On se bat aux Indes

---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.

This is our old friend the Bengal Lancers movie. Hero in disgrace, redeems himself by saving the honour of the regiment. Unlike most of the genre (The Charge of the Light Brigade, The Four Feathers, etc) this one is actually set in India or nearby for the most part. Peter Lawford is too weak for the lead; Richard Greene slightly too fruity, as always, for the second banana; and I don't know how Janice Rule got a gig as the English girlfriend, although she wears her best corset and a stunning Victorian ballgown trimmed with flowers at the bodice. Overall it's a fun example of the genre, and the battle scenes at the end, shot in the real Khyber Pass somehow, are alone worth the price of admission, giving you some idea of strategy & tactics, not just the usual hand to hand biffing.

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.

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.

After an officer is drummed out of one of the brigades of the British empire for being accused of and then convicted of selling secrets to Russian agents, he joins a different brigade and eventually winds up having to deal with his accusers and the real culprits, everything being shifted from London to a remote part of India where an insurgency is being stoked by the Russians. The similarity to what is happening today in Afghanistan makes this rather intriguing, though the best parts occur in London before the action shifts to India. Peter Lawford was an original Rat Pack member (with Dean Martin, Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr., etc..), and even if this film is pre Rat Pack, with this film you can see why he'd later fit in so well in Las Vegas. Even as he's being officially kicked out of his elite brigade in front of all the assembled ranks, which is one of the films better parts, he still looks like he could care less. On the lam in London for escaping from the civilian police, he gets a job as a bartender in a rundown section of town and listens in on and then butts into a conversation as a sergeant is busy trying to pick up on a supposedly loose woman. Lawford's character is socially above them, but due to the circumstances he's now at the bottom of the social ladder in civilian society. When he joins another regiment he comes in as a private, yet through it all this guy has undeniable class and a saving sense of humor. The film itself isn't half bad, as Lawford's character finds out who actually did sell those military secrets. His character's eventual reinstatement into his rightful place in the military and society is a foregone conclusion. The battle scenes are filmed on location (in Southern California?), and aren't that impressive. What's more impressive is what the Russians do to the real culprit in another scene which is the most intense in a film that lacks, for the most part, intensity.