Mein Herz gehört dem Rebellen

As I have always said, I am amazed by the fact that Hollywood scripts are so inspired by French History; here it takes place under Louis XVI reign. But, of course, as you can easily guess, don't expect to learn anything accurate about true facts related to History of France. This period, settings is only a pretext for swashbucking scenes, romance, and a scheme of good hero defending poor people against rich ones. And, of course, as a Columbia Pictures movie, the villain is no one else than, guess who??... George McReady, of course as Basil Rathbone was more or less for the same period in swashbuckers: MARK OF ZORRO, ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, ADVENTURES OF MARCO POLO. It is pleasant, predictable, supported by a good production design. Henry Levin the director made several films like this one, for Columbia Pictures, before moving up to bigger and more ambitious stuff such a JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH, his best film, besides THE LONELY MAN. Forget his last features, destined to sixties audiences, born after WW2. You know what I am talking about.

A French baron (Willard Parker) leads rebels like a Robin Hood, stealing Louis XVI's taxes to give to the poor.

Ok Willard Parker might not be a typical choice for such a role, but he acquits himself quite well, coming across stalwart and upstanding. The film itself follows the routine lines of a Robin Hood type of story, but does it with some liveliness. The sword fights are good, and the added bonus is George McCready, who bolsters a film if he is the villain of the piece. It's predictable yet fun. Nice supporting cast and a smooth narrative help. Technicolor would've been great as it usually fits this genre - black and white is more for film noir and mysteries.

Youngsters out there will likely not remember tall, blond Willard Parker, who with a flashing smile aspired after the cape and sword of Errol Flynn (who didn't?) in those halcyon movie days after WWII. He kind of looked like Peter Graves, Matt Dillon's (James Arness of Gunsmoke fame) brother. But, he never caught on. Mainly, I suppose because he didn't have the dash to go with his flashing smile, or because he often got stuck with not-too-good scripts, like this one. Listen, as a kid, I lived on costume adventures. Those years were the heyday of those tales. I waited for movies with John Hall, George Montgomery, Cornell Wilde but, this was a dog. I barely sat through the convoluted story line and tiresome dialogue. Now, if you can see this film, it actually is better than I remembered it as a kid. Why? The story is a bit involved, the dialogues sometimes a bit tedious and the action doesn't always burst off the screen. Today viewers may not have the patience to wade through the undercurrents of the complex plot. But, if you're a die-hard costume drama addict like me, you do it. The film doesn't hang together like some of the later Burt Lancaster action films but it is worth seeing.