El caballero audaz

When Hammer's production schedule was cleared in 1956 to make way for more horror films, the plug was pulled on the long-in-preparation 'King Charles and the Roundheads'.

Having in the intervening seven years made another Robin Hood adventure and a pirate yarn, Hammer finally made their Cavaliers v. Roundheads picture with a suitably gory title and Lionel Jeffries, of course, as a roundhead (with Oliver Reed as his saturnine young henchman ironically sporting a fake scar on his face in an entirely different place from the real one he acquired on his left cheek in a pub brawl a year later). Jack Hedley makes a rather gentle leading man, and although improbably cast as Jeffries' daughter, the late June Thorburn (who gets to wear a magnificent hat) plays a far greater role in the plot than the leading lady usually does in such nonsense.

Plenty of people get killed - and Hedley is flogged at one point - but compared to Tigon's harrowing Civil War subject 'Witchfinder-General' a few years later it's a pretty placid affair, with a jaunty score by Gary Hughes.

The English Civil War much like our own in America has been fodder for numerous historical adventure stories. And the stories have been told from both the Cavalier and Roundhead sides with each taking turn at being the hero and villain of same. It was that kind of period in the United Kingdom history, subject to many different interpretations on all sides.

In this one the Royalist cavaliers are the heroes, they've been driven underground pretty much in 1648 and are now concerned with rescuing King Charles I and spiriting him away to safe exile. Charles is now in the custody of Colonel Lionel Jeffries and Captain Oliver Reed of Oliver Cromwell's Ironsides army and is on the way to London for trial and execution.

Jeffries has set up headquarters in the manor of the Beverleys who were Royalists now dispossessed of their property. Jeffries is one real pig as I recall and not living the spartan puritan life that his kind were wont to preach about. He's even got a marriage arranged for his daughter June Thorburn to Oliver Reed. But June's a secret Royalist whose heart is set on Jack Hedley the elder of the two Beverley brothers who is leader of an underground group of Royalists.

The intrigue in trying to rescue the King is tangled up with the romantic intrigue of this triangle and it leads to a lot of tragedy all around. History tells us what happened to Charles I, if he ruled rather badly, he certainly died nobly for his cause. As for the personal intrigues, you have to see the film for that.

The Scarlet Blade was playing as the second half of a double bill as I recall, probably with some Hammer horror feature. I remember at the time thinking how much more interesting Oliver Reed was as the shrewd, but villainous Roundhead than Jack Hedley was as the dashing, but rather wooden cavalier. Maybe Thorburn ought to rethink what she's doing. Of course this was before Oliver Reed became an international star, but his appeal was dead-on.

If you get a chance to see The Scarlet Blade, you'll see an average, but entertaining swashbuckler that might have been better with Reed as the hero.

Oliver Reed once said that "Hammer gave me my start, (Michael) Winner gave me my craft, and (Ken) Russell gave me my art." Well in 1963's THE SCARLET / CRIMSON BLADE you can see the arrival of the Oliver Reed we all know 5 years before his international success in OLIVER!. Here he crystallizes his screen trademarks. The quiet voice that can suddenly erupt, the smoldering look of rage and/or pain, and his sheer physical presence that can dominate the screen. This was Reed's penultimate film with Hammer (out of 6) and he owns the movie.

Although the nominal stars are Lionel Jeffries (usually known for comic roles in movies like CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG but quite good here) ,Jack Hedley and June Thornburn, Reed's portrayal of the adventurer Captain Tom Sylvester is clearly the focus of the film. Writer-director John Gilling, who made a number of films for Hammer including the celebrated "Cornish Double Feature" THE PLAGUE OF THE ZOMBIES and THE REPTILE, had worked with Reed before on THE PIRATES OF BLOOD RIVER showing that he could handle the actor as well as make a well mounted period action-adventure movie.

The story is set in 1648. Colonel Judd (Jeffries), once a royalist but now a follower of Cromwell, is trying to capture King Charles I to further his own career. Sylvester (Reed) is his second in command and has eyes for Judd's daughter Claire (Thornburn) who is secretly helping the local Royalists led by Edward Beverly (Hedley) aka The Scarlet Blade (the movie's original title). Claire exploits Sylvester's feelings for her while really loving Beverly. When Sylvester realizes this he is none too pleased but, rather than flying into a typical rage, Reed internalizes his anger and makes us feel his character's pain and sadness at what has happened.

The rest of the film is a solid period adventure yarn with swordfights and ambushes and an authentic look to the film despite the low budget. In fact parts of this film reminded me of Michael Reeves' WITCHFINDER GENERAL with Vincent Price made 5 years later only less brutal. This release of the American version (hence the title change) is its first appearance ever and the transfer is first rate. Not a great film by any means but a surprisingly engaging one thanks to Oliver Reed...For more reviews visit The Capsule Critic.

Set during the civil war with the Roundheads portrayed as the baddies and the Royalists the dashing heroes. Some of the scenes are quite well shot and it's in Technicolor as well which is a plus.

Unfortunately, the heroes aren't very interesting and are overshadowed by the much better Oliver Reed and Lionel Jeffries, the heroes aren't even that likeable and June Thorburn's character is just downright nasty and annoying, she doesn't deserve anyone. Reed's character is by far the most well done and complex, he does a fine acting job too. Additionally, for an action film there's a notable lack of action and the fighting that is in is not very well choreographed or entertaining.

3/10: Worth a watch for Oliver Reed but as a swashbuckler is terrible

Hammer studios are most fondly remembered for their horror output, but they occasionally dipped their beak into other genres. The Scarlet Blade (US title: The Crimson Blade) is an example of their non-horror releases. Made in 1963 and directed by Hammer veteran John Gilling, this English Civil War swashbuckler cracks along at a brisk pace and, at a mere 83 minutes, never taxes the patience. It also features an early appearance from the brooding Oliver Reed, here perfectly cast as a tough but charming villain. Reed would go on to die 36 years later during one of his countless drinking binges, and his death marked a sad but inevitable loss to the acting profession. It's always pleasant to look back at his early works and remind ourselves what a fine actor he was, especially before years of alcohol abuse took its toll on his features and figure. In fact, roguish Reed's villain is much more interesting in this film than the "good guys" portrayed by June Thorburn and Jack Hedley…. that, coupled with the fact that the other main villain played by Lionel Jeffries is also far more charismatic than the dreary heroes, is probably the film's principal drawback!

Cromwellian soldiers Colonel Judd (Lionel Jeffries) and Captain Sylvester (Oliver Reed) capture King Charles of England (Robert Rietty). Colonel Judd has a beautiful young daughter named Claire (June Thorburn). Little does the Colonel suspect that his daughter is actually a Royalist supporter, totally opposed to her father's political sympathies. While Claire is seemingly intended for an eventual marriage to the handsome but ruthless Captain Sylvester, the reality of the matter is that she is very much in love with Cavalier adventurer Edward Beverly (Jack Hedley). Edward and Claire realise that they must gather the sparse Royalist supporters together in their struggle to rescue the king.

The Scarlet Blade is pleasing enough whilst on, but soon forgotten afterwards. It paints a typically romanticised view of history, portraying the Cavaliers as whiter-than-white heroes with justice on their side, and the Roundheads as tyrannical baddies with few - if any - likable qualities. The film ends on a rather sour note, much more downbeat than expected, and the decision to do this should be applauded. Happy and convenient endings can sometimes be a bit too conventional, so it's nice to come across a film from time to time which reminds us that things don't always work themselves out perfectly. On a less positive note, the performances are generally wooden and unconvincing (only Jeffries and Reed escape this criticism). Much of the dialogue is unconvincing too, but this is more to do with the film's innocent, old-fashioned charm than anything and provides some unintended pleasures. I'm not going to stand here and claim that The Scarlet Blade is a lost classic, nor am I going to slate it as a lesser-quality time waster. This film is brisk, lively and perfectly forgettable, a period adventure flick that fills a little time harmlessly enough if you're in the mood. If you're lucky enough to find it, give it a go.