A l'est du Soudan

Judging this film forty eight years after release requires some care. In 1964 it pandered to the escapism that cinema goers still relished, echoed days of colonial glory which were rapidly fading and offered a glimpse of the exotic before foreign travel and mass television made it accessible. The core triumvirate of actors, Anthony Quayle, Sylvia Syms and Derek Fowlds are strong supported by child star Jenny Agutter.

Chaos in Sudan is not new to 21st century audiences as Quayle does battle with Dervish hordes from the 19th century. The plot is a formulaic one, Quayle as Private Baker escapes a native assault and helps the upmarket Simms to escape. This provides for chase sequences and encounters with various wild animals including snakes, rhinos and elephants – it's pretty much like walking though a zoo.

The problem is that not only is the plot formulaic and laborious, but the sets are studio ones, with excessive use of archive and stock footage (some from The Four Feathers)that require considerable suspension of disbelief. As a drama it fails. As entertainment at the time, it probably did the job. Quayle was a massive star at the time with HMS Defiant, The Guns of Navarone, and Lawrence of Arabia under his belt when he made the film, Sylvia Syms was an established love interest and has had a distinguished career which has lasted till this day, most recently as the Queen Mother in The Queen. Director Nathan Juran had a solid but unspectacular career having some success with sci-fi movies but also trying his hand at Western's and fantasy with Sinbad. There is nothing in his work on this film which is of note.

I do not recall seeing a film which derives not only background shots but most of its action from stock shots and parts of another feature,including the climax.So virtually all of the action comes from The Four Feathers(1938)This film looks as if it has been made on a shoestring.For example there are shots of charging elephants and you have the actors shooting at them from in front of a process screen.It is so clear that they have not been anywhere near the Sudan.At the climax you have Anthony Quayle on a small set on the left of frame with the main action fromThe Four Feathers either put in by a process screen or an optical printer.The acting is not up to much ,the only exception being the dependable Anthony Quayle.So all told rather a disappointment.

EoS has been screened several times recently on British TV and the synopsis seemed promising. It turned out to be a mix of "Ice Cold in Alex" (Anthony Quayle and Sylvia Syms escaping from a beleaguered town), "North West Frontier" (heroic Brit, governess and child escaping from a beleaguered town), "The Four Feathers" (much stock footage) and several travelogues (stock footage of various animals and native dancing).

Other reviewers here on IMDb have already commented on the amateurish mixing in of the footage of charging animals. I am resigned to the heroine in films of this vintage apparently having access to make-up and hairdressing facilities as she undergoes various privations, Miss Woodville continuing to look glamorous at the end. And Murchison's rapidly falling in love with Miss Woodville is par for the course, though usually in films such relationships develop into a three-way romance with rivalry between the two men. In EoS his passion seems to have fizzled out as quickly as it appeared.

But there were at least three risible scenes. The first was when, after Baker had rued the small stock of ammunition, Murchison fires his revolver several times in enemy country to stampede a herd of animals to delight Asua. Then he sets off the signal fire when he sees a boat on the Nile. Not even the most callow officer would be so stupid. Thirdly, when the fugitives are hiding from the slavers they are barely concealed by a few fronds of foliage; they are fully visible to the camera - and thus to the men searching for them inches away who do not notice them.

One might also think Baker very well-spoken for a private soldier who had been demoted from sergeant several times, but, as other films ("Beau Geste", "Under Two Flags") have shown, "gentleman-rankers" did exist.

East of Sudan is a simple adventure movie from 1964, depicting the fall of Khartoum but without any actual falling that the viewer can discern. That's because we are only informed of it, that General Gordon is defeated and his head is displayed on a spike. Don't worry, we don't see any of that.

What footage of the battles are obviously lifted from other films as this entire production was shot in the studio. Clips of wild animals are used with back projection, allowing actors to stand in front of a screen and shoot at them or wave their arms about, amusingly I might add, it's so ineptly directed.

I thought about giving this one star but raised it to three because, strangely I enjoyed some of it. For a start there is the gorgeous Sylvia Syms at the height of her fame, that fine actor Anthony Quale who does his best with an atrocious script, Derek Fowlds who I know people remember fondly from Yes Minister on TV and little Jenny Agutter looking about ten years old but just as pretty as when she grew up, even though she's hopelessly miscast as an Indian princess with a black wig. Unfortunately her skin is white as Snow White.

It kept me watching in spite of it's flaws and making me wince from time to time as it zips along at fairly brisk pace. Children who wouldn't notice these bloopers might well enjoy it so I mustn't be too harsh although I did feel a bit sorry for Anthony Quale who deserved better material.

OK to watch with a young family on a Sunday afternoon.

Aside from the fact that much of this seems to have been cannibalised from "The Four Feathers" (1939), it makes for quite an entertaining action adventure with Anthony Quayle ("Baker") and Sylvia Sims ("Miss Woodville") trying to help smuggle the young daughter of the Emir of Barash "Asua" (Jenny Agutter) through the lines of the Mahdi's army that is challenging the British in the Sudan. It's a cheap and cheerful adventure, with a minimal budget and some rather static indoor sets that let it down rather - and Quayle was always a much better stage actor than he was on screen, but that said there's a little chemistry on screen between the two leads and just enough action to keep the thread from unravelling. Not a film you are likely to recall seeing, but it is still watchable in a boy's own adventure sort of way.