Le roman d'un Roi

A retiring English country gentleman, Rassendyll, is mistaken for his distant cousin, King Rudolph of Ruritania. When the king is taken hostage by his jealous brother, Black Michael, Rassendyll agrees to act as the king in the coronation ceremony.

It takes a long time for this version of 'The Prisoner of Zenda' to get moving. The first hour or so is stodgy and less than riveting film-making, and then it gradually picks up momentum, and the last half hour packs a decent punch, especially action-wise. But all in all, a rather more lackluster, even crude entertainment than I had expected after the exhilarating 'Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse', also by Rex Ingram.

The script is largely at fault, with the scenes so disjointedly put together that it does not in long stretches make a lot of sense. It has the makings of some interesting psychological insights, but does not explore them. I would have made more - MUCH more - out of the fact that for a long while Black Michael seems a pretty decent fellow, genuinely in love with Antoinette and understandably preoccupied about leaving the fate of his country to his feeble-minded brother. But Ingram makes nothing of it and seems curiously uninspired.

The youngish Lewis Stone is an earnest Rassendyll/Rudolph, and sort of holds his own in the climactic sword-fight with, among others, Ramon Novarro. And now we are getting somewhere. This is Novarro's film. He was hardly a star when it was made, and his role does not take up a lot of screen time, but Novarro eats up the scenery with his monocled, slick diabolism. "While you're unhung, Rentzau, hell lacks its master!", Stone says, and right he is. Novarro is pure evil, and a delight to watch.

"The Prisoner of Zenda" has been filmed about a dozen times...more of less. It's a VERY familiar story to anyone who loves old films. When I heard about this 1922 version coming on Turner Classic Movies, I at first thought it was the original one, though it turns out there was an even earlier version in 1913! Regardless, I was thrilled to finally see a silent version of a story I have long loved. So is this one as wonderful at the 1937 Ronald Colman version? Well, not exactly--but it sure was close.

Another surprise about this one is that is starred Lewis Stone--a guy I'd hardly think of as an action hero! This is the bald Judge Hardy...playing a handsome king! Looking at Stone's hair in the film, I assume he was wearing a wig, as he had A LOT of hair! But he was also quite good in the dual roles of King Rupert as well as his English cousin. Oddly, however, while Stone clearly is THE leading man, Ramon Navarro got top billing--which makes little sense as he's a relatively minor character. No, this is definitely Stone's film.

As far as the plot goes, it's pretty much the familiar story. The new king, Rudolf, is about to be crowned leader of Ruritania. However, his evil but popular brother, Michael, has plans of usurping the throne. First, he drugs Rudolf so he cannot attend the coronation. BUT, coincidentally, a distant cousin is at hand and poses as the king. However, this won't deter Michael, as he's discovered the real king and has taken him prisoner. So, you KNOW another attempt will soon be made on the pretend king's life. Can the evil Michael and his nasty henchmen be defeated? This is a lovingly made silent--with terrific sets and wonderful acting. I particularly loved the king's beloved #1 man--he had such wonderful and soulful eyes. And something unique to the film I really liked--the deadly river and how it plays into the film. Overall, a great silent--and a film that only barely was eclipsed by the great 1937 version (this film is just perfect).

Note: After the FIRST guy gets pulled over the deadly falls, the print's quality degrades VERY quickly. It is very fuzzy and could really use additional restoration.

Expensive silent film of a king who is marked for assassination. He switches identities with a look alike (both played by Lewis Stone) who takes his place at his coronation. But the real king is kidnapped. While his followers try to find him, the fake king falls in love with Princess Flava (Alice Terry).

Slow moving but the film looks great. No action...just lots of exagerrated looks and people endlessly talking. The sets, costumes and acting helps. Seeing Stone (who went on to play Judge Hardy in the Andy Hardy movies) so young and being a romantic lead is interesting. He's also very good. Terry is regal and also very good as the princess. Ramon Novarro (still an unknown) plays the evil villain. That's quite a shock--he always played heroes in his later films. He pulls it off though.

So, it's beautiful but I can't totally recommend it.

As with "Scaramouche", I found this film rather stodgy, with a lacklustre score. Lewis Stone is too old in his dual role and Alice Terry lacked any real charm. This picture belongs to its supporting cast- Barbara LaMarr ("too beautiful for her own good") as Antoinette de Mauban, Colonel Zapt, Captain von Tarlenheim and,of course, Rupert of Hentzau, played with relish and humour by Ramon Novarro. I think I prefer him in this role to any other I have seen him portray; perhaps his popularity with the female audience meant he became stuck in the part of gentle romancer (long after he had become too mature for this) rather than developing his abilities as an actor.

Rex Ingram was one of the finest directors of the silent era, but unfortunately, he is little remembered today. His most famous film is The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, a box office smash in 1920 which put Italian immigrant Rudolph Valentino on the road to full-blown stardom. This 1922 adaptation of The Prisoner of Zenda is one of his better known films among silent movie geeks, but I would not count it among his most outstanding.

There's good scenery and spectacle, and Lewis Stone makes good as the lead. The standout of the cast is without a doubt a young Ramon Novarro as the roguish Rupert of Hentzau. Unfortunately, the rest of the cast is not so memorable. The film is also overlong and the comic relief was mildly painful at best.

Overall, it's watchable, but you'll be better served by watching the 1937 remake. If you want outstanding Ingram, then see Scaramouche or Four Horsemen.