JohnHowardReid Although he wrote many later novels (including "The Paradine Case" which was also filmed by Selznick), Robert Smythe Hichens (1864- 1950) never equaled the success of his early "The Garden of Allah" which sold a staggering 800,000 copies in its initial hardcover editions. A well-written book with much accurate, closely-observed detail (too much in fact for modern tastes), it offers not only a grandly romantic story of love and mystery set against a fascinatingly unusual yet breathtakingly picturesque background, but meticulously describes the inner rewards and setbacks of an idealized heroine's self-imposed search for peace, love and fulfillment. As for the title, it is explained by Count Anteoni: "The Arabs have a saying: "The desert is the garden of Allah."The novel was filmed three times: Helen Ware and Thomas Santschi starred in a 1917 version, while Alice Terry and Ivan Petrovich were the leads of an MGM/Rex Ingram film (screenplay by Willis Goldbeck — Selznick's assistant on this one) ten years later.Green and Rosson were handed an Honorary Award by The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for their color cinematography. "The Garden of Allah" was the world's 5th three-strip Technicolor feature. Negative cost: $1,447,760. Locations in the Mojave Desert near Yuma, Arizona.The film was originally to star Merle Oberon and Gilbert Roland. Fortunately, Selznick was astute enough to grab Dietrich and Boyer for the leads instead, when they suddenly became available by both walking out on Paramount's "Hotel Imperial" in protest over the firing of director Ernst Lubitsch. COMMENT: Unlike the 1927 version which took considerable liberties with both plot and characterization, this is a remarkably faithful transcription of the original novel. Admittedly a few incidents and characters have been compressed (and one minor player, Domini's maid, Suzanne, omitted altogether); but with one or two exceptions, all the changes — slight as they are — represent distinct dramatic improvements. Not only are atmosphere and suspense heightened, but the exotic romance of the book is perfectly captured.The players are collectively nothing short of superb. Dietrich is brilliantly cast. It's a role calling not only for glamour and allure, but one requiring the actress to express a quality of urgent, desperate seeking. Dietrich's exotic appeal goes without question, but her most fascinating and interesting roles are usually those in which she herself is actively seeking something (Dishonored, The Scarlet Empress, A Foreign Affair, Witness for the Prosecution, Judgement at Nuremberg) rather than being sought (Blonde Venus, Song of Songs, Stage Fright, Rancho Notorious). Her face (especially her eyes) and the accented timbre of her voice convey urgency, energy, drive — even ruthlessness — extremely well. Domini Enfilden is not only an embodiment of all these qualities, but she has a romantic restlessness which Marlene portrays with totally convincing sympathy. It's impossible to imagine any other star in this part. If ever there was a role that seemed completely made to order for Dietrich, this is it.Charles Boyer was also never more perfectly served — although he did have a few other roles the equal of Boris Androvsky in romantic intensity, particularly in Mayerling (his very next film) and Hold Back the Dawn. Boyer would have made an ideal Hamlet. As a romantic character, he is often at the mercy of events. He struggles to extricate himself, sometimes succeeding (History Is Made At Night), often not (Algiers, All This and Heaven Too). Anxiety, restlessness, despair — these are Boyer's stock-in-trade. Most of the support players are not quite so impressively catered for, though Basil Rathbone and Joseph Schildkraut judiciously match their respective characters to those in the book. C. Aubrey Smith, Alan Marshal and Lucile Watson are also ideally cast. John Carradine, however, is so completely unrecognizable — even his voice is different — it's hard to believe it's really him!If it were possible to overshadow the richness of these excellent performances with a wealth of striking production values, producer Selznick and his accomplished technicians certainly give it a rousing try. Director Boleslawski, forsaking the sterile tableau approach he employed in "Clive of India", has directed every scene with admirable deftness and style. He is aided — indeed bested — by superlative Technicolor photography of the film's ravishing sets, costumes and locations.Max Steiner contributed a movingly atmospheric, delightfully captivating score.All in all, a beautifully produced, grandly exotic yet totally engrossing romance. One of my favorite films of the 1930s. Fortunately available on DVD (from Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer) in a really excellent print.

Marcin Kukuczka "Sunshine all the time makes a desert." (an Arab proverb).A viewpoint that great visuals and skillful performances are enough to turn even a dull screenplay into an entertaining motion picture seems too much simplified. However, in some instances, such perspective occurs to make sense. Seldom may it occur as relevant as in THE GARDEN OF ALLAH directed by Richard Boleslawski and produced by David O. Selznick. The strengths of the movie do not lie in clever storyline but in amazing camera and lighting work as well as performances. As one of the first three strip Technicolor films after BECKY SHARP and long before THE WIZARD OF OZ, the colors of THE GARDEN OF ALLAH have much to boast of. In many of its scenes attempted at purely visual experience, the aesthetic impressions are in no way dated. Clarence Slifer, collaborating with other artistically innovative people, does a wonderful job. Just to note the effective use of red (one of the most beloved colors in the period of color experimentation) symbolizing the land of fire and desire where the protagonists' destinies meet, the shots of the desert as backdrop with persons and caravans in silhouettes as well as the interiors. The elaborate visuals are particularly memorable in a little scene of Domina and Father Roubier when he tries to warn her against the man she loves. Consider the particular detail as she leaves the sacristy. Besides the cinematographic pearls of location shots and camera work, what strongly contributes to the memorable impressions are costumes by Jeannette Couget and music by Max Steiner (in particular the use of Schubert's "Ave Maria" and the atmospheric song "No One But God and I Know What is in My Heart"). But let me now develop, perhaps, the most striking feature of the film – performances, which I am not going to divide into main roles and supporting characters since this is one of the movies of the 1930s which cannot be treated as 'a vehicle' for Marlene Dietrich solely. Single individuals deserve unique praise for making the hardly believable content still communicative.Marlene Dietrich, freed from the guidance of her tutor Josef Von Sternberg) portrays a character whose mind and dreams are occupied by the search for happiness, for finding herself. As a young, beautiful actress with subtle presence on the screen and girlish movements she is nothing but outstanding. The effect of her screen presence is, of course, multiplied by the use of colors and a number of costumes she wears. Ms Dietrich reminds me a lot of her earlier role (also away from Sternberg) in THE SONG OF SONGS. However, she is not Garbo who proved to be 'a queen on her own' preferring to be left alone to go on with her lines and cooperation with the camera. Dietrich was more generous with her co-stars. Consequently, Ms Dietrich cannot be considered fully without her leading men. And one is truly captivating. That is... Charles Boyer. Although his character lacks logical sense of his motifs and may be less communicative with audiences, he proves unbelievable acting skills. His performance is filled with extravaganza, rebellious attitude, self-imposed, almost blasphemous ignorance of the hard past, neurotic struggle for materializing his inner desires. It is all a great insight into the tormented, almost tortured character who does not seek refuge in loneliness but in the arms of a woman. Having experienced the extreme silence and hermit-like life as a Trappist monk, his tortured soul strives for passions (to fulfill them) and the fire of lust (to extinguish it). While Ms Dietrich's scene is the memorable finale (after she received the harsh test she prayed for), his moment is the speech scene when teary eyes and sweaty forehead manifest the most inner struggles. Although it does not necessarily work so logically, the moment is worth seeing thanks to his compelling performance. Even the liqueur would not taste that good... Although Boyer worked with the various female stars of the time, including Garbo and Bette Davis, there is a strong chemistry between him and Marlene Dietrich. Their scenes are sweet, fussy and overly sensitive but worth seeing. The finale is also something of a genius collaboration of the leading protagonists. Joy, tears, smile evoke.Joseph Schildkraut has particularly witty and charming moments as Batouch, a sort of character no one will be after but everyone will like. C. Aubrey Smith with his specific strength and rhetoric in his performances crafts the role of Father memorably. I particularly sympathized with his sweet dog that seems to perceive sometimes more than humans do. Basil Rathbone carries the restrain and appeal as Count Andreoni. Apart from them, there are two of the cast who, though given just a minimum time on the screen, and yet appear to be truly memorable: John Carradine as a seer who, in a haunting moment, foretells Domina's future and Tilly Losch as a dancer who, in her Salome-like lustful crush, provides the movie with one of the most erotic sequences ever found in motion picture. And finally, who contributes to the entertainment and mood are great extras who speak gibberish in the backdrop.But who is in the lead? No one so much as the title garden of Allah itself with its endless attraction and cleanliness of catharsis, with its oases of fresh water and the heat of vast loneliness where you can hear the whisper of your inner self, the desert.All is touched by the search of happiness that the protagonists struggle to find. The desert seems to be a perfect place for that target and yet...do they find it? The unforgettable finale seems to answer this question where the religious and the secular, where purity and desire reach the heights of their mutual, though fairy tale, collaboration. But if you seek something thought provoking, search for it elsewhere...enjoy the visuals and performances offered by THE GARDEN OF ALLAH.

Jay Raskin Boy and girl meet God. Boy and girl lose God. Boy and girl find each other. Boy and girl find God again. This is not really a formula that caught on.There's some great Technicolor cinematography here. The sets are believable, at least for those of us who have never been to Morocco, and the music is pleasant.The acting is fine. Marlena and Charles make a lovely couple. Basil is dashing and John Carradine reads fortunes in sand like he preaches in "Grapes of Wrath".The problem lies with the main characters and the plot. The characters are torn between a saintly life and a normal life. For the vast majority of us, it is not a real problem. It is hard to relate to that kind of dilemma, and that is really the only kind of problem that the two lead characters face.When it comes right down to it, I don't want to see Marlena Dietrich as Mother Teresa, I want to see her as Lola Lola.People always talk about the Jewish/communist influence in Hollywood, but it was the Roman Catholic Church that really successfully infiltrated and brought their propaganda to Hollywood (e.g. "Going My Way").This film is a good example of the type of film that would warm the hearts of any Catholic Legion of Decency member.

bkoganbing When Marlene Dietrich was labeled box office poison in 1938 one of a handful of actresses so named by the trades papers, it was films like The Garden Of Allah. How a film could be so breathtakingly beautiful to behold and be so insipidly dull is beyond me. Also how Marlene if she was trying to expand her range and not play a sexpot got stuck with such an old fashioned story is beyond me.The Garden Of Allah, one of the very first films in modern technicolor was a novel set at the turn of the last century by Robert Hitchens who then collaborated on a play adaption with Mary Anderson that ran for 241 performances in 1911-12. It then got two silent screen adaptions. The story is about a monk who runs away from the monastery out in French Tunisia to see some of what he's missed in the world. He runs into a similarly sheltered woman who was unmarried and spent her prime years caring for a sick parent. She's traveling now in the desert and the two meet on a train.The woman is of course Marlene and the runaway monk is Charles Boyer. I'm not sure what was in David O. Selznick's mind in filming this story. Someone like Ingrid Bergman might have made it palatable for the audience. But you can bet that the movie-going public of 1936 when they plunked their money down for a ticket they expected to see Marlene as a modern day Salome rather than a saint with that title. The public still remembered Rudolph Valentino and you can bet that it was some desert romance and seduction that they were expecting.As for the monks you have to remember that they are self supporting in their monasteries and this particular one bottles a special wine of which Boyer happens to be the one with the secret. The monastery will have to rethink it's economics if Boyer leaves. The monks are a sincerely pious group, but from the head man Charles Waldron on down they've a right to be a little concerned with some self interest.Anyway a whole lot of religious platitudes get said here by a pair of leads that really are not suited for the parts. Most especially Marlene Dietrich. I would watch this film with an eye for the special color desert cinematography and forget the plot.