gazelam

Agreed with other reviewers about the abysmal quality of the movie. Even Ali McGraw's beauty was insufficient to cause this movie to have any redeeming quality. Dean Paul Martin as a tennis hustler who goes on to reach the finals of Wimbledon? Please, give me break. How about a tennis hustler who goes on to have his legs broken by an upset mark?

Given all that, it seems a pity to waste one more erg of energy on this loser, but I have to disagree with the release date. I saw this film on a flight to Japan in early June of 1978. There was no way this was released in 1979. So that makes it the worst film of 1978, not the worst film of 1979. Now, I suppose that they might have test-screened the film to captive airline audiences to see if someone would be so upset as to throw themselves out of the plane rather than see the dragging conclusion - I could not say.

Having seen this a number of times as a late-night or Saturday-afternoon movie growing up, I caught it again yesterday on television, and was pleasantly surprised. As other posters have commented on it's faithfulness to the book or as a historical setting, I won't comment on that.

Probably due to an excellent cast, the movie manages to transcend many of the (at least now accepted) clichés and is very successful. Having Welles and Powers in leading roles obviously allows them to sell the story line in a very convincing manner. I am a big fan of swashbuckler movies, but this goes beyond the bravado with good character development. The large-scale shots were magnificent. Lots of extras, animals, etc. I was drawn into the story and quite dazzled by the cinematography.

Although there is nothing profound here, this is an easy film to enjoy.