Le Maître du monde

I caught this one on cable recently, seeing it for the first time as an adult. I must admit to a slight bias toward this film: when I was growing up in the dreaded BC (before cable) days, it was standard Saturday afternoon TV fare on our local indie channels. I was surprised at how well it's held up after all this time.

Master of the World is actually based on two little-remembered Jules Verne novels. Price is his usual hammy self as the standard Verne not-quite-villain, Robur (read: Nemo in the air) who, like Nemo, seeks to end war through technology. The young Bronson, as a sympathizer who then rebels against Robur's violent methods, is far less wooden than in his later years. But the real star of this movie is its production design. The rendering of what an aircraft might have looked like in Victorian days (had such a thing been possible) is dead-on, and the special effects are pretty impressive for 1961. The script, by Richard Matheson, is a little overwrought, but true to Verne's spirit while eliminating the blatant racism of the original stories. This time around though, I found the sweeping, melodramatic score to be a bit overpowering.

In short, not a perfect film or even a great film, but Master of the World remains a well made, entertaining action fantasy. I'm surprised it isn't better remembered by fans of the genre.

Set in the Victorian era, a mad genius named Robur (Vincent Price) has devised a futuristic flying ship for a devious, slightly contradictory, though possibly admirable purpose. He travels halfway around the world with an imprisoned quartet and a crew of "air sailors".

Although there are some problems with this film primarily due to its budget, and some viewers might be put off by the obvious similarities to Disney's version of 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea (1954), I enjoyed this somewhat wacky sci-fi/fantasy/adventure film quite a bit, and gave it a 9 out of 10.

The film actually opens with a brief but clever, tongue-in-cheek black & white documentary about the history of flying machines. Abruptly, at the narrative line "Master of the World", the documentary ends. Then we change to color as we're taken to a sumptuously fantastic Pennsylvania town, complete with towering mountains and a seeming volcano.

I have to admit that director William Whitney already had me in the palm of his hand at that moment. I'm all for weird transitions, surrealism and beautifully saturated color cinematography. To make things even better, just as a character tells us how boring the town is, a booming voice (obviously Price's), quoting a doom-laden passage from scripture, emanates from the vicinity of the mountain.

I was also easily sold on the film because I'm a big Vincent Price fan. Price is great, even though the context of the role is a bit unusual for him. There is a lot of comic relief throughout most of the film, and the genre wasn't his norm. However, he comes across as menacingly demented yet suave as always. The rest of the principle cast was marvelous, too, with Charles Bronson playing an early version of Harrison Ford (maybe he always did that), Mary Webster as an appealing love triangle target, and some very fun and appropriate overacting from Henry Hull doing an early obnoxious "I'm an American" shtick and David Frankham as the perpetually irascible Victorian sap.

It's a blast noting all of the future tech elements from past eras' perspectives, and the set design and special effects are actually admirable given that this was a low-budget film for its ambitions. Even the stock footage and footage from the 1944 Henry V (the shots of London that look like a medieval town), although at times obvious, are incorporated well. On the other hand, there is some similarity between the set design and that of a particular era and class of television show--say the Adam West Batman, the original Star Trek, or even the Tom Baker Doctor Who--which all have a fairly low-budget look, but I have to admit that I love those shows, too.

There isn't much of an easily discernible subtext in the film, but of course that's because Master of the World wears its messages proudly on its sleeve. I won't state them explicitly here, as in my view that would be a spoiler, but it's notable, like many other aspects of the film, for its similarity to 20,000 Leagues, including its moral ambiguity. This would actually be a good film, as would 20,000 Leagues, to show a freshman-level ethics class as an exemplification of and discussion launching pad for both utilitarianism and deontology.

Although it's not exactly the most original film to come down the pike (but primarily just because of 20,000 Leagues), and it's not a faithful adaptation of author Jules Verne's work, I don't subtract points for either of those characteristics. Master Of The World has an engaging, solid story that is both thought provoking and a lot of fun.

This is a fun movie to watch, full of charm and thinking characters in entertaining action, debate and introspection. With Vincent Price in the lead as Robur(who has declared war on warfare with his flying machine the Albatross) and Charles Bronson as his unlikely heroic nemesis Strock(almost an early era anti-hero), how can one not be intrigued? But also there's grand adventure, costumes and an 18th Century setting to boot. Also the main theme of the need to end warfare remains a very strong one and the film never loses sight of this. Just great stuff to watch.

I saw Master of the World mainly because of Vincent Price who is one of my favourite actors. It is far from perfect, but is fun and deserves better credit. The effects are not great where you can tell that they are low-budget, while the stock footage of other costume epics looks rather clumsy, the Globe theatre suddenly appearing in Victorian London also happens to be anachronistic. And Vito Scotti overacts to the verge of embarrassment. However, the costume and set designs are nice to look at and Master of the World is at least well photographed. The music score manages to be both rousing and bombastic, the script while talky is intelligent and humorous and the story is fun. Charles Bronson has been better but he is at least appealing, while Henry Hull is amusing. Stealing the film though is none other than Vincent Price, who commands every frame with his ever effortless suavity and panache, and he is also deliciously sinister when needed. All in all, an enjoyable film with a great Price but at the same time it could have been more. 7/10 Bethany Cox

This film is a mish-mash of two Jules Verne novels (none of which, I have read), and I think it is a fairly good adventure.

It's interesting to see Charles Bronson in an early role (before he hooked up with Mr. Winner and went-all bitter vigilante'), he turns in a good performance. And the late-great Vincent Price is just right as Robur, Captain of the flying ship "The Albatross", in one of his trademark not-strictly evil genius roles - more like, men who usually have good or honourable intentions, but are driven to madness and the use of terrible means to acheive them. The rest of the cast are all of a fairly good standard, except the character of Mr. Prudent, I find him extremely annoying and the acting is also quite poor.

The effects are alright (you have to take into account it's the early 60's) and the set of the ship itself looks good and is well crafted. But the parts where the ship is supposed to be over land (some country- or-other), are almost funny because you can clearly see that the ship is super-imposed on to a completely different piece of film.

Overall Good, with an important message (discussed and challenged in the movie), that is more relevant, today, than ever.