Lloyds of London

Our story begins in a fishing village in Norfolk, on the east coast of England in the year 1770. This is when adventurous preteen Freddie Bartholomew (as Jonathan Blake) and his pal Douglas Scott (as Horatio Nelson) learn some sailors are planning to swindle an insurance company. The young lads want to report the skulduggery by taking a one hundred mile walk to London. When Master Scott takes a midshipman's job, Master Bartholomew makes the trip to "Lloyd's Coffee-House" alone. His warning results in a job with the origination, which of course becomes "Lloyd's of London"...

The story jumps to 1784 as Bartholomew grows up to be Tyrone Power, who is the real star of the film (top-billed Bartholomew makes an additional, brief flashback appearance). Mr. Power makes advances in the insurance business and meets beautiful blonde Madeleine Carroll (as Elizabeth). They are mutually attracted, but she is married to unscrupulous George Sanders (as Everett Stacy). Odd as it seems, Power and Bartholomew are believable as the same person. The heroic story of an insurance company, with action and romance, is difficult to follow; but it's a nice looking production.

****** Lloyd's of London (11/25/36) Henry King ~ Tyrone Power, Madeleine Carroll, Freddie Bartholomew, George Sanders

In retelling this piece of history, the writers left out one item. Between 1688 and 1807 one of the prime sources of Lloyd's of London's revenue was by insuring ships engaging in slave trading.* This enabled Britian to establish itself very rapidly as the chief slave trading center in the Atlantic.

British ships carried more than three and a quarter million humans into slavery. This shocking statistic casts a deep pall on Lloyd's of London. It may be have been an embarrassment to the writers to include this in their screenplay; still a fact of this magnitude can be considered a sad omission.

The rest of the film is well presented with beautiful acting and production values. Both Bartholomew and Power are excellent, as are Carroll and Sanders. _______________ *According to Wikipedia Enclycopedia "Lloyds in London...was a popular place for ship owners...especially those involved in the slave trade....Historian Eric Williams notes 'Lloyds insured slaves and slave ships...and quickly obtained a monopoly on maritime insurance related to the slave trade and maintained it up through the early 19th century.' "

Lloyd's of London is a very enjoyable piece of entertainment.With those actors involved I wasn't surprised.Tyrone Power delivers a good early performance,but the acting honors go to George Sanders as a despicable regency cad.Madeleine Carroll is a radiant heroine. The story is only mildly engaging but one gets caught up in the beauty of the sets and the good direction of Henry King,who makes this picture flow easily. I hope this title will be available on DVD soon along with other Tyrone Power titles. He did a lot of very entertaining movies in the three decades he was active. So watch this one in good faith, you won't be disappointed.

While I read that this movie was a very, very fictionalized account of the early days of Lloyd's of London, it still was a nifty 1930s-style adventure film. This is not exactly a wonderful endorsement, I know, but the film was far from perfect. Now if you are a Brit or a real Anglophile, then you will probably like the film more than the average person--with all its "Huzzah and God save the King" style of hooplah. I am not 100% sure why Hollywood embraced Britain so strongly in the 1930s (WWII would explain this for 1940s and 50s films).

A very young Tyrone Power played the lead and much of the film concerned the British shipping industry during the time of the Napoleonic Wars. It was mildly interesting but that's about all. His love interest was the married Madeleine Carroll, though for the life of me, I didn't understand why he didn't pursue the prettier and available (and very amply endowed) Virginia Field--she seemed just as nice and almost identical to Ms. Carroll in looks and devotion to Tyrone--especially since his unrequited relationship that lasted years to Ms. Carroll just made him seem awfully desperate and pathetic.

In the end, this is yet another costumer from the era--neither great nor bad. The acting was decent and the production values good. It's worth a look, but certainly not great or deserving special attention by anyone.

In response to ADAMSHL's comment on LLoyd's insuring slave ships-In one scene when the insurers were in deep trouble, Blake was asked if he would insure a slave ship and he curtly said no! to emphasize the director's view of that practice.

It is a pleasant change to watch a movie that flows through the acting and dialog rather than sound effects and extreme graphics. I could even understand all the actors voices in spite of 60 yr old audio technology. Most present day English movies have horrible sound and many words are lost because of the actors elocution.

The main value of this movie is not a history lesson in politics but one in the lives of those who lived in that period and their environment, clothing, etc.