Swashbuckler

If one can simply recall that movies are to take us away, whether from or to is personally specific, then it would take a profoundly negative person to think poorly of any well made and well acted movie. This is such a flick, decently focused relative to plot, well chosen costuming and locations, great cinematography . . . what more can you ask? If you want a 'film', with all its highbrow silliness, it's true you might not wanna go there with this one, but jeez, does anyone who only goes to 'films' even tell anyone else they know that they're painfully pretentious? This one has no pretensions, and since when is Genevieve in any state of undress a minus? Good entertainment, which is what I want when i spend money on a movie, and Swashbuckler delivers with aplomb.

JGS

I LOVE this movie. I don't care how terrible critics might think it is. It's fun, romantic, entertaining, an old fashioned yarn. It came out right after Robert Shaw made a "splash" in Jaws, and he's fabulous as usual. Don't let them make you feel guilty about loving this movie. It's great.

Critics were hard on "Swashbuckler" in my Country too. However I've been watching films for 45 years now and there are some things I'm pretty sure on movies. As most things in life everything is just a matter of opinion and each one's own preferences and tastes. Critics are just movie fans -like any other one- that have the possibility of making their opinions known, but that's the only difference with us, and in fact I don't agree with them very often. "Swashbuckler" is one of those cases. Considering this film within it's genre -there's no other way to analyze a film- I found it most entertaining and enjoyable.

The first point in favor of "Swashbuckler" is that the director, crew and actors didn't take it too seriously and they aimed to an action, romance, amusing and unpretentious pirate movie; and they succeeded in my opinion.

Robert Shaw was no Errol Flynn and he didn't even try to be but he is convincing as pirate Captain Ned Lynch who joins a noble damsel in distress (Genevieve Bujold) to fight tyrannic Jamaica governor Durant played by Peter Boyle (he isn't Basil Rathbone and also doesn't pretend to be) who achieves a most original and colorful villain (his deadly sword training with more than one opponent at a time is most enjoyable and interesting). The rest of the cast that includes James Earl Jones, a funny Beau Bridges and Angelica Houston are a good support too.

Director James Goldstone does a prolix job in beautiful Caribbean outdoor sceneries and keeps entertainment all along with very well achieved action scenes and sword play.

All in all, if you enjoy pirate films this is one to see (the critics opinions notwithstanding).

Despite Maltin's great slagging-off of this movie (has he actually seen it, I wonder??), I reckon it was a little gem in an era when a lot of filmmakers took themselves and their work far too seriously! Guaranteed to lift the blues on any bad day, it may be a bit corny, it might have been misguided to make a pirate flick in the mid-70s, but there are certainly a lot worse examples of the genre around, and this one is quite a cute and appealing film.

... then and now.

Alright, I saw this flick as the opener for a circus in Radio City Music Hall on my first trip to NYC in 1976. I thought it grand then, and I haven't much changed my mind.

I do agree with those who think that a better villain and ingenue could have been found than Peter Boyle and Genevieve Bujold (one of the most overrated actresses of the time), but the Shaw-Jones pairing sparkles. I loved the score so much I bought the soundtrack on vinyl -- dare I hope that it may be out on CD somewhere? The flick isn't long on plot, really, but the cinematography and action are spiffy, the characterizations work, and man, is Geoffrey Holder a bad ass! It's a sprightly movie and you'll spend a fun time watching it. Who knows, you might even have limerick contests with your mates the next time you're escaping from the local militia.

Rating: 7/10