Movie Review #14: The King and I - Rodgers and Hammersmonth

The King and I (1956)
Director: Walter Lang
Writer(s): Ernest Lehman... as adapted from the works of Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II
Starring: Deborah Kerr, Yul Brynner, Rita Moreno

So, my last review was pretty harsh...

From last time: "The characters, with only a few exceptions, are lazily written. The songs are thrown in and are of little consequence. The cinematography is horrible. The sound mixing is amateur. The themes are tepid. The pacing is inconsistent. South Pacific is a bad movie. I'm sorry, R&H, but this film gets a complete thumbs-down."

I hope I'm not being unfair to Rodgers and Hammerstein. After all, the two are arguably the two most important figures in all of musical theatre. But, so far, their movies have averaged only a 5.35 in my rating system. That's not a particularly good sign. I hope this next movie might be able to increase that statistic at least a little bit. For, on its own, The King and I stands as a very enjoyable and solid movie. The issue here, though, is one of ethics rather than one of critical thinking.

The King and I is based on the novel, Anna and the King of Siam, itself based on the memoirs of Anna Leonowens, governess to King Mongkut of Siam. Ms. Leonowens's memoirs, however, have been notoriously scrutinized and criticized for historical inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Anna and the King of Siam is an even more flawed account, as it leaves even more room for error. Thus, by the time we get to The King and I, we're four degrees away from Kevin Bacon and many more away from the actual truth. Thus, as fun as The King and I is, it could actually be an offensive presentation of King Mongkut and the rest of the Siamese people. For sake of being critically and culturally tolerant, I am going to treat the king presented in this movie as a fictionalized account, rather than the actual king. Think along the lines of Rameses in The Ten Commandments (also played by Yul Brynner): a leader whom we respect as a character but not as a representation of historical fact. As a result, this review treats The King and I as a fiction rather than an adaptation: just replace every instance of "Siam" with "Culturally Insensitive Land" and "England" with "Powerful Empire Land."

Anna Leonowens (Deborah Kerr) is hired by the Siamese government to act as governess and schoolteacher for the King's children. The King of Siam (Yul Brynner) has hired Anna as part of his program to Westernize Siam. When she is denied a house of her own, an essential part of her contract, Anna is put quite on edge. She ends up staying when the children of the King charm her, but she ends up at odds with the King when he continually denies her a house and continues to act in a "culturally backward" manner. But she and the King band together when a letter arrives denouncing the King as a barbarian; the threat could lead Britain to make Siam a protectorate and take away the King's sovereignty. The two must work together to present Siam as a civilized Western country, a matter almost impossible when the King discovers that one of his wives (Rita Moreno) is in love with another man.

From the outset, many things about The King and I are better than all the other Rodgers and Hammerstein musicals. For one, the production is lightyears ahead from even Carousel. The sound mixing is quite excellent, the colors are more vivid than ever, and the cinematography is focused. While Carousel and Oklahoma! play it quite safe with their shots and angles, The King and I allows for much more flexibility. There are some nice tracking shots, effective close-ups, and even some nice broad pans. The sets and landscapes are breathtaking; one really does feel as if one is in imperial Siam. The costumes are gorgeous. All of this adds to a great sense of culture somewhat absent in the earlier Rodgers and Hammerstein movies. The film won Oscars for both costume design and art direction: they are duly won.

Deborah Kerr does a nice job as the prim and proper Anna, though she is able to show some real sensitivity when it is necessary. I'd say she shines best in the singing, but Deborah Kerr actually doesn't sing a note in this movie. That honor goes to Marni Nixon, the woman most known for playing Singin' in the Rain throughout her entire film career. Marni Nixon is one of the most talented Broadway singers in human history; she's provided the singing voices for Deborah Kerr in The King and I, Natalie Wood in West Side Story, and Audrey Hepburn in My Fair Lady, amongst others. Nixon's voice, as always, is pitch perfect. Her voice tells the story completely while also exhibiting nigh flawless technique. Even songs as kitschy as "I Whistle a Happy Tune" sound great so long as Nixon is behind the mic. It's a shame that she was paid a mere $420 dollars for her work.

Yul Brynner won an Oscar for his portrayal of King Monkgut. I am wholly aware the performance is not historically accurate, but that is beside the point. Brynner creates a human being for us to appreciate. Certainly, the King of Siam is a character from a bygone age; he has all the arrogance one would expect of someone as entitled as he is. At the same time, he is a man conflicted by his place in the world at large. He wants to be powerful, but he recognizes that he is one of the weakest men in the world abroad. Thus, most of his actions - marrying dozens of wives, enforcing a system of kowtowing, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera - come across as him clinging on to whatever power he can. By the end of the film, he has learned what mechanisms of expressing power are appropriate and which are not. He also is a man who clearly has the capacity to love but who tends to botch the expression. It's a remarkably subtle performance, despite how over the top it seems.

The rest of the cast is competent. Rita Moreno has a sizable role as Tuptim, one of the King's wives who tries to elope with the ambassador from Burma. Her performance is good, though it is somewhat distracting to see a Latin American actress trying to play someone who is Burmese (that's about the same I can say for Natalie Wood playing a Puerto Rican in West Side Story). Martin Benson gives a great understated performance as the Kralahome, the King's prime minister. Patrick Adiarte is one of the few child actors I've unilaterally liked in movies. The only dud in the cast is Carlos Rivas as Lun Tha, Tuptim's lover. His delivery is rather stinted.

As for the actual work from R&H, the quality really shines forth. South Pacific had some great songs, but they were all rushed and poorly delivered. The King and I places the songs all at appropriate times and lets each settle with the audience. "Getting to Know You" and "Hello, Young Lovers" are silly numbers but are fun in their own way. "I Whistle a Happy Tune" is somewhat grating, but it does have some purpose, at least. "We Kiss in a Shadow" is a bit overwrought, but I think it works well enough. The two stand-outs are "Shall We Dance?" and "Something Wonderful." The former is the best dance-sequence of that can be found in the Rodgers and Hammerstein movies, even above Louise's sexually driven ballet in Carousel. "Shall We Dance?" has much more character, telling a story of emotional and spiritual growth through the actual dance. "Something Wonderful," on the other hand, is drop dead gorgeous. It's just a terrific composition.

The only duds are "A Puzzlement" and "The Small House of Uncle Thomas." The former is Yul Brynner's song; as great an actor as the man was, he just couldn't sing. The piece does accelerate his character development, but it is rather painful to listen to. The latter is a lengthy, and I do mean lengthy, ballet composed by Tuptim depicting the story, Uncle Tom's Cabin. The dancing is nice and the message is straightforward, but the ballet is so long, so dull, so boring that it really isn't worth the watch. We are in the middle of the second act, and the ballet takes up so much of it that the rest of the act seems rushed by comparison. As a result, the pacing of the latter portion of this movie is really thrown askew.

The King and I may not be particularly deep like Carousel, but it is several steps ahead of Oklahoma! and State Fair. Great performances, great production, and great music elevate this musical to a classic status. It's one of those movie musicals everyone should go see at some point; it's a great time and a celebration of the Hollywood musical experience. It's one of Rodgers and Hammerstein's best shows and one of their best movies.

After The King and I, Rodgers and Hammerstein made two more musicals for the screen. The first, Cinderella, is a much cherished TV musical with a cadre of nice songs. However, this blog isn't the place for it. The second, Flower Drum Song, is often regarded as one of Rodgers and Hammerstein's weakest productions. Normally, I'd seek out the movie for sake of completing the theme, but then I watched the sequence of "I Enjoy Being a Girl" from the film. Needless to say, it was a turn-off. So, if you want to watch Flower Drum Song, I say enter at your own risk. As for me, I have no desire to see it. All that leaves is one final Rodgers and Hammerstein movie musical.

And it's the best one of them all.

Recommendation: The King and I is a great family film. Adults can enjoy it for the fun performances while kids can enjoy the music and culture of it. If you are looking for an auteur's masterpiece, then Carousel is probably a better film for you. But, if you just want a fun, popcorn movie, The King and I is very satisfying.

I give The King and I 7.4 stars out of 10.