El talismán

King Richard I, known to posterity as the Lion Heart and, according to this script, to his friends and family as Dick, certainly has his work cut out on his Third Crusade. He faces a host of vicious and unscrupulous foes and they're just his fellow Crusaders. Lucky for him, that flashing-eyed rascal Saladin is a stickler for fair play as well as fancying cousin Edith, so things could be worse.

Though screen writer John Twist has supplied the more idiotic dialogue, the eccentric narrative stems from Sir Walter Scott's The Talisman itself. By the time of its publication in the 1820s, Richard had long become one of the great romantic legends of English history. In reality he was a ferocious warrior of the 'kill first and ask questions later' school, but a useless ruler. So when Virginia Mayo as the fictitious Edith utters the much mocked line: "War! War! That's all you think of Dick Plantagenet!" at the end of the movie, it's not far from the truth. Except that Richard's descendants did not adopt the name Plantagenet until a couple of centuries later.

Of course no-one expects factual accuracy in this kind of movie, but it's also rather dull in places. Too much time is taken up by the interminable feuding in camp at the start of the picture, while it ends in a frenzy of action in which it's hard to discern what's going on. Then there's the business of Sir Kenneth, hit in the chest by Saladin's arrow and falling from his horse, only to be prancing about with no harm done within a minute or two. I have seen similar films that are worse though, there is the lush photography and an excellent score from Max Steiner that's worthy of a more prodigious production and while some of the action scenes are very average, the joust and fight between Richard and Sir Kenneth is well done.

Rex Harrison as Saladin and George Sanders, looking less bored and cynical than usual, as Richard offer enjoyable performances, though the latter could have been played by a younger actor as the King was in his early thirties at the time of the Crusade. Laurence Harvey though is fairly dire as Sir Kenneth, not sounding remotely Scottish, and his love scenes with Barbara Mayo fall flat. Harvey always had his fans, but those who have speculated as to why an actor so lacking in talent and charisma became a star will find no answers here.

Somehow King Richard And The Crusaders made the Medved list of the 50 Worst films of all time. I'm not saying it's Citizen Kane, but I've seen far worse. And until The Lion In Winter and Robin and Marian, we have never been given a true picture of King Richard I of England.

George Sanders who also in his career played King Charles II, a monarch of a far different temperament than Richard is in the title role. The film is based on the Sir Walter Scott novel, The Talisman and takes place in the Middle East during the Crusades.

As in the DeMille epic The Crusades which this bear a faint resemblance, The Lion Hearted King is beset with lots of problems, not all of them caused by the Syrian warrior King Saladin whom he faces in the field. Duke Leopold of Austria and Philip Augustus of France question his leadership of all the Christian nations, his brother Prince John is looking to seize his throne back home and right in camp, he's got a couple of fifth columnists in Robert Douglas and Michael Pate.

Pate and Douglas put in action an assassination attempt in which Richard is only wounded by a captured Saracen arrow. Richard's loyal retainer a Scot knight played by Laurence Harvey starts hunting up the assassins. But in the mean time, a truce of sorts is called as Saladin, hearing of Richard's attempt sends his personal physician played by Rex Harrison.

There is a romantic subplot going here with Harvey and a cousin of Richard's played by Virginia Mayo. Richard likes Harvey enough, but not to marry into the royal family, especially when as a royal princess, Mayo can be married off for alliance purposes.

Sir Walter Scott was one of those authors in the 19th century who cleaned up the Middle Ages quite a bit and invested those bloody times with a romantic aura. He was never more effective in doing this than in his more well known work Ivanhoe. In fact Ivanhoe is almost a sequel of this film as it deals with the capture of Richard by Duke Leopold on the way back to England after the action in this film is concluded and the ransom for Richard demanded and paid.

George Sanders and Robert Douglas were both in the screen version of Ivanhoe that MGM did two years before Warner Brothers did this film. Ivanhoe is a much better film, yet King Richard And The Crusaders does hold its own.

When the Medveds wrote that 50 worst film book they cited a line that Virginia Mayo says which is "war, war that's all you ever think about Dick Plantagenet". In point of fact that was the thing uppermost in that very bloodthirsty man's mind. More truth than humor there.

And you won't get much truth from King Richard And The Crusaders. Still it's not as bad a film as the Medveds would have you believe.

KING RICHARD AND THE CRUSADERS is a Warner Bros. attempt to get folks away from their TV sets during the '50s and watch a spectacular adventure film in CinemaScope and Warner Color. Based on a story "The Talisman" by Sir Walter Scott (of "Ivanhoe" fame), it contains a lot of absurdly anachronistic dialogue ("Go squat on the Alps!"), and plot- heavy nonsense that gets more and more entangled as the film plods toward another saber-rattling conclusion.

REX HARRISON seems to be having a fine time as a turbaned Mideasterner (Saladin) under heavy dark make-up in a rather physically demanding role not characteristic of most of his work. And LAWRENCE HARVEY is more animated than usual in a cardboard assignment, in love with VIRGINIA MAYO who has little to do but look decorative in her colorful costumes.

The big mystery is why David Butler (who specialized in comedies and musicals) was chosen to do the sort of directorial chores that should have gone to Michael Curtiz. One can only yearn for a better film when listening to Max Steiner's well orchestrated background score, but even his music fails to save an inept script from seeming even the least bit credible. Most of the dialogue is unbelievably bad in a screenplay by John Twist.

No wonder this was a box office dud, in no way reaping the sort of rewards Warner Bros. hoped for or the sort of success that MGM had with "Ivanhoe" and "Knights of the Roundtable."

Summing up: At your own risk.

King Richard and the Crusaders is directed by David Butler and adapted to screenplay by John Twist from the novel "The Talisman" written by Sir Walter Scott. It stars Rex Harrison, Viginia Mayo, George Sanders, Laurence Harvey, Robert Douglas, Michael Pate and Paula Raymond. A WarnerColor/CinemaScope production, music is by Max Steiner and cinematography by J. Peverell Marley.

Unfairly maligned as one of the 50 worst movie of all time, David Butler's picture has enough spectacle about it to ensure it can be enjoyed by fans of such fluffy fare. The script is often awful, the historical accuracy equally so, while Rex Harrison – who is otherwise excellent – singing like a love sick minstrel, is a touch bizarre! But on the other side of the fence is the lush colour, the costuming, Harrison and Sanders' playful jostling, Steiner's rumbling score and the lively action scenes (mucho jousting high in calibre).

It for sure isn't approaching the top end of the swords and shields list of movies, but is it really worse than the likes of Androcles and the Lion, Helen of Troy, Sword of Lancelot etc? No say I! There's fun to be had, both intentional and otherwise. 6/10

King Richard and the Crusaders is an entertaining movie, with plenty of action, nice costumes, some good scenery, and a fast-moving plot. Everything you would normally want from an adventure movie.

However, the script is horrible, many of the actors are completely miscast, the actual story is pretty poor, and it has next to nothing to do with the Crusades. It is not Crusaders versus Saracens. It is Good Crusaders and Good Saracens versus Bad Crusaders. Also, they most certainly do not have a cast of thousands, looking like it has a very low budget.

As a result, if you are looking for a historically accurate epic about the Third Crusade, you will be disappointed. Although it is not a great movie, it is underrated, being far better than a lot of other adventure movies, and is overall entertaining.

If you want to enjoy it, simply do not go into the movie looking for an award winning script and brilliant acting.