accordance with his bet, and Zelie's revenge when she realises that, wager or no wager, he has switched his attentions to the other woman in earnest. This is not a great deal of plot with which to fill the entire succeeding portion of the film, and it is perhaps not surprising that a lot of the remaining time goes on showcasing Novello's versatility, as he 'suffers beautifully'.
There are some light touches of humour in the opening scenes, with the character of Rene Duval, would-be poet and ladies' man, seen as an unsatisfactory Silenus at the fancy dress ball, and with Boucheron's imperturbable indifference to Zelie's demands on him as he amuses himself reading a book in her boudoir. But a tamed, respectable Rat is dull stuff compared to the feral young gang-leader of earlier days, and to do it justice the script is evidently aware of this.
Even with the eventual return to underworld scenes, however, we never really see the old Rat back. It's a brave, and I think artistically justified, decision to have the hero actually *lose* the knife-fight in the White Coffin Club that marks a final flicker of his old spirit. Victory under those circumstances, while hallowed by cinematic tradition, would in reality have been improbable. But I did feel that beyond that the general air of defeat was taken too far. The Rat's titular triumph may be a moral one, but it came across as less than satisfying to this viewer.
That said, the later part of the plot does provide the opportunity for some effective and memorable scenes: in particular the moment when the girl Mou-Mou (her existence a nod to continuity with the first film) orders the crowd to dance, through her tears, and the Rat's scenes outside the restaurant and final confrontation with Zelie. And Novello *does* suffer beautifully. I couldn't help feeling, however, that the character had been hamstrung on a crucial level by refusing to allow him to be 'bad' - a bold rogue is more appealing than a plaster saint!
A contemporary review comments, tartly, "the climax just fizzles out, obviously to make way for a sequel." Sadly this was not to be the case - the eventual sequel, "Return of the Rat", ignored continuity in that respect altogether, thus leaving the end of this story forever unresolved.
(Edit: the Silent Films Curator suggested that one should regard the character discontinuities as being the alternate-reality version of "The Rat" -- showing what *would* have happened if the hero had accepted Zêlie's invitation to join her world instead of rushing home to rescue Odile. In other words, this is a Dreadful Warning! I'm not sure that Novello ever intended such an interpretation, but it works for me; and armed with such a moral let-out clause and forewarned as to the ending, I found myself thoroughly able to enjoy wallowing in Beautiful Suffering on a second viewing with great music and an enthusiastic audience. The beginning still strikes me as a little flat, but the ball scenes show some truly gorgeous staging, Novello has more mischievous moments than I had remembered, and yes, I did have a tear or two in my eye. Better watched with the lapse of a few months between the first film and the sequel, perhaps, rather than straight in a row as I tried before -- but the 'Rat' reprise was the unexpected highlight of the 'British Silents' festival, and went down to a storm of applause. Original rating upgraded from 6/10 to 8/10.)
Rated going on the novel based on the movie which seems completely elusive
Rozinda16 November 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I've just no idea how ever to see this movie or the original. I managed to purchase from the USA a copy of the final Rat movie, but the earlier two are "non-existent" so far as I can make out with respect to purchase. I can only people who have the good fortune to be able to get the BFI movie showings, wherever they may be, are those who can see these old silent masterpieces. It's so annoying they are never shown on TV and also that we cannot see anything of Novello's stage shows, whether redone now or even just something of the originals if they were ever filmed in any way.
I enjoyed reading Phillis Bottome's novel based on the movie and in answer to the reviewer above who wondered what happened to Madeleine and the Rat's pursuit of her, the novel continues the story beyond the movie to an appropriate wartime moment. I bought this novel and the earlier novel based on the original Rat movie (different writer) from Abe Books and these are both great reads and treasures whether or not you've seen the movies.
One issue with the book is the final Rat movie which follows on from Rat 2 movie, not from Rat 2 book version, so the finale of the novel simply doesn't fit at all with Rat 3 movie.
I've no idea if there is was spin off novel of Rat 3. I haven't found one yet.
I enjoyed reading Phillis Bottome's novel based on the movie and in answer to the reviewer above who wondered what happened to Madeleine and the Rat's pursuit of her, the novel continues the story beyond the movie to an appropriate wartime moment. I bought this novel and the earlier novel based on the original Rat movie (different writer) from Abe Books and these are both great reads and treasures whether or not you've seen the movies.
One issue with the book is the final Rat movie which follows on from Rat 2 movie, not from Rat 2 book version, so the finale of the novel simply doesn't fit at all with Rat 3 movie.
I've no idea if there is was spin off novel of Rat 3. I haven't found one yet.
Cutts and Young - beautiful losers
kekseksa30 April 2017
There is certain injustice in the fate of certain directors and cinematographers and both Graham Cutts and Hal Young (who also filmed The Lodger) do a very fine job in this film that makes their subsequent slide into oblivion seem extremely harsh if one compares with the subsequent success and vast, but only partially deserved, reputation achieved by their Gainsborough colleague, Alfred Hitchcock.
Novello's writing and acting are both blandly elegant and gruesomely mawkish by turns, but passable if one can endure the actor's old-fashioned music-hall penchant for "facials", but it is the camera that is the real star of this film and, at times, as in the ball-scene, it produces something rather fine that actually deserved a somewhat less trivial script and a somewhat less self-indulgent star.
If the German industry would be massacred by Hitler, the British industry would be pared (if also, in a manner, saved) by the quota quickie and in both cases the casualties in terms of directors and cinematographers would be many. The survivors were not always necessarily the best or not always at any rate so significantly better than those who failed to survive.
The key to surviving, and indeed thriving, in a difficult ambiance lay in seizing on and capitalising on what slender opportunities were available. making of a film is always teamwork but the balance of power between the various members of the team is very variable. A supposed "auteur" of a film is perhaps a fine artists but also not infrequently a thief and a bully.
In this film the fine work is done by Cutts and Young but it is never THEIR film as much of their work simply subserves the antics of Novello.. The film belongs therefore in a sense, rightly or wrongly, to Novello. Compare this with The Lodger (not in the first place written by Novello) where the partnership between Hitchcock and Young could hardly be closer and Novello gives a much finer, more restrained performance. But here the film belongs unequivocally to Hitchcock.
Survival was also a matter of temperament, self-publicity, opportunism, ruthlessness and an eye for the main chance and Hitchcock was a champion in all those respects. But one should occasionally pause to salute the best work of those who fell by the wayside.
Novello's writing and acting are both blandly elegant and gruesomely mawkish by turns, but passable if one can endure the actor's old-fashioned music-hall penchant for "facials", but it is the camera that is the real star of this film and, at times, as in the ball-scene, it produces something rather fine that actually deserved a somewhat less trivial script and a somewhat less self-indulgent star.
If the German industry would be massacred by Hitler, the British industry would be pared (if also, in a manner, saved) by the quota quickie and in both cases the casualties in terms of directors and cinematographers would be many. The survivors were not always necessarily the best or not always at any rate so significantly better than those who failed to survive.
The key to surviving, and indeed thriving, in a difficult ambiance lay in seizing on and capitalising on what slender opportunities were available. making of a film is always teamwork but the balance of power between the various members of the team is very variable. A supposed "auteur" of a film is perhaps a fine artists but also not infrequently a thief and a bully.
In this film the fine work is done by Cutts and Young but it is never THEIR film as much of their work simply subserves the antics of Novello.. The film belongs therefore in a sense, rightly or wrongly, to Novello. Compare this with The Lodger (not in the first place written by Novello) where the partnership between Hitchcock and Young could hardly be closer and Novello gives a much finer, more restrained performance. But here the film belongs unequivocally to Hitchcock.
Survival was also a matter of temperament, self-publicity, opportunism, ruthlessness and an eye for the main chance and Hitchcock was a champion in all those respects. But one should occasionally pause to salute the best work of those who fell by the wayside.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
