Avis des utilisateurs

The old swashbuckling mythology in capital letters: King, Country, Duty, Courage, and Honor, featuring a handsome, fearless Hero; a beautiful and perfectly behaved Princess; a stalwart Elderly Advisor; a grasping Villain; his insinuating Right Hand; and so on. It's so stereotyped that it could take up a whole chapter of Carl Jung.

So it's amazing that this production manages to pull it off so well. Maybe it's the unusually effective screenplay, which doesn't waste a line, and somehow manages not to rehash creaky dialogue. Maybe it's the actors, who carry their roles with as much dignity as if this is the first time anyone's ever done them. Or maybe it's James Mason as the only recognizable human in the story, a charming and calculating psychopath with razor-sharp wit and stunning powers of manipulation.

However they did it, the results are a joy. Swordplay, love affairs, grand balls, royalty, and political intrigue - it all works. Put your brain in low gear, sit back, and enjoy the ride.

Next to the 1937 version with Ronald Colman and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., this version of The Prisoner Of Zenda is the one most fondly remembered by movie audiences. If it doesn't quite have the panache of the Colman film, it makes up for it with the introduction of some nice color cinematography.

The casting of Stewart Granger in the double role of Rudolph Rassendyll and his royal cousin, the Crown Prince Rudolph of Ruritania and James Mason as the villainous Rupert of Hentzau is hardly some stock company casting. If Granger doesn't quite have Colman's flair for the spoken word and very few ever have, he makes a fine and dashing hero which parts he played very well, too well in his opinion on his career. As for Mason, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. took the Rupert part because he was advised it's one of the best villains ever created in drama. Mason who has also played some of the best villains on screen keeps up the fine tradition for that role.

The 1937 version benefited from having the world wide publicity of the constitutional crisis in the United Kingdom over Edward VIII choice of consort. I've wondered whether someone over at MGM after George VI died in early 1952 whether they thought it was now time to do another remake of The Prisoner Of Zenda in time to coincide with the publicity of Queen Elizabeth II's coronation. Which begs the question whether we'll get yet another version when Prince Charles eventually assumes the throne. We've seen over ten versions so far going back to the silent screen.

The women in the cast, Deborah Kerr and Jane Greer as Princess Flavia and Antoinette DeMauban respectively never come in for much discussion of their roles. The parts in relation to the hero are almost a carbon copy of the roles of Katharine DeVaucelles and Hugette from If I Were King. I've always thought that Greer as Antoinette plays one of the most tragic characters in popular literature. She loves a cold and forbidding man in Prince Michael, especially when played by Robert Douglas. But he's her man and when she does ever so slightly give in to the scheming Hentzau she regrets it when it means the death of her beloved. Personally why she falls for a cold fish that Michael is who can figure. But the heart does have its reasons.

As for Kerr her best scene is at the end when she realizes she has been hoodwinked, but in a scheme for the greater good of the kingdom. She knows what her obligations are and she too can't afford to follow her heart.

Something tells me we're far from done with The Prisoner Of Zenda. Try and figure out who could play these roles today with the flair of the players in this version, let alone the one from 1937.

"The prisoner of Zenda" (1952) is a wonderful swashbuckler ,a movie the whole family can enjoy! I've already seen it three or four times and I've never got tired of it.Stewart Granger is absolutely perfect as the hero,playing two parts with gusto:I love the crowning where he manages to be as majestic as a king and yet shows he is not completely at ease ;his waltz with Deborah Kerr is also a great moment.James Mason vies with Robert Douglas in wickedness ,greed and Machiavelism.Deborah Kerr is gorgeous as Princess Flavia.

This kind of story belongs to an imaginary remote past -although it is supposed to happen in 1897-like the fairy tales.That's why "the prisoner" is so magical.

Knowing nothing of this film, the book or previous versions, I watched TPOZ expecting nothing but a star-studded cast. I sat enchanted throughout, undisturbed by thoughts of "carbon copy" scenes, recycled musical scores and previous performances. For me the movie was timeless, not a word nor scene wasted, Granger and Kerr were engaging lovers. The sword fight was one of the best. The only "glaring" production fault was the 300 watt shadow. Otherwise, fantastic cinematography and score, and wonderful Granger, Kerr and Mason.

"He has the appearance and manner of the king, yet he's really a lookalike… and on his shoulders rests all hope of foiling a blackguard's plot to usurp the throne. Adventure, pageantry and royal intrigue are forged at sword point in the two finest screen versions of the beloved 1894 novel filmed many times," according to the Warner Home Video release, "Ronald Colman plays the double role in the resilient 1937 David O. Selznick production (Side A), making palpable the heartbreak of the royal stand-in whose gallantry is tested by his love for the real king's fiancée (Madeleine Carroll). Stewart Granger stars in the eye-filling 1952 color version (Side B), romancing Deborah Kerr and wielding bold steel in the film's bravura climactic duel."

Thanks to whoever at Warner/Turner decided to release these two versions of "The Prisoner of Zenda" together. Considering the way things are usually handled in Hollywood, the obvious has become inspired. Adding extra movies, for less than the price of two (or more), also encourages sales. They could have added "The Prisoner of Zenda" (1922) for even better measure, assuming the three "Metro" features are owned by Warner Bros. Of the two available here, the 1937 "black-and-white" version wins the sword fight, though the 1952 color version is inoffensive and beautifully photographed (by Joseph Ruttenberg).

Examined together, the three films support the widely held belief that the more villainous role in a drama is often the one to act. In this case, observe how the character "Rupert of Hentzau" supports this thesis. In the 1927 version, the role made Ramon Novarro a star. In the 1937 and 1952 versions, Douglas Fairbanks Jr. and James Mason are always above or equal to anyone else in the cast. The fact that Mr. Colman can his own against Mr. Fairbanks helps make their version a classic. Lewis Stone appears in two versions, and Louis Calhern played the lead on stage. In each case, "The Prisoner of Zenda" is an attractive production.

****** The Prisoner of Zenda (11/4/52) Richard Thorpe ~ Stewart Granger, Deborah Kerr, James Mason, Louis Calhern

On the face of it, "The Prisoner of Zenda" has everything a swashbuckler could require to make it a glorious success: a star-studded cast with previous form, Technicolour pageantry, MGM production values, an Alfred Newman score, a classic story of self-sacrificing heroism... not to mention a setting that's not only generically but genuinely Ruritanian! But on viewing it again after a lapse of some years, I find that it still doesn't work for me; and there doesn't seem to be any obvious reason why.

There were in fact *two* films released in 1952 starring Stewart Granger in sword-fighting heroics: one of them -- enchanting, bittersweet, dancing of wit and of blade, and featuring what was to become one of the most famous fight sequences in screen history -- was, of course, "Scaramouche". The other was "The Prisoner of Zenda"... and somehow, in every aspect that melded together to produce the classic that was its counterpart, it never quite catches up. Swashbucklers should spring lightly; this one has gloss, but a certain stilted air.

Stewart Granger differentiates his dual roles admirably, to the extent that I caught myself becoming sceptical as to the actual resemblance between the two supposed doubles! His final duel is as athletic as any in his screen career, although the plot demands dogged defence rather than flashing brilliance; indeed, the outcome is refreshingly unconventional. However, I didn't find Rudolf Rassendyll to be one of his more memorable characters.

It was James Mason, sporting an incongruous Prussian bullet-head haircut, who was the real disappointment for me. No stranger to charismatic villainy in the likes of "The Man in Grey", "Fanny by Gaslight" or "The Wicked Lady", he is here oddly lacking in Rupert of Hentzau's essential perverse charm, in what should have been a scene-stealing part. The other male characters are little more than one-dimensional down to Duke Michael's villainous limp, although Louis Calhern makes an upright Colonel Zapt.

The women fare better. Deborah Kerr is sweet, fiery and entirely convincing as Princess Flavia, next in line to the throne, and Jane Greer is more than equal to the pivotal role of Antoinette de Mauban, whose complex motives prove the key to the whole plot.

Ultimately, I found this a decent film, but not as outstanding as it should have been, given its constituent parts. It isn't the best work of any of the actors involved. I am reminded of Zoltan Korda's re-make of his own "Four Feathers" as the widescreen "Storm of the Nile": the story (and indeed in that case the script) is the same, but the spark is missing.

Given the parallels, I must admit that I'm now very curious as to how the 1937 "Prisoner of Zenda" -- which I've never seen -- stands up in comparison! This one is a plush literary adaptation, but lacks the rollicking rapier-edge of laughter and daring that characterise the great classics of its genre.

This is a nice hour and change of mindless entertainment that will keep your attention and gain your appreciation. There is no great message here; no unique storyline; just good old Hollywood casting and shooting of scenes that are well done. All of the actors do an admirable job; Granger and Kerr as the romantic interests, and Mason as the heavy. The direction and cinematography are crisp and a good time is had by all (except Mason).

I can never watch too many of these movies. The story was beautiful, but not overdone. Stewart Granger gives a great performance, and we get the added bonus of another stellar performance by James Mason. Of course, the breathtaking (Dame) Deborah Kerr is the real reason to watch -- and wonder how an actress can be so beautiful *and* so talented. My only regret is that she wasn't more prominent in the story. And, as usual, she doesn't get the man. Oh well. The cinematography, the costumes, the action -- all blend perfectly with the compelling story and the great acting to make this a "must see" movie.

Stewart Granger plays twin roles. An Englishman called Rassendyll on a fishing trip to a small European kingdom of Ruritania and gets strange looks from the locals. This is because he looks a lot like the new King Rudolf, a distant cousin of his.

After a night of partying with the king, Rassendyll soon discovers that thanks to the king's brother their is intrigue to wrest the crown from the decadent Rudolf before his coronation. Rassendyll agrees to step into the place of the King to keep the country steady. He falls in love with Princess Flavia (Deborah Kerr) while dastardly Rupert of Hentzau (James Mason) also wants to take control of the kingdom.

This is a lavish Technicolor remake of the Ronald Colman version, a faithful pedestrian remake though. It should had been more cavalier but Mason makes a sinister villain and there is plenty of swashbuckling.

Hollywood has always had a philosophy, that if a film makes money, either do a sequel, or remake it! While sequels are most common (offering original cast members, older and less believable in their roles, performing variations of the same plot that made the original film popular...usually less successfully...), remakes have a long history, as well, with some remakes an improvement over the original (John Huston's THE MALTESE FALCON far outshines both of the earlier sound versions), some just as good (1939's BEAU GESTE, with Gary Cooper, has as loyal an audience as Ronald Colman's silent version), and some truly disastrous (why anyone would even CONSIDER remaking Frank Capra's LOST HORIZON, much less turning it into a 70s MUSICAL, defies comprehension!)

MGM, in their 1952 remake of 1937's classic THE PRISONER OF ZENDA, tried to surpass the earlier version by creating a 'scene-for-scene' duplicate of the film, while utilizing some of their biggest stars in each role, reworking Alfred Newman's original score, and shooting it all in glorious Technicolor. The end result, however, was a mixed bag...

Stewart Granger, MGM's resident 50s swashbuckler, certainly was more athletic than Ronald Colman in the lead, but lacked the older actor's panache, and more importantly, 'The Voice', that distinctive, oft-imitated but never duplicated speaking voice that made Colman so unique. It still wins hearts, nearly 50 years after his death, and was the reason Colman made the transition from a star of silent pictures to sound so effortlessly. While Deborah Kerr was as regally beautiful as Madeleine Carroll, she lacked the fragile quality that made Carroll's doomed love of the commoner Colman so heartbreaking. Louis Calhern, in C. Aubrey Smith's role, as Col. Zapt? No way! Robert Coote replacing David Niven as Fritz had some novelty value, as both would costar, twelve years later, in the television series, THE ROGUES, but the younger Niven was far more appropriate in the role of a young but loyal assistant to Zapt. While Robert Douglas was every bit as sinister as Raymond Massey as Black Michael, the most disastrous miscasting came with the film's other major villain, Rupert of Hentzau. While James Mason was a truly gifted actor, he was too old, and actually too villainous in the role! While the character has to be truly jaded and unscrupulous, he also has to be such a young, likable scoundrel that his escape, after the climactic duel, disappoints no one, not even the hero he nearly defeats. The role ideally suited Douglas Fairbanks Jr., whose prowess with a sword was unmatched, and whose scenes with Colman were instant classics of sophisticated wit. When Granger and Mason repeated the same lines, their exchanges came across as typical 'good guy vs. bad guy' dialog, lacking the unique chemistry Colman and Fairbanks brought to the roles.

As for shooting the film in Technicolor...While the regal color photography certainly made the Palace scenes more impressive (don't forget, Great Britain was crowning Elizabeth as Queen when the remake was released, and American audiences were rabid Anglophiles, totally enthralled by all the Pomp and Circumstance), it also 'dated' the story, making the adventure seem quaint and old-fashioned in the Cold War era. The black-and-white photography of 1937, with it's masterful use of light and shadow, gave the earlier version a timeless quality it still carries to this day.

David Niven, in his autobiography ('The Moon's a Balloon'), said he thought MGM's remake was a ridiculous idea, and that he was pleased that the newer production, even as a scene-for-scene copy, failed. While I think he was, perhaps, too hard on the Granger film, I have to agree that no other version has ever even come close to the magic of Ronald Colman's 1937 classic!

High budgeted MGM film of fantasy and another time is typical of the work the studio was doing in the early 1950s. Although they were as usual doing some great work around this time, there were some pretty forsaken awful films getting a release at this time, and this was a film which could have been more, but wasn't.

Remake of the 1937 Ronald Colman classic, the latter is a disastrous film, probably an ill advised adventure. Probably inspired and riding high by the big biblical hit "Quo Vadis" made the year before, art decorative sets of mammoth proportion formed a Zenda which is noticeably studio bound and lacking magic. In bold technicolour, these sets stick out annoyingly like a sore thumb. However, the costumes were a nice touch.

Stewart Granger was laughably miscast. His performance in the dual role, I found, was dull and almost unbearable. Deborah Kerr is actually better as the beautiful Princess Flavia, but on the whole she too is disappointing. The supporting cast even worse, but with the mediocre script, the actors cannot be entirely blamed themselves.

This is a classic example of a good story ruined for Hollywood overpriced grandeur. I found the remote control to press onwards more easily than a laugh or even a good stretch of a scene. Only the Deborah Kerr sections were watchable, and its a wonder that after this would-be junk that the film spawned a gem that year, "Singin' in the Rain".

Rating: 5.5/10

Anthony Hope's novel never appealed to me as a young man--the story of look-alikes ruling countries abound in "The Prince and the Pauper" and its ilk. To film the story, one would expect a director to go beyond the text and put an intelligent perspective to the story. Anthony Thorpe does nothing of the kind but settles for good looking actors and good sets. Children would love it because it is so uncomplicated and you do not have to think beyond what you are told on screen.

The only redeeming feature in the film was James Mason's above average performance. Deborah Kerr's performance is lackluster compared to her fine performance in The Night of Iguana, which convinces me that an inspired director can make an actor come alive on screen--and an unspired one merely make one look good. The other actors do not deserve mention.

I bought a duel set of "The Prisoner of Zenda" that contains both 1937 and 1952 versions, and like the 1952 version much more. First of all, Granger's handsomeness and style fits more to the fairy-tale adventure story of prince and princess, Coleman is too sophisticated for the Rassendyall character. Other casts are better also; Kerr is much prettier and princess like, and Mason is a more impressive villain. I also think that the fighting scenes are better, more elegant and better choreographed. With no less significance is the color ,makes the costume and characters look more sensational, and gives more feeling for the romantic fairy tale .

This movie is pure entertainment, I first saw it in high school, loved it, I still enjoy it 30 years later .

This is a story of royal romance and of adventure , as breathless and flashing as a sword play . This is a classic swashbuckler concerning an innocent traveler , Rudolph Rassendyll (Stewart Granger) , Rudolf V's identical distant relative , in a small European country , as he results to be the exact double of its king and gets involved in a murder plot . In order to save King Rudolph of Ruritania (Stewart Granger as well) from assassins and murderous usurpers , the kingdom aristocrats (Louis Calhern, Robert Coote) hire a look-a-like London man, a distant cousin , to impersonate the Monarch . Upon the death of his father the King, Rudolph V is set to assume the throne of Ruritania and the honest Britishman as his stand-in . Both become involved in troubles , along with his half-brother , Grand Duke Michael (Robert Douglas) , his orphaned cousin who lives in a wing of the palace located in the Ruritanian capital of Strelsau and the lovely Princess Flavia (Debora Kerr) . When the rightful monarch is drugged and kidnapped , the adventurous knight goes into action . If Rudolf V isn't present at the ceremony, he will forfeit the crown to his older half-brother. Complications ensue when Princess Flavia, the king's cousin and betrothed, begins to notice a "personality change" in her fiancé . The Grand Duke of Strelsau , with his longtime faithful companions and Rupert of Hentzau (James Mason) , plan to detain the King at the Grand Duke's hunting lodge on the grounds of his castle at Zenda on the day of the coronation so that Michael can assume the throne in Strelsau in his place . A reckless love that fought to live ¡ . They fought for the right to rule she fought for the right to love ¡ . The most thrilling swordfight ever filmed... Romance and adventure to thrill you! Confusion reigns in Ruritania ¡ . They dared not kill him; They dared not let him live In this dilemma were conspirators against the King of Ruritania. This is but one of the amazingly dramatic situations in The Metro Golwyn Mayer Production of The Prisoner of Zenda ¡.

This is a slight and hugely budgeted retelling about the durable Anthony Hope's novel with all-star-cast . It is packed with derring-do , suspense , a sensitive love story , action , drama and thrilling as well as dazzling swordplay between Stewart Granger and James Mason . Entertaining swashbuckling with lavish production , glamorous gowns and luxurious settings . The fifth of six movie versions of Anthony Hope's famous adventure , a blockbuster of its day . This is a flashy Technicolor remake of the notorious and better 1937 Ronald Colman rendition . Stewart Granger plays the nobleman forced to impersonate a king in a mythical European country , as he's asked to risk his life and impersonate the would-be king when his relative is kidnapped before his impending coronation , a situation that rises to some moments from which filmmaker Richard Thorpe manages to extract the maximum of intrigue and tension . As the tale carries its excitement with thrills , noisy action, swashbuckling , an attractive romance and anything else . Cast and support cast are frankly excellent , such as the gorgeous Deborah Kerr , the mysterious Jane Greer , the tall Louis Calhern and the sympathetic Robert Coote . And Lewis Stone who performed the dual leading character in a silent version made in 1922 , has a small cameo here as a Cardinal . In this The Prisoner of Zenda (1952) stands out James Mason as the ominous villain with a Rommel haircut as well as a penchant for irony and heel-clicking . The rest of the casting is exemplary and with good reason the movie has never lost its reputation of being one of the most enjoyable aventure-romance ever produced . Adding an impressive final duel between Stewart Granger and James Mason was almost as good as the one Ronald Colman and Douglas Fairbanks in the past retelling . The motion pictue was professionally directed by Richard Thorpe .

There are several versions about this classy story , these are the following ones : ¨The prisoner of Zenda¨(1922) by Rex Ingram with Lewis Stone , Alice Terry , Robert Edeson , Stuart Holmes , Ramon Novarro . ¨The Prisoner of Zenda¨ (1937) by John Cromwell with Ronald Colman as Major Rudolf Rassendyll / The Prisoner of Zenda , Madeleine Carroll as Princess Flavia , C. Aubrey Smith , Raymond Massey . ¨The prisoner of Zenda¨ (1979) by Richard Quine with Peter Sellers , Lionel Jeffries , Elke Sommer , Lynn Frederick , among others.

This is a wonderfully adventurous romp! Granger is at his best in this type of role! Handsome and daring, he fills all romantic girl dreams of period heros. Deborah Kerr and Stewart Granger have great chemistry and are obviously having fun. The story line is that the King has been kidnapped and a British man who looks exactly like the King has to step in and take his place, to keep the government under control. He however, falls in love with the King's cousin, who is also the King's betrothed. The rest you must see, it is a classic.

This pales I think to the brilliant 1937 film, but this version is still very good. It is a little too short though and some of the exchanges of the dialogue lack the class and unique chemistry of the 1937 film. However, the colour, costumes and scenery are exquisite and the score is marvellous. The film goes at a good pace too and the romantic and exciting story never fails to engage, while the acting in general is very good. Stewart Granger is marvellous in his dashing and heroic dual role, and Deborah Kerr is ravishing as Princess Flavia. Jane Greer comes off even better, while James Mason is a menacing and somewhat austere Rupert and while his part is a little underwritten perhaps Robert Douglas is appropriately sinister as Michael. Overall, far from perfect, but worthy and colourful version. 8/10 Bethany Cox

If production values were all that mattered, this would be considered a vast improvement over the B&W version with Ronald Colman and Madeleine Carroll. MGM has spared no cost in sets and costumes but this is clearly a scene by scene remake that brings nothing new to the story, no added dimension of enjoyment except for the color and the technical improvements for the twin photography. It moves at a rather stately pace, as though impressed enough with its own trappings to conclude that a viewer needs nothing more.

STEWART GRANGER and DEBORAH KERR are graceful replacements for Colman and Carroll and both look splendid in their roles with Granger having considerably more acting to do in a dual role when he assumes the identity of the King of Ruritania.

The famous story has him as the commoner posing as the King and falling in love with Princess Flavia. Of course, there has to be a villain and JAMES MASON fills that role superbly as Rupert, involved in the plot to kidnap the real King in a struggle for power. It's the kind of role Mason specialized in for a decade or so previously and he's a scene stealer. Likewise, ROBERT DOUGLAS as a fellow conspirator plays another villain with relish.

It's a lavish costume adventure/romance of the highest order, prettified in color by Technicolor so that it seems like a fairy-tale for adults. And it is. It's fantasy, beautifully realized of course, and a feast for the eyes.

The final duel between Mason and Granger makes up for any lulls along the way. It's one of the best choreographed swashbuckling duels since "The Adventures of Robin Hood".

While on holiday an Englishman who resembles the king of a small European nation gets mixed up in palace intrigue and royal romance when his royal doppelgänger is kidnapped.

A Technicolor remake of Anthony Hope's much filmed story sees Stewart Granger, Deborah Kerr and James Mason star, while directing is Richard Thorpe, composing the score is Alfred Newman and cinematography is by Joseph Ruttenberg.

Lush and at times lavish, this MGM production is however rather ponderous at times. The first hour positively crawls and while Granger is just fine in the dual roles of Rudolf Rassendyl/King Rudolf V, the dynamism and breezy pace of the Ronald Colman starring 1937 version is sadly lacking. A better director than Richard "One Take Only" Thorpe could have made better use of the budget. There's also a distinct lack originality in the piece since it's practically the same film as the 37 movie. Even using the same Newman score. You have to wonder what was the point really?

Still, there are some enjoyable moments in here to not make it a complete waste of time. James Mason, in spite of it being a rare occasion where he's miscast, is worth a watch for his line in campy villainy. While Ruttenberg's camera-work doesn't waste the chance to swash that buckle in a Technicolor sheen. The duelling sequence, that sadly seems to take forever to arrive, is well choreographed (better than anything in the 37 movie actually), and the costumes by Walter Plunkett are very pleasing on the eye. 5/10