Kim - Geheimdienst in Indien

I saw the movie just after I had read the book and I realized that while some dialogue was copied verbatim, the end had been changed and the character played by Erol Flynn was given a greater role than in the book while the importance of some female characters that existed in the book was actually obliterated. Of course the movie cast the English as good and the Russians as bad as the book did and had all the trappings of the mythology of British imperialism as it would have been obvious in a book based on a Kipling novel.But the experience of watching it on screen was fine, since the movie had simplified some of the more esoteric meanderings of the book focusing on action or on the making a man- Kim- that is in character building, as the moral was that an essentially kind-hearted but mischievous oriental had to acquire the manners of an English gentleman-the role St Xavier's was preparing him for, and which he found difficult to follow-but at which he returned in the end through the guidance of the horse trader, a model of faith to the British. The role of he Lama was downplayed in the sense that the actions of his that the movie retained were only the ones that related with Kim's development as an individual and not the ones that had to do with his own spiritual quest. In the book, the Lama is just after Kim the second most important character while in the movie he is overshadowed by the horse trader played by Erol Flynn.Also importance is attached in the training Kim received in order to enter British Intelligence, an ambition that judging from the movie seemed to be what natives considered a crowning achievement. But still it is an enjoyable movie provided you agree with it's premises i.e. that the east is the playground of Westerners whose ways the natives would do well to emulate as Kim did or otherwise they would appear at best as well meaning but essentially exotic eccentrics as the Lama, or otherwise as dangerous criminals as all the opponent of British rule appeared in the film. The movie is really fun if you are a young westerner or someone who in latter life still retained this outlook but I suppose the same prerequisites apply to all Kipling's work- original or subject to adaptation.

"Kim" is a Hollywood attempt at a literary adaptation that doesn't quite come off: on re-reading the book I was surprised at just how much is lifted directly from Kipling's original dialogue, albeit not always in the original context, and many of the familiar images are there even where the plot strands that were attached to them have been omitted. The little boys still ride astride the great gun in Lahore, the smashed water-jar reforms itself on the floor of Lurgan's shop, and the old woman from Kulu peeps shamelessly from the corner of her curtained cart.

A great deal has been condensed in order to meet the requirements both of length and of the cinematic form; the most memorable parts of Kim's adventures, like those of Mowgli, occur before he is 'civilised', and the film does a good job of trying to reduce the strung-out remaining two thirds of the novel into a reasonably short timespan. Many of the added scenes, such as the one where Mahbub Ali cheerfully dispatches a would-be assassin and Kim tries for equal equanimity but fails, Creighton's device for helping Kim escape his pursuers at Ambala, and the boy's hard bargaining with the disguised goat-herd in the mountains, are true to the spirit of the book. Someone clearly did try hard on this.

But what I would guess that MGM were hoping for was another Kipling-cribbed adventure story along the lines of "Gunga Din", and "Kim" simply doesn't come to life in the same manner. British-made films of India such as "The Drum" or "North West Frontier" capture the local colour better, but they also have the advantage of more sophisticated political dialogue and a more inherently cinematic plot. Ironically, "Kim" probably sticks too close to source: Kipling's novel was never intended as a conventional thriller, and once you take out the philosophy, description and the unequalled ear for the demotic that conjure up the author's India at such length, there isn't that much actual action in the book. The screenplay supplies some extra thrills to take the place of the novel's ignominiously simple defeat of the Russians and adds a couple of rooftop chases earlier on, with the somewhat creaky device of a narrator used to fill in the gaps, but it didn't really catch my imagination.

Dean Stockwell is no Sabu, but he acquits himself well in a film that absolutely depends on its central child actor. He handles Kim's long streams of abuse or cajolery with aplomb, and looks if anything more convincing in Indian clothes than European costume, where he seems more the 1950s schoolboy than a child of the nineteenth century.

Casting Errol Flynn as Mahbub Ali, the Afghan horse-trader 'as prompt as he was unscrupulous', was clearly a publicity coup for MGM, who awarded him top billing for what is really only a supporting role, and rewrote the story to give the character a more heroic place in the action. For his part, Flynn sacrifices not only his trademark pencil moustache, but his entire head of hair to the studio, appearing at one point with a shaven scalp and at another with a bizarre ginger stubble that suggests someone had misunderstood the concept of a crimson-dyed beard... He wears his costumes well, and the script adds in a couple of winking nudges to Flynn's image as a screen Lothario that aren't really an improvement; but on the whole he plays it straight, although relatively uninspired. There's nothing wrong with the performance but nothing really memorable about it either, although there is a visible rapport between Mahbub and the boy.

Paul Lukas gives a good performance as the holy man whom Kim loves and protects, once you've got over the fact that he looks nothing whatsoever like a Buddhist monk -- more like an elderly Cardinal! The fact that he is supposed to be Tibetan is perhaps wisely glossed over in the script, and Lukas brings out the quiet steel behind the old man's unworldly determination, as well as his affection for Kim.

Ultimately, however, I felt this film neither had the depth of character of its source nor the magic and excitement of the type of adventure it's trying to be; it reads as a tea-time adaptation rather than a film in its own right. I'd rank it as a 7 on my personal scale: worth recommending if it's on, but not worth going out of one's way to see.

This is a nice version of Rudyard Kipling's notorious India tale, adapted in Hollywood style by Victor Saville and set in 1880s. Along with ¨Courageous captains¨, ¨Jungle book¨, ¨The Elephant boy¨ are the Kipling's most known adaptations. Kim(Dean Stockwell) is 15-years old boy posing as vagrant native , but he's actually son of a English sergeant. He's living on his own resources when finds a monk Lama(Paul Lukas) , a holy man. Kim is looking for a red bull an the Buddhist Lama on search for a river where Budda hurled an arrow becoming itself a sacred place. Kim also befriends an Afgan horse dealer named Mahbub Ali (Errol Flynn) . Later on , Kim is trained by English secret service(Arnold Moss) as spy. Then Kim receives orders of a Brit colonel(Robert Douglas) for a daring mission.

This rousing adventure film packs emotion, feats, thrills and agreeable performances. Stars Paul Lukas does a magnificent acting as spiritual monk but is Dean Stockwell as the rogue waif , in the title role, who steals show. Although relies heavily on the enjoyable relationship between the protagonists , nevertheless the film is very amusing, providing some intense action scenes and lots of excitement. Enthusiastic supporting cast from Robert Douglas, Cecil Kellaway, Thomas Gomez, Laurette Luez and Reginald Owen as Father Victor, among them. Glamorous cinematography in glimmer Technicolor by William L Skall . Filmed on location in Rajasthan,Agra(India) and US, as Lone Pine, Alabama Hills, Sierra Nevada mountains of California and with production design by prestigious Cedric Gibbons and Hans Peters. Stirring and exotic musical score by Andre Previn. The picture is flavorfully directed by Victor Saville. Rating : Good and nice, it's an exciting family fare. It's remade for TV(1984) in an inferior version directed by John Davies and starred by Peter O'Toole as Lama and Blayr Brown as Ali.

MGM's Technicolor adaption of the Rudyard Kipling novel of the same name. The plot's about an orphaned boy named Kim (Dean Stockwell) in colonial India who aids the British in putting down a native rebellion instigated by Russia. It's a colorful and sometimes fun adventure flick with a good performance from Stockwell and fine work from Paul Lukas (looking almost unrecognizable without his mustache) as a Buddhist lama. Errol Flynn's better days were behind him and it's painfully apparent in every scene of his. He looks paunchy and tired throughout and that dyed orange hair and goatee does nothing to help. Still, there are these moments where you see some of that roguish charm and can't help but smile. The movie was filmed mostly on location in India, which helps by providing some lovely scenery. I didn't mind the parts filmed on set, though, as the production values here are of typically excellent quality you would expect from Metro. It goes on a little long and is never as exciting as you would hope but it is enjoyable, particularly for fans of Stockwell or Flynn completists.

Fans of The Great Game in general and Rudyard Kipling's Kim specifically will enjoy this film, I think, especially if they've read or re-read the book recently. While it is true the film shows its age, if you're not a nit-picker, you should remain engaged. Stockwell does a good job with the title character of Kim, who is the central character, just as he is in the book. While The Great Game swirls around Kim, the story is one of his education in the arts of spying and his devotion to his holy man. The courage portrayed by characters Mahbub Ali (played by Errol Flynn) and Hurree Chunder is reminiscent of the exploits of the real-life locals who served in the Indian Secret Service in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.