On se bat aux Indes

This unusual film stars a young and dapper Peter Lawford. As I started to watch the film I doubted that I would like it because I have never been a big Lawford fan. But, to my pleasant surprise, the combination of an interesting story line and an exceptional performance by Lawford made it a most enjoyable experience for me. The plot has Lawford, a British officer, framed as a traitor who has sold military secrets to the Russians who are backing insurgents in India. He is ceremoniously publicly humiliated and drummed out of the service. After that he is scheduled to go on trial in a civil court but he escapes and gets back into the service by using a fake name. He spends the remainder of the film trying to get back his good name and see that justice is done. There are excellent battlefield scenes in this film. I think that you will enjoy this "sleeper" of a movie.

This film does have an interesting set-up but never takes full advantage of it. There's nothing clever about the beginning, wherein British Fusilier Captain Lawford is court martialed for being a Russian spy and imprisoned, but things get intriguing when he escapes and joins the military again, inspired by the idea that it would be the last place the authorities would be expected to look for him. Now an enlisted man, he has to hide his abilities and keep a low profile, but circumstances put his masquerade in jeopardy. If written properly, this could be an effective and suspenseful story, but not so here. The film goes off into a simplistic hero-redeemed thread that seems more concerned with using MGM's access to the real Khyber Pass in Afghanistan than with the complications of Lawford's plight. A pity. But for fans of British Colonial War movies this one does have a fairly well-done and believable action climax. How the producer coaxed MGM into shooting on location in Afghanistan is the only interesting question regarding this movie. Or maybe one more: how did Lawford's character escape from military prison? We never see this and it's never explained. Just another potentially suspenseful scene not taken advantaged of by the filmmakers.

Lawford? He's handsome, tanned and sports a fine moustache, but he was never leading man material and proves it again here. He's too reticent an actor; there's little energy or passion visible from him. The role is that of a man wrongly and ruinously convicted who must submerge himself in a lower (military) station, then rise up and redeem himself when occasion demands it. A role requiring a mix of outrage and tightly-coiled intensity. Not the role for a dapper "cocktails anyone?" kind of smooth lounge loafer. Lawford is directed to treat all this as if slightly disturbed from missing a dinner engagement.

Richard Greene, in the second lead, is far better suited to Lawford's role, but alas, he gets The Other Hero role: the one that doesn't get the girl and gets saved by the Big Hero (Lawford). Janice Rule and Leo G. Carroll pop up here and there, and Sean McClory as Lawford's likable enlisted buddy is more enjoyable than anybody else, but disappears before the film even gets to its big action climax. And John Abbott is one of the top-billed actors, yet he disappears early on. Then again, not much should really be expected considering the film is scored by studio hack Alberto Colombo, written by the mediocre Leon Gordon (this being his last movie) and helmed by an inconsequential English television director named Allan Davis.

This has shades of the "Four Feathers' story to it as "Lenbridge" (Peter Lawford) is drummed out of his regiment after being accused of stealing top secret documents. It's made all the worse by the fact that it's his colonel father (Leo G. Carroll) who has to oversee this disgrace. He is also to face charges of high treason, but absconds and sets off for India where he hopes to clear his name and restore the family honour. The story itself is quite a solid British Raj adventure, but director Allan Davis really does turn it into a bit of a drudge. There's a bit of action towards the conclusion but otherwise it treads the line between adventure film and romance just a little to clumsily - and slowly - for my liking. Regarding that latter part of the plot, we must rely on the underwhelming Janice Rule ("Jane") who really rather simpers her way through the scenes as the story begins to falter. I like this kind of boy's own style of story - so probably give it a little more credit than it deserves, but neither Richard Greene nor the wonderfully expressive Skelton Knaggs can make this sow's ear into a silk purse. It's a perfectly watchable tale of espionage and subterfuge, but equally forgettable too.

---SPOILER---

In this period picture set in the Indian "raj" in the mid-1800s, Peter Lawford is a British army officer framed for espionage by Russian spies and drummed out of the army. He escapes from the police on his way to prison and makes his way to India to gather evidence to clear himself, a task he figures to accomplish by enlisting in the army under a different name. A variation on the old "Four Feathers" story, this low-budgeter from MGM can't make up its mind whether it's a thriller (Lawford trying to clear his name and find the real spies) or an action picture (the British fighting rebellious Afghan tribesmen in the Khyber Pass) and doesn't really succeed at either--you know that Lawford's going to clear himself (he does) and that the British army will win the day (they do). There's some odd casting (Janice Rule is Lawford's British sweetheart but doesn't even try to hide her American accent, Australian actor Michael Pate plays a Cockney soldier with a laughably exaggerated Cockney accent, American actor Richard Hale--who often played Indian chiefs in westerns--plays a Russian spymaster in the same kind of chopped, singsong manner in which he played Indians), and the picture overall is stiff and mechanical; a burst of action at the end isn't particularly well done (although it was filmed on location at the Khyber Pass and uses hundreds of extras), and even Lawford's charm, good looks and way with a line can't really save it.

It's a bit better than most of the innumerable period "action" clunkers Sam Katzman was churning out at Columbia--several of them with the same setting as this picture--at around the same time, but that's about all that can be said for it.

Kudos to MGM for actually filming this story in actual locations that it happens. We see the real Khyber Pass here. Unfortunately it's attached to a story that is a combination of the Four Feathers and the Dreyfuss Affair.

Peter Lawford stars in Rogue's March as a brilliant staff officer in the war office looking for some real combat assignment in India with his father Leo G. Carroll, colonel of the old regiment. But he gets nicely set up in an espionage charge by the Russians and is cashiered from the army.

What Lawford does is re-enlist as a private under an alias and gets shipped to India to find out who set him up and to clear his name. Also to clear it with Janice Rule another child of a military family who was going to marry him.

In the Fifties Russians were certainly popular villains even before the Communists took over. They're actually getting to be again currently. Always scheming, always subverting. Of course what the British were doing in India themselves is a question not answered.

Richard Greene is in it as Lawford's rival for Rule. But he helps out his comrade in the best stiff upper lip tradition.

Well it's a chance to see the fabled Khyber Pass.