Memorable, crazy movie

Don't listen to the negative reviews

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Based on the 1881 novel of the same name by Mark Twain and released in the US under the title "Crossed Swords", this is a very fun historical adventure film in spite of its flaws. The film has a slow start but it picks up momentum as it progresses. It has a good script by George MacDonald Fraser but the direction of Richard Fleischer is not up to his usual very high standard. Given that it was produced by the Salkinds, has several major cast members in common and was adapted by Fraser from a 19th Century classic, it is difficult not to compare it to "The Three Musketeers" (1973) and "The Four Musketeers". On that score, I found the film to be a little wanting. I couldn't help thinking that it would have been better if it had been directed by Richard Lester, who was more suited to the swashbuckling adventure genre than Fleischer. The film stars Mark Lester in not one but two very bad performances as the title characters Edward, Prince of Wales (later King Edward VI) and his impoverished doppelgänger Tom Canty. As played by Lester, both characters are cardboard cutouts. The very occasional slight trace of a Cockney accent aside when playing the latter in the early scenes, he does absolutely nothing to distinguish between the two. They are supposed to be physically identical but not in terms of their personalities, which often seems to be the case here in spite of Fraser's efforts in the script department. The fact that Lester delivers 90% of his lines in a monotone and shouts the rest of them does not do him any favours either. At 18 years old, he was far too old for the roles, as both characters are supposed to be about nine in the novel. Other than all of these things, however, he was perfect casting. In spite of Lester's poor performances, Prince Edward and Tom are both likable characters, which is a testament to Fraser's writing and the strength of the source material. It is quite funny that the film would have been better with one Lester and without another. I found the scenes featuring Prince Edward trying to deal with the often merciless outside world to be far more interesting than those of Tom in Nonsuch Palace.The best performance in the film comes from Rex Harrison, who is wonderful as the kind, fiercely intelligent, witty and introspective Duke of Norfolk, who is condemned to the Tower of London by Henry VIII but finds a friend and ally in Tom. George C. Scott has little more than a cameo but he is sublime as the enigmatic, dishonest monk turned gang leader Ruffler. In contrast to Lester, his "Oliver!" co- star Oliver Reed was very well cast as Miles Hendon, a nobleman turned soldier of fortune. He takes pity on Edward, saving him from a mob and fighting off Tom's abusive father, but does not believe his claims to be the Prince of Wales for most of the film. Reed is an excellent actor and he imbues the hotheaded Miles with a great deal of pathos, particularly in the second half. I have always thought that Charlton Heston is a very underrated actor but he is atypically bad and forgettable as the dying Henry VIII, in contrast to how effective he was as the conniving Cardinal Richelieu in the aforementioned films.Ernest Borgnine is pretty decent as John Canty but I think that he may have been miscast. As Miles' beloved Lady Edith, Raquel Welch is billed second after Reed (and before Lester) in the opening credits but she does not appear until almost three-quarters of the way through the film and has only about 15 minutes screen time, if even that. Nice work if you can get it! Welch is better known for the way that she looks in a fur bikini or a tight spacesuit than for her mastery of Shakespeare but she still manages to give a better performance than Lester, which says a lot. David Hemmings was quite good in the small role as Miles' treacherous brother Hugh, which surprised me as I thought that he was very bad in "The Charge of the Light Brigade" (1968). It also features nice appearances from Harry Andrews as the new king's uncle Lord Hertford, Julian Orchard as St. John, Lalla Ward as a suitably imperious Princess Elizabeth, Murray Melvin as Edward's dresser and Hammer regular Michael Ripper as Lady Edith's servant.Overall, this is by no means a perfect film but it's good fun. The script and some excellent performances are able to paper over some of the more obvious cracks.

Rather chintzy retelling of Mark Twain's "The Prince and the Pauper", though one with a good director (Richard Fleischer) and a fine cast behind it. Mark Lester has the dual roles of the Crown Prince of England and his lookalike pauper who exchange places, and he's a decent young actor if a bit colorless. Older children might enjoy the film, though a comic rendering of the material may have been more successful. Fleischer is too literal and reverent to the text, and his pacing is often stilted. Audiences at this point were eager for a little broad satire and, while Oliver Reed and Raquel Welch do grace us with their presence, one waits in vain for someone like Marty Feldman or the Monty Python troupe to invade the territory and give it some juice. *1/2 from ****

Touted as the latest answer to the 1973 version of "The Three Musketeers", this film can't hold a candle to the light wit, sumptuous splendor and game cast of the first film. (The movie even cribs no less than 4 actors from the prior film.) Based on the story by Mark Twain, it concerns a pick-pocketing urchin (Lester) who finds himself in the room of King Henry VIII's son (also Lester) and discovers that the two are virtually identical. They swap places as a lark and soon find themselves up to their necks in the problems of each others' lives. Lester, so adorable in "Oliver" years before, is a lanky, fright-wigged, one-note presence. On the occasions when he stands up straight, he TOWERS above everyone including the extras, looking gangly and awkward. He has a pinched facial expression and fraught eyebrows through the entire film...as both characters! This gets very old, very quickly. Reed shows up as a game, but bulky swordsman who aids the one who's stuck as a pauper. Second-billed Welch barely appears in the film, turning up at the very end (and looking stunning.) Four (count 'em) Best Actor Oscar winners round out the cast to no great effect, done in by the laggy direction and the uncreative script. Heston (with no authentic accent) unconvincingly and hammily plays Henry VIII to the one filling in as a prince. Borgnine (in another distractingly non-British accent) plays the urchin's overbearing father. Harrison has little to do (he's offscreen for a significant portion of the film) as one of Heston's political rivals. Scott has a cameo as a grizzled leader of thieves. The good things about the film (the sets, costumes, star wattage) are done in by the bad things (mundane storytelling, lazy cinematography, a ghastly, anachronistic score by Jarre.) The biggest flaw is the casting of Lester. So much hinges on him and he is just wrong for the role by this time. Comparing this so-so piece of work to the majestic, classy and rich "The Three Musketeers" and "The Four Musketeers" is blasphemy.

This was always one of my favorite adventure films as a boy. a fine cast of legendary actors complimented the story wonderfully. Mark Lester was a bit old to play the title roles but, still a good young actor. George C Scott and Oliver Reed are standouts as is Sir Rex Harrison as the curmudeonly Duke of Norfolk. Harrison has the best line in the film when the King's Guards come to escort him to prison. "Oh, you are arresting me? I always thought that was an honor reserved for His Majestey's unfortunate wives." On the down side, Charleton Heston was ridiculous as an overly made up (and stuffed ) King Henry. Heston never seems to learn how limited an actor he is. Overall a very fun film that never bores and never makes you stop enjoying yourself.