Le prince et le pauvre

A fun adaptation of Mark Twain's ultimate doppelgänger story. Sean Scully is the beggar ("Tom Canty") who stumbles into the palace of Henry VIII (Paul Rogers) where he encounters a curious Prince of Wales - who might be his twin! The Prince is struggling to find attire for a rather tiresome fancy dress party and hits on the idea of swapping clothes with his new, scruffy, friend. The guards assume the prince is really the pauper and evict him from his grandeur to make his way in the squalid streets of "Offal Court"; where he meets "Miles Hendon" (Guy Williams) and sets about convincing him, and everyone else of his true identity. Meantime "Tom" is having as equally an hard time convincing all the folks in the palace that he isn't actually the Prince - and when Henry VII dies - the King too. It's an enjoyable, colourful historical adventure with some swash and buckle; good attention to the detail of Tudor Court and costumes and the likes of Jane Asher, Donald Houston and Laurence Naismith all support the young Scully well.

A film crew and actors arrived in County Meath, Donaghpatrick in the early 1960s. A thatched cottage with road and grass frontage (no wall or gate) was used. It was on a very quiet country road running parallel to the Blackwater river. (Half way between Navan and Kells). We think this was The Prince and the Pauper. Another local cottage was used as a make-up studio.

Given the stature of the studio today, it is easy to see what an outlier this was at the time. Produced overseas (so Walt was not in charge) and written as an uncertain combination of drama and/or musical, badly written, badly cast, badly acted, and badly directed. With a runtime of only 1:09. (Except of course for Williams, the one and only Zorro -- eat your heart out Anthony Hopkins).

Disney was really into hiring one child actor to play multiple roles. However, unlike their success in this in The Parent Trap films, Scully just isn't quite up to the task. Each of the boys is clearly written, but the layers of deception are lost under a doe-eyed dullness.

Disney fooled me and I thought that this was a theatrical production, so I watched it. This is actually a made for TV from the 1960s. But honestly, it doesn't differ much from their live-action of the time. There's a vague historical aspect, a lot of British actors, and a very out of place American accent. The story more or less sticks to the plot of The Mark Twain original, but it is done with more of a divine right of kings Flair. It is clear that the poor boy would make a better King, is making a better King, but he gives it all up when the real king returns from his adventures. It would have been a much better film if the boy had decided, i'm the king now take this Ruffian and throw them in the tower. The real King dies at the age of 15 which the film barely hits at, although they do suggest that his sister Mary was a fanatic. Although Elizabeth the first, barely mentioned and that's probably because this film was made during the early years of the reign of Elizabeth II.