Tres soldados

Based on another Rudyard Kipling story, the parallels between this and the better known Gunga Din film are too obvious to ignore. Once again Kipling has three protagonists soldiers as heroes who are three of the most undisciplined soldiers in the Indian army. But are three of the best fighters. Unlike Gunga Din where the heroes are sergeants, these three guys are from the ranks and have been there for many years.

Stewart Granger, Cyril Cusack, and Robert Newton are our three privates and they get into all kinds of jackpots. Their colonel is Walter Pidgeon and this whole film is a flashback offered at a club by retired General Pidgeon. After one incident too many he and his adjutant David Niven have the idea to promote one of them to break up the team. It works to some degree.

But when Cusack and Newton and many more of their comrades get into a nasty jackpot trying to capture a rebel tribe leader the old team comes together. In fact the rescue of the group by Granger bears a lot of similarity to the climax of Gunga Din. Only this one is played for far more laughs.

This military comedy cried for the rough house traditions set by John Ford. Although director Tay Garnett did any number of good action films, the whole military tradition and the comedy would have really been perfected had Ford been at the helm. Irishman Ford did quite well with the British army in India with Wee Willie Winkie.

Still Soldiers Three is worthwhile if you're a fan of the three leads.

"Soldiers Three" is a great example of the sort of pro-British colonialism that was popular in American films of the 1930s-50s. I really have no idea WHY the films of the USA so strongly supported the British in these stories....and when I see many of them today, I find myself rooting for the 'bad guys'...folks who are fighting for freedom and independence from the Crown!

In this rather inconsequential film, the writers seem to be trying to re-create the magic from RKO's "Gunga Din"...and the story is very similar. Like "Din", this one features three irrepressible and irresponsible enlisted men who manage to rise to the occasion when the chips are down.

This film seems to scream 'time passer'....with a lot of plot holes, one-dimensional characters and a sense of fun. Not one of MGM's better films...but enjoyable in a mindless sort of way.

Other posters complained that in Soldiers Three Granger imitates Cary Grant in Gunga Din. I'm a fan of Gunga Din but hadn't really thought of comparing the actors as I watched Soldiers Three. Instead I found myself admiring, and frequently amused by, Granger's comic abilities--of which he showed flashes in other movies but of course he was better known as a romantic swashbuckler or, later, a western hero comfortable with the ladies.

Another complaint is that the film is a Hollywood potboiler, but what's surprising is how much British comic style survives in this production from the West Coast of North America. The comic pace may seem "lazy," but it's familiar even now in the Brit-coms that play Saturday nights on PBS. Granger's timing and interplay with Sykes and Cusack are admittedly unspectacular but nonetheless well-practiced in technique and pleasantly warm with human feeling.

As a final recommendation, the story, characters, and dialogue may be closer to authentic Kipling than Gunga Din, whose screenplay was a free expansion of a not-very-long poem that contributes little to the film with the same title. Long ago I read Kipling's Plain Tales from the Hills partly about English servicemen in India and introducing the characters of Soldiers Three. I think there were later stories collected under the title Soldiers Three. Anyway the plain and humane style remind me of those early stories by Kipling, which gambol between stereotypes and humanity. Kipling's Anglo-Indian writings benefit from his youth and early journalistic career primarily in what is now Pakistan. The film of Soldiers Three seems true to this author's spirit.

Others have said this has similarities to Gunga Din, which isn't surprising, since they were both by Rudyard Kipling. Always stories of adventures in far off exotic lands. This one opens with General Brunswick (Walter Pidgeon) reminiscing about his days as a colonel. Due to his height and stately voice, he was always given the role of admiral, senator, or grandfather. His soldiers are played by David Niven, Stewart Granger, Robert Newton, and Cyril Cusack. Niven received an Oscar for "Separate Tables", but is probably best known for "Around the World in Eighty Days" or "Pink Panther". We tag along as they have their trials and tribulations, fights, and comical adventures during their military maneuvers. Pretty light fare, and certainly not the epic that Gunga Din turned out to be. All in good fun, but mostly silly, unlikely adventures. Filming locations show Utah and California. Strong performances by Pidgeon and Niven, but the story isn't one of his best. Story has no plot holes, it just kind of plods along, and we get to the end. If you're looking for a good R Kipling story to watch, see "Gunga Din" instead- that one has Cary Grant!

Retired British general Brunswick (Walter Pidgeon) recounts his days in colonial India. He assigns his success due to his three most unruly soldiers, privates Archibald Ackroyd, Bill Sykes, and Dennis Malloy led by Capt. Pindenny (David Niven).

It's trying to be a comedy but I don't think it's that funny. It's a rambling dramedy for about an hour and then there is some action. For some reason, way too many men get trapped in a way too small bunker. It should be easy work to smoke them out. It's fine. I'm not really rooting for the British Imperials. It's passable.