VividSimon Simply Perfect

Nonureva Really Surprised!

Jonah Abbott There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

shakspryn This is an old-fashioned adventure movie, but there's nothing wrong with that! Our time period is the 1660's or so, with Charles II on the English throne. That the film is in color helps a great deal, allowing us to fully enjoy the fine costumes and the beauty of the leading lady. There is some good swordplay and other good action scenes. The knowledgeable film fan will spot a number of familiar faces in the cast. This film puts many of the backlot locations of MGM to good use. They're gone now; you can appreciate them here. Recommended.

ksf-2 Glorious CinemaScope. Some BIG BIG names, in their early days. Roger Moore, waaaay before he was James Bond. Ann Blyth. George Sanders... who could be hit or miss in his movies. David Niven in another prim and proper English role. Of course, Niven had ALSO played Bond in Casino Royale! Period piece from England, on Charles II, who actually lived from 1630 to 1685. History says he died of kidney illness, which may or may not have been brought on by poison. In our story, Dermott is played by Edmund Purdom; fun bio on IMDb.... Purdom has the distinction of being the only actor to have his hand-prints removed from the sidewalk at G's Chinese Theater. Swordfights. Chases on horseback. Brampton (Niven) is the evil dude, having his opponents knocked off with false accusations. The usual palace adventures. Its okay. Fun to see some of those big names from back in the day, but the acting is all pretty stilted, as if they are reading off cue cards. Directed by Robert Leonard... one of his last films.

MartinHafer I am a retired American who taught world history. Although Charles II is shown as an all-around swell guy beset with disloyal jerks waiting to kill him, he was, in fact, a divine right king who managed to eventually lose much of the good will the English had towards him when the monarchy was restored. The English were dreadfully sorry they chopped off the head of Charles I and were ready to make amends. Charles, however, wasn't about to learn the lesson of his father-- and continued to behave as if he was never to be challenged in his role as king. Things really were bad...so bad that when his brother, James II, took the thrown the English soon chased him out of the country and replaced the Stuarts with a Dutch king and queen. So, as I watched the film, I had to laugh because it did re-write history just a tad! But enough of a mini lecture...on to the film itself.The film is about yet another plot to kill the king by a disloyal bunch of jerks. However, there is a small book with this information in it--and it's stolen by a group of highway men! Are these crooks evil crooks or the Hollywood type who are intensely loyal Englishman who love their king? Through the course of this film you'll learn! So although it might not be all that accurate, is this an enjoyable film? No. Not really. Like too many period films, the dialog is stilted and the picture lacks humanity and realism. It looks like a stagy production and sounds like one too. Watchable but hardly a must-see.

bkoganbing Filmdoms most notorious cad, George Sanders, makes a second film appearance as King Charles II of Great Britain, the first being in Forever Amber. Charles II has come down in history as a pleasure driven hedonist, he's not called the Merry Monarch for nothing. Hedonist he was, but that was also so much image management as well. He had a good head on his shoulders, he survived the defeat of his father and a decade of exile to return as King in 1660. The man that has come down to us in history is hardly likely to have been taken in the Duke of Brampton as played by David Niven.But that's what this film asks us to believe. We're given no real reason why Charles has placed such confidence in the fictional Duke, but he has. So Niven's got himself a real nice racket going, he denounces folks as traitors and Charles believes him and executes them. And their property goes to him.In fact Niven's got himself as little black book with a Restoration Dun&Bradstreet rating on all the richest and loyalest of Charles's subjects. The book unfortunately falls into the hands of highwayman Edmond Purdom. Then Purdom makes an alliance of more than one dimension with the daughter of one of the late nobility, Niven's had done in, Ann Blyth.Niven looks very uncomfortable in the part of villain one of the few, maybe the only one he ever did. Purdom and Blyth are reunited from the film they did the year before, The Student Prince, which was far better than this. Sanders saunters his way through Charles II again. If he had been this dumb, the Popish Plot which occurred later on in his regime would have knocked him off the throne.One of the dumber swashbuckler films I've ever seen. Only for the quality of the players which includes Roger Moore as one of Purdom's gang does it get as high a rating as it does.