ShangLuda Admirable film.

Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Dirtylogy It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

boblipton If you're looking for a perfect swashbuckler in which people sound like stage Scots, ye can nae do better than this movie about the Scottish cattle thief and protection racketeer whom the early 18th-Century press, along with highwaymen, romanticized into heroes; the magnificently idiotic image was perfected by Sir Walter Scott and so we have this flick.Disney went full English with this, shooting at Elstree and the Highlands with a British cast, and the care shows, particularly with Guy Green's beautiful oil-painting Technicolor lighting. Richard Todd gives a fine performance in the traditional, anachronistic costume; Glynis Johns (who is still with us as I write this) has never been cuter; Finlay Currie was never more Scottish; and John Robertson Justice, as the Duke of Argyll, plays his role as befitting a man whose name is John Robertson Justice, even though his real middle name was Norval.

keelhaul-80856 I am surprised this has a 6.6 rating.This was a classic I watched again and again as a kid.Plenty of action, rousing patriotism, singing, dancing, light romance, and manly speeches/battles to go around.This is from the era when Disney knew the basic formula for success, family values, and how to deliver a good story with a historical background, even if liberties were taken.Richard Todd is believable; tough and cunning, he also provides some humor as well. He often reminds me of Odysseus, in his protracted journey abroad and home again, using his wiles and determination to defeat his enemies and survive.Todd's version is WAY BETTER than that Liam Neeson reboot that came later. I was excited to see a modern adaptation of Rob Roy, but the Neeson thing just didn't cut it for me. Way too many boring scenes that grew tedious, with no payoff. Neeson himself didn't bring the mischief and energy of the role that Todd was brimming with. A couple of scenes are good from the later one, and I still watch it occasionally, but it really wasn't the amazing remake I hoped for. I felt they wasted a good opportunity to bring this to a new audience, and it fell flat, with little excitement or battles to showcase, nor the intrigue back in England.This was sort of the first version of a Braveheart film, noting the fiery Scottish rebellions against English rule that had gone on for years.The only thing I can really detract from the earlier film, is the fact that it is a little cheesy, and takes liberties, as most movies do. It puts more of a light-hearted spin on certain things(though much of it is nicely dark and tense), and runs wild with history at times.

JohnHowardReid Although not based on Sir Walter Scott's novel of the same name, I found "Rob Roy" a most entertaining effort. Splendidly acted throughout, particularly by James Robertson Justice (as the sympathetic Campbell), Michael Gough and Geoffrey Keen (two wonderful villains), and Eric Pohlmann (a truly charismatic performance – one of his best – as King George), "Rob Roy" emerges as a rousing adventure yarn with plenty of swashbuckling excitement, hair's breadth escapes, and even a bit of humor and romance. French has directed in rousing style. He has an eye for both the pictorial and dramatic possibilities of real locations. Supporting technical credits are absolutely first-class, featuring fine scenic photography and a handsomely atmospheric music score.

sandy-97 Although I said I had seen this film before it was at least 44 years ago and I was only a strapping lad of about 6 or 7 so my comments of the film might be touched with some nostalgia.I have incidently seen the new release of Rob Roy several times but I somehow prefer the 1953 version.