There are a couple of things you have to get past to be able to enjoy this film.
First, world perspective on colonialism is far different today than it was in 1936. What seemed like the grand British Empire back then isn't respected today as it once was. And that's a big issue.
The second thing you have to get past is that quite a few horses were killed making this film. At least one of our posters said over 200, although what I read is more like 25. Not that even that is acceptable. But there is a huge difference between 25 dead horses and 200+ dead horses. Apparently Flynn, a horse lover, was livid over that.
If you get past those two issues, then this is quite an impressive film. Not that it's historically correct, but they admit that at the beginning of the movie. It is historical fiction. But awfully good historical fiction. Errol Flynn may have been Hollywood's bad boy, but he was a fine actor, and I would say this is one of his best efforts. I did feel that Olivia de Havilland was a bit wasted here, but then again, it's a war film, and this was, after all, three years before her triumph in "Gone With The Wind".
In terms of the supporting cast, Patric Knowles is great as Flynn's brother.
The list of supporting characters is pretty familiar -- Henry Stephenson, Nigel Bruce (in a not-so-bumbling role), the wonderful Donald Crisp, David Niven, C. Henry Gordon (as a very interesting Surat Khan; nicely played), and gabby Spring Byington.
It's a great STORY, but I have to admit that it was sort of ruined when I saw how those poor horses were treated in the climax attack. I'll never be able to look at Michael Curtiz as favorably again...this was atrocious. It's interesting that despite the film's initial success, it was not re-released to theaters due to the cruelty to the horses.
I'm giving the film a "7", although without the horse cruelty I probably would have given in an "8".
First, world perspective on colonialism is far different today than it was in 1936. What seemed like the grand British Empire back then isn't respected today as it once was. And that's a big issue.
The second thing you have to get past is that quite a few horses were killed making this film. At least one of our posters said over 200, although what I read is more like 25. Not that even that is acceptable. But there is a huge difference between 25 dead horses and 200+ dead horses. Apparently Flynn, a horse lover, was livid over that.
If you get past those two issues, then this is quite an impressive film. Not that it's historically correct, but they admit that at the beginning of the movie. It is historical fiction. But awfully good historical fiction. Errol Flynn may have been Hollywood's bad boy, but he was a fine actor, and I would say this is one of his best efforts. I did feel that Olivia de Havilland was a bit wasted here, but then again, it's a war film, and this was, after all, three years before her triumph in "Gone With The Wind".
In terms of the supporting cast, Patric Knowles is great as Flynn's brother.
The list of supporting characters is pretty familiar -- Henry Stephenson, Nigel Bruce (in a not-so-bumbling role), the wonderful Donald Crisp, David Niven, C. Henry Gordon (as a very interesting Surat Khan; nicely played), and gabby Spring Byington.
It's a great STORY, but I have to admit that it was sort of ruined when I saw how those poor horses were treated in the climax attack. I'll never be able to look at Michael Curtiz as favorably again...this was atrocious. It's interesting that despite the film's initial success, it was not re-released to theaters due to the cruelty to the horses.
I'm giving the film a "7", although without the horse cruelty I probably would have given in an "8".