Kristian

Director:
Martin Frič
Year:
1939

About film

Just like other stars of the First Republic, Oldřich Nový also formed his image through the media – in theatre, film and on LPs. His current image as a star, however, is derived mainly from his film roles, for which he is most often remembered. Especially during national holidays, the likelihood of seeing Nový as a sensitive, charming, fit lover wooing a lady rises rapidly when you turn on the TV. But this popular actor didn’t find his ideal character right away. The turning point came with his role in Kristian, which, with its premiere in September 1939, was one of the first and biggest film events of Protectorate-era cinematography.

The film’s success is not the result of coincidence, as sometimes happens, but of careful calculation. Kristian was based on the comedy Christian by the French playwright Yvan Noé, which had already been a success in the mid-1930s when it was performed on the Vinohrady theatre scene. While the director Martin Frič did choose the theme at random, together with screenwriters Josef Gruss and Eduard Šimáček, and probably with the help of Oldřich Nový, he made considerable changes. He adapted the characters and the setting to Czech circumstances and the nature of the actors. Even the pessimistic ending was changed at the last minute. Originally, Kristian was supposed to end with the protagonist’s divorce.

In the 1930s, Nový would appear in film and theatre in the roles of various tricksters who do not play fair with others. Kristian partly follows this pattern. At the same time, there is a certain romanticization of deception. The main character is the downtrodden travel agency clerk Alois Novák. At work he obediently fulfils the wishes of his customers and the manager, and at home he just as submissively submits to the routine expected by his wife Marie (played by Nataša Gollová). He breaks out of the stereotype by frequenting the Orient Bar, where he seduces other women with the intention of spending the night with them (which, of course, he fails to achieve – and perhaps he wouldn’t even have the courage to actually do). Nonetheless, towards that end, he very consistently creates a complete alternate identity.

When Alois arrives at his favourite establishment in the opening scene, the staff address him respect, believing him to be an engineer, factory owner or general manager. In any case, he is Kristian to them – and to the audience, at first. The cleverly constructed script only reveals the true face of the dashing bon vivant half an hour into the movie. Till then, we are held under the illusion, along with the other film characters, that we are watching a famous figure of Prague nightlife. The opening introduction of the hero contributes to this. First, we only see his legs, then his torso in a perfectly fitting suit. We hear how he is greeted by everyone. Only then does he stop at the mirror to check that his appearance is tip-top from head to toe, and we finally get to see the mythical figure in all his splendour.

Kristian is greeted with a drink at the bar and seated at a table by a trio of keen waiters.

Additional clues reveal that he is no ordinary guest, but a distinguished one, worthy of the most exquisite service. Kristian is unfazed, as if he were used to this level of admiration and flattery. In reality, this is just a perfectly learned role, the execution of a clearly written script. His next stage is to find his prey. For this evening, it is Zuzana (Adina Mandlová), a bored woman from high society who, in her white dress (from the renowned salon of Hana Podolská), sparkles across a room filled exclusively with people in black outfits. No wonder Kristian can’t take his eyes off her.  

Oldřich Nový was also famous for sticking faithfully to the script. He would practice every gesture and line, and he is said to have calculated exactly how many steps Kristian had to take during his flamboyant entrée to ensure that it had the right rhythm and that he radiated dignity at all times. His thorough preparation came in handy considering the hectic filming, which took just 23 days (and it wasn’t just for Kristian – this was standard production time in its day). Furthermore, the highly efficient Martin Frič only did one or two takes for most shots. Perhaps this is why the film occasionally has distracting jumps across the timeline and why the continuity of some of the shots falters.

It was also Nový, who was 40 at the time of filming, who reportedly pressed for both acting partners, 29-year-old Adina Mandlová and 27-year-old Natasha Gollová, despite Frič’s reservations. Kristian lusts after the former, and she initially succumbs to him. But when Zuzana learns that the strapping, handsome man with the flawless diction is actually the perpetually crouching, mumbling Alois, he ceases to be attractive to her. Instead, she sets the rules of the game and starts to plot how to punish the two-faced womanizer. The other woman, on the other hand, must embody what the protagonist desires. Until that point, she is almost invisible to him as the bland Marie, who is most excited by an evening game of dominoes. It is only when she becomes an attractive modern woman with the help of her impertinent aunt („No wonder she doesn’t want you!“) that the marriage regains its lost sparkle. 

When Marie, in turn, asks Alois at the end to show her a bit of Kristian, presumably to indulge her fantasy for a change, her husband resists. He abandons the role of the assertive, almost aggressive seducer who does not respect personal space and explicit or implicit appeals from women to leave them alone forever. As much as the figure of Kristian is etched in the general consciousness as a model of First Republic gentility and gentlemanliness, today the response to his „pick-up“ techniques would probably not be a gradual melting of the heart, but a dose of pepper spray to the face.

Kristian ignores Zuzana’s request to leave, and instead audaciously sits even closer to her. When the annoyed victim wants to leave the bar, Kristian takes her to the dance floor without asking. He disregards her pleas to let her go. He deliberately takes advantage of her fear of shouting out and attracting unwanted attention. Later, Kristian argues over Zuzana with her current suitor, Fred. She is a mindless object for them to be used either by one man or the other. Nobody asks her what or whom she wants. 

The initial seduction of Zuzana continues in the private lounge, where the tone of the conversation changes. She allows Kristian to come increasingly closer, he circles around her like a hungry vulture, with pretty words (the falsehood of which will soon be unmasked) as he tries to win her favour. At times playful, at times chilling, the courtship – reminiscent of American screwball comedies such as Bringing Up Baby – culminates in an almost erotic, intimate close-up lighting of one cigarette against another. A similar deviation from the dominant tone occurs again during the sentimental ending, apparently a remnant of the originally sad ending, when Alois self-pityingly accepts his defeat and the prospect of a solitary existence, and the dynamic comedy of confusion becomes, for a moment, a melodrama.

In the audience’s reactions to Kristian, one may come across the interpretation that Alois started spending his evenings with other women because his wife bored him. But the film shows that they are both boring, and Marie would have an equally compelling reason to create an alter ego living a lavish nightlife like her husband. Just as Kristian reiterates certain tried-and-tested catchphrases (e.g. „Close your eyes, I’m leaving“), Alois is also a man of habit. In the travel agency, he answers customers‘ questions with memorized phrases that, due to unclear breaks between the words, merge into one big, suffocating entangled noise. He is suffocating in his marriage but does nothing to revive it. On the contrary, he cowardly flees from it. At home, he just eases into his slippers and starts playing dominoes. It would be unfair to blame Marie for the greyness of their cohabitation, to blame her as Kristian does when talking to his colleague. They’re both guilty.

Besides hobbies, Alois also lacks self-confidence. When speaking to the director of the travel agency (Jaroslav Marvan), he only nods resignedly and nervously plays with his fingers. He doesn’t have the courage to speak up. If he comes across as worldly as Kristian – it will be in Men about Town (Světáci, 1969), in which Nový, after several futile attempts to make a sequel, at least partially revives the legacy of the iconic character – it is thanks to the aforementioned preparedness. He knows in advance what to do and what to say. He also has a set sum of money set aside for each evening. But outside the confines of the Orient Bar, where he is in control, he loses his confidence. Even in the role of Kristian. When he takes a taxi with Zuzana, he nervously watches the taxi meter with the increasing price of the ride, which he had not calculated in beforehand. He only has a measly 30 crowns in his wallet.

One of the most popular Czech comedies can thus be seen, with a slight shift in perspective, as the story of two insecure, unhappy partners who totally fail to communicate with each other openly. The husband assumes another identity to flirt with other women behind his wife’s back. The wife pretends that everything is fine while in reality, she is mentally devastated and plans to file for divorce. The husband’s reformation comes only after he becomes terrified at the thought of being left alone. More significantly, or more visibly, however, the wife is transformed in the finale, having in fact done nothing to compare with Alois’s secret dates. She just couldn’t express how much pain she was in.

However immorally Kristian acted, the greater demands are ultimately placed on his wife in their strikingly asymmetrical relationship. In this respect, Kristian did not merely represent the prototype of a new type of film lover – paradoxically in a character that is admittedly illusory, unreal, even impossible. In some ways, Kristian was also normative for the romantic comedy genre. To this day, domestic films of this genre follow a similar formula – leniency towards men, strictness towards women. Unfortunately, they are rarely as entertaining and charming as Kristian was.

Martin Šrajer

Filmographic data

director:
Martin Frič

screenwriter:
Eduard Šimáček, Josef Gruss, Martin Frič

cinematography:
Ferdinand Pečenka

music:
Sláva Eman Nováček

cast:
Oldřich Nový, Adina Mandlová, Nataša Gollová, Jaroslav Marvan, Anna Steimarová

Lucernafilm, 100 min.

Reviews

“It is a film comedy of a very good standard, with a witty and skilfully crafted script, polished and inventive direction, performances that are elegant, skilled, smooth and impeccable, and beautiful photography. Nothing more than a jolly comedy with an amusing development of a theme that offers nothing deep or exceptional: nevertheless, Kristian is a positive and significant achievement in our film production. For after this film, the criticism that there are no people in this country who can make an impeccable modern social film of truly international standards, and that therefore all domestic comedies about modern life must be heavy-handed and unimaginative, can no longer be repeated. This makes Kristian a film we must welcome.”

Bedřich Rádl, Kinorevue 6, 1939, no. 3, p. 46.

 

“Frič’s Kristian is a well-made film shot with safe routine skills, but with no surprises in the subject matter. A kind of great convention, a much-returned-to setting with the usual plots. Adina Mandlová’s performance is downright sparkling, while Oldřich Nový often overacts and his performance seems alien in many places. It is an obviously expensive film, and it must be said that the money could have been better spent on a more worthy domestic libretto that would have addressed a useful and interesting problem and enriched a domestic production that is still so poor in terms of subject matters. We have no doubt, however, that the film will achieve considerable external success, especially thanks to Mandlová’s performance.”

Q. E. Kujal, Český filmový zpravodaj 19, 1939, no. 29, p. 1–2.

 

“A social parlour merrymaking, a film of the type they say we cannot do in Czech cinema. It is a pity that Noé’s play is too literary. The film is so realistic and natural that the improbability of the whole story stands out too much before the eyes of the audience in comparison with the confined space of a theatre. Nevertheless, we are thankful for this further proof of our film’s versatility. The merit goes to the performances of Nový, Mandlová and Marvan, as well as the efforts others, Schránil, Veverka, and even Kohout, who disciplined himself, yet remained irresistibly comic.”

-ve-, Filmový kurýr 13, 1939, no. 37, p. 5.

Visuals

Kristian – Just for Today?

“What Casablanca means to Americans, Kristian means to Czechs.”

“The essential source of the glorification of the First Czechoslovak Republic with its poverty and political corruption!”

“A precursor to later films about poor dreamers and sympathetic tricksters – Men About Town and Waiter, Scarper!.”

“Intelligent entertainment!”

“A rather depressing reflection on the oppressive everyday and the unbearable stereotype of ordinary life...”

As many viewers, as many opinions and views on the film Kristian (dir. Martin Frič, 1939). Leaving aside the cult of the film, who is the film’s Kristian and what is he trying to tell us? And how did he get presented to the film audience?

Production

The film Kristian (Kristian) was made in 1939 by Lucernafilm in the film studios of AB Barrandov. The filming took place from 2nd to 25th May 1939. Before its creation, the comedy was discussed by the Film Advisory Board and the project’s viability was not at all certain. Václav Binovec, the chairman of the Czechoslovak Film Union, for example criticized the project, based on a French play, for its foreign, non-original subject matter.[1] The aversion to French themes is not surprising, given that we are talking about the period a few months after the Munich Agreement was signed. Josef Hořčička, the chairman of the Central Union of Cinematographers, was bothered by the fact that the film glorifies snobbery, the environment of mondain bars, and fancy women. The only one who could have been really heard defending the upcoming film was Miloš Havel, who, on the contrary, pointed to its commercial and export potential.

The film was thus put into production with a budget of approx. CZK710,000 (together with 15 exploitation film copies it cost nearly CZK800,000). Oldřich Nový starring in the double role of Alois Novák alias Kristian got CZK20,000 out of the total costs.

The film was directed by Martin Frič. There were two scriptwriters: assistant director Eduard Šimáček and actor Josef Gruss. Josef Gruss is also the author of the film’s theme song, Just for Today (Jen pro ten dnešní den). Two years later, Gruss wrote the script for yet another film by Frič – The Hard Life of an Adventurer (Těžký život dobrodruha, 1941) – and later directed one of the most successful films made after the 1948 Czechoslovak coup d'état, The Stone Table Inn (Hostinec „U kamenného stolu“, 1948). 

Martin Frič received the National St. Wenceslas Award for his direction of Kristian. Adina Mandlová received the same award for Best Actress. Famous for her irony, Mandlová slightly downplayed her award at the time, saying that it should have gone to the designer Hana Podolská who sew all the costumes for Kristian. According to Mandlová’s recollections, Oldřich Nový was also supposed to receive the film prize, but he did not – because of his wife’s Jewish background.[3]

Theatre play vs film

The script was based on a French play by playwright Yvan Noé. This play was successfully staged by the Prague Chamber Theatre (Komorní divadlo) already in the autumn of 1935, four years before the film. The main role had been played by Bedřich Vrbský, the role of Zuzana by the then unknown Nataša Gollová. She later played in the film – not Zuzana, but Alois’s wife Marie.

However, the story of the play which the audience could see in the Chamber Theatre, was completely different to the one later offered to the film audience. Screenwriters Šimáček and Gruss substantially reworked and expanded the original French work. They added new characters and themes and, most importantly, changed the overall feel of the story. They emphasized the comedic potential, which gradually fades away in the play and the ending itself has an explicitly tragic flavour.

First of all, the characters of the main characters have changed significantly:

The central character of the play is Vincent Jourdain, a clerk at the Ministry of Agriculture, an elderly and unattractive gentleman (the theatrical Zuzana assesses him with a diffident, “I don’t know who you are. You are not handsome, you are not young.”). The main character in the film is Alois Novák (a symbol of elegance as played by Oldřich Nový), an employee of a travel agency. Thanks to his job, he is able to faithfully tell stories of travel and exoticism, which lends him an aura of mystery.

The theatrical Zuzana is a rather mondain lady, a voluntarily kept woman of many men. She actually has three boyfriends. Vincenc glosses their role in Zuzana’s life as follows: the car dealer Roger is the “official concubinus” with whom Zuzana spends time only because “women’s clothes are expensive;” the sportsman Jacques is the lover of today’s day; and the film actor André the lover of tomorrow’s day. The professions of Zuzana’s lovers are not accidental – the play explicitly communicates that spiritual love (for Kristian) is more powerful than money (Roger), power (Jacques), and romance (André). Despite her living high, the theatrical Zuzana is essentially a simple, naive girl. But the film’s Zuzana is a modern, emancipated and intelligent woman with a sense of humour who has only one boyfriend and maintains a rather platonic, social relationship with him. The difference between the two Zuzanas can also be demonstrated by how differently the final line, heard in identical wording both in the play and the film, sounds: “I used to think that if one is to laugh, one must have a reason to laugh, and if one is to cry, one must have a reason to cry... And now I could cry or laugh – for you – at your will! That’s beautiful, Kristian!” While the theatrical Zuzana is deadly serious in her final line and must suppress her sincere tears while delivering this, in the film the same words (spoken by Adina Mandlová) are meant as irony. The film’s Zuzana confesses to Kristian only for show, only to then throw it in his face that she saw through his game right from the beginning and wanted to punish him. 

The character of Alois’s wife was changed even more. Vincent’s wife Julie is, to put it mildly, a loud-mouthed vixen. She berates both her husband and their maid who even quits her job because of the insufferable landlady. But the film’s wife Marie is lovely and rather naive – a charming wife despite her simplicity and whining. A mother-hen tending the warmth of the family hearth (without the help of a maid). She loves her husband faithfully and out of love for him, she undergoes a transformation at the end of the film.

But the greatest intervention into the original play can be found at the very end of the story. The play’s Vincenc is being stultified by his work at the ministry. His wife wants to leave him after she finds out about his escapades. Vincent then voluntarily gives up his adventurous trips, his only pleasure. In the end, he does not divorce his wife, but he remains unhappy. He would like to live a different life, with different people, with a different profession. Yet he takes a defeatist stance – his native environment supposedly predestined him to the life he is living. Vincent is incapable of change and ends tragically.

For the film’s Alois, on the other hand, working in a travel agency is an opportunity to dream of travelling. After his double life is revealed, he returns to the family hearth, his wife forgives him and even claims to understand his aversion to stereotypes and his desire for change. The film’s Alois, unlike the play’s one, does not long for young, beautiful Zuzana, who, although formidable, is still a bit cold. Zuzana belongs to another world, and Alois realises that. He knows well that a man like him, rather humble and conservative at heart, can only find happiness by the side of his lovely naive Marie.

This is the most significant deviation from the original. The play’s Vincent warns us, saying: We’re not supposed to pretend we’re something we're not. Hopeless dreams end tragically. The film’s hero almost took this message up as well, as is evident from the surviving synopsis where the plot is still abject to the theatrical one. It concludes with the following motto: “The world would not be the world and life would not be life if there were not one bond common to all human beings: the eternal and perhaps never fulfilled [!] longing for the ideal.”[4] What does the film’s Alois tell us in contrast? Let us dream. Let us enjoy life to the full. Even in the mundane reality one can find adventure.

Compared to the film, the play also lacks poetry in its language and plot construction. The replicas of the characters are more caustic, more vulgar in meaning (Julie calls her husband Vincenzo “you filthy pig”). Their motivations are often overtly low and their morals questionable. For example, the characters talk openly about who is sleeping with whom or who wants to sleep with whom and what they are asking for in return (Roger, the film’s Fred, refers to Zuzana as an originally very poor “girl from the streets” to whom he gave a large sum of money in exchange for a love affair).

Period atmosphere

Kristian premièred on 8th September 1939. Let us imagine for a moment that we are attending this première. It is 8th September 1939. A year ago, in September 1938, the rest of Europe betrayed us. The Munich Agreement was signed and, with a view to maintaining peace in Europe, our Western “friends” gave Germany our Sudetenland. Six months ago, in March 1939, Hitler usurped the rest of Bohemia and Moravia. A protectorate was established. And exactly one week ago, on 1st September 1939, the Germans invaded Poland, and the Second World War began. You and your families have lived through the First World War, which ended 21 years ago. You remember well what a conflict of this magnitude can bring. And now you are sitting in a cinema which, by the way, no Jew shares with you, because a month ago – in August 1939 – they were banned from visiting the pictures. So you are sitting in the cinema and you want to forget about life out there, outside the screening room, at least for a while. Oldřich Nový sings his most famous song. Just for today, life is worth living for... Here it is necessary to remember that people in the Protectorate perceived these words differently. The present was bad and the future uncertain. Under these conditions, everything really was “just for today” – because we may not be here tomorrow. 

In the estate of Josef Gruss, there is the original text of the song. He wrote: “You mustn’t ask: is tomorrow perhaps going to bring what yesterday brought.” The word “perhaps” describes the uncertainty of the Protectorate occupation. Will it ever end? Or will Germany rule us forever? Or will someone else rule us forever? This is also the form in which the text was included in the technical script, but the typescript is corrected by hand in pencil: “You mustn’t ask: is tomorrow going to bring again what yesterday brought.” This is the version Oldřich Nový sings in the film. A small but essentially fundamental correction. The overall tone is more relaxed, more carefree, in short, a hedonistic shrug-off, without fear or tension. Kristian could have sung a love song to Zuzana that would have copied the motifs of popular hits of the time – about her beauty and charms or about blue-skied horizons and Cairo the travel agent is raving about in the film. Instead, Gruss wrote a universally valid message the altogether hedonistic sense of which is easy to identify with for the viewer even in today’s consumerist era. There is no doubt that Kristian’s song is essential to the film. Thanks to it, Kristian wins over not only Zuzana, but also the viewers across generations. It can be said that Just for Today has become an acknowledged musical synonym of the First Czechoslovak Republic (paradoxically despite the film’s Protectorate origins).

The message of the film

People often ask what makes Kristian special, why it should be put on a pedestal. After all, there are many other hilarious comedies of the time, for example The Blue Star Hotel (Hotel Modrá hvězda) or Eva Fools Around (Eva tropí hlouposti). Is it fair? It is, considering that Kristian is not only a great social comedy, but it stands out above other comedies for its extraordinarily human dimension as well. Similarly to Alois Novák, each of us sometimes longs to be someone else. If only for a moment, if only in the eyes of others. All of us sometimes long to escape from the hard, stereotypical reality and achieve different qualities and dimensions in our lives. The contemporary critic Oldřich Kautský summed it up perfectly in his review:

“In film, the main characters are usually exceptional people. People who have had something happen to them, or who are interesting enough by nature to capture the viewer’s attention. But such people are a tiny minority in the world. Millions have nothing happen to them in a lifetime. [...] And in a time of a complete lack of new subjects, [Kristian] reaches out to places film has never before turned to. It does not strive to portray a bland man but one man of a million of nameless and uninteresting ones. [...] Even a little man can experience a romantic story without having to travel all around the world. [...] Even for people who are in a hurry on their way from work, there is a beautiful world if they can imagine it. For everything that is written and invented in the world belongs to everyone. [...] It is beautiful to live our own life while being convinced that all the beauty of the world is made for us. The awareness of the greatness and splendour of the world belongs to us as well, even though we may be sipping coffee in Prague centre, far from the sea or the Indian forests – it adds an unknown magic to everyday life. [...] The film about Kristian is a comedy for people who think and feel. Its subject matter is beyond the average and its treatment is of the level of a European film.”[5]

Would you agree?

Tereza Sklenářová

Notes:

[1] OPA NFA, fond FPS, inv. č. 22, Schůze č. 169–204, 1939. Zápis o 179. schůzi FPS, 2. května 1939, p. 8.

[2] FOND: Prag-Film A.Gr. (A-B), sig. VI/d, inv. 534/

[3] Adina Mandlová. Dneska už se tomu směju. Praha: Československý filmový ústav 1990, p. 72.

[4] NFA fond: FRIČ Martin (1902–1968), sig. III 8) 2), inv.č. 234.

[5] Kinorevue no. 44, 21/06/1939, p. 343-345.