The Prisoner of Zenda (1952)

Thanks for the memories!

Please don't spend money on this.

Absolutely the worst movie.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

The concept of turning to a proved success rather than come up with an Original Screenplay is something that seems to beset only producers of today whereas this film is proof that it has been going on for more than half a century. They may have opted to film the 1937 version shot for shot but, alas, they couldn't replicate the original cast and had to settle for acting joke Stewart Granger, insipid Deborah Kerr and rely on James Mason to supply the only decent acting amongst the principals, plus strong support from Louis Cahern and Robert Coote. The story itself retains all its Boy's own Paper razzamatazz and it's one of the few properties which does not suffer by the addition of colour. Once you get past the wooden Granger and the passionless Kerr you can bask in the charisma of Mason and beguile the time pleasantly.

While on holiday an Englishman who resembles the king of a small European nation gets mixed up in palace intrigue and royal romance when his royal doppelgänger is kidnapped.A Technicolor remake of Anthony Hope's much filmed story sees Stewart Granger, Deborah Kerr and James Mason star, while directing is Richard Thorpe, composing the score is Alfred Newman and cinematography is by Joseph Ruttenberg.Lush and at times lavish, this MGM production is however rather ponderous at times. The first hour positively crawls and while Granger is just fine in the dual roles of Rudolf Rassendyl/King Rudolf V, the dynamism and breezy pace of the Ronald Colman starring 1937 version is sadly lacking. A better director than Richard "One Take Only" Thorpe could have made better use of the budget. There's also a distinct lack originality in the piece since it's practically the same film as the 37 movie. Even using the same Newman score. You have to wonder what was the point really?Still, there are some enjoyable moments in here to not make it a complete waste of time. James Mason, in spite of it being a rare occasion where he's miscast, is worth a watch for his line in campy villainy. While Ruttenberg's camera-work doesn't waste the chance to swash that buckle in a Technicolor sheen. The duelling sequence, that sadly seems to take forever to arrive, is well choreographed (better than anything in the 37 movie actually), and the costumes by Walter Plunkett are very pleasing on the eye. 5/10

Rollicking Technicolor swashbuckler like they just don't, can't or probably just won't make anymore. You just know that today the story here would be swallowed up in miles of SFX ("National Treasure" anyone?). Virtually the only noticeable effect here is the cleverly wrought double-play scenes of Grainger as the facile sot of a king and his dashing True-Brit doppel-ganger who is pressed into his impersonation (you really can't see the join). Grainger of course eventually saves the kingdom against the dastardly machinations of the King's designing brother, Prince Michael and the even more dangerous James Mason, (a picture in lilac jodhpurs!) as the real brains and cold-steel of the whole operation, Rupert of Hentzau. Here we get a narrative true to its "Boy's Own Story" novel source which plays it straight from start to finish. The story engages and involves the viewer straightaway and takes you out of the everyday into a magical make-believe world of derring-do (and derring don'ts!). The three English leads (Grainger, Mason and Kerr) are all absolutely delightful, immersed as far as they need to be in their characters with nary a trace of knowing cynicism at the unreality of it all. The climax of the film of course is the terrific sword-fight between Grainger and Mason (more correctly the two gifted stunt-players), a trick repeated in Grainger's next feature "Scaramouche" to even better effect. All in all a matinée treat of the highest order.

Having not seen the 1937 version, to me the '52 movie is a perfectly serviceable movie. Hokie in some places? Sure. But still a great movie with a heart felt cast. There's a lot to be said for the simple authenticity of non CGI movies with Romantic themes.Michael is deliciously dastardly, the uniforms are quaint yet hold a sense of menace, and in particular Deborah Kerr's performance really is underrated and very well done. I think it's a tribute to the original story that it has been remade so many times. Its universal themes offer something for each of us: duty and lost love, the danger of greed, and a reminder of chivalry from 19th century Europe, whatever its paternalistic and hierarchical undertones.