Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

UnowPriceless hyped garbage

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

robertguttman Most films about the American Revolution don't seem to do well at the box office, and the "The Scarlet Coat" appears to have been no exception. One difference with this story is that it has little to do with the war itself, or the politics behind it. Instead, "The Scarlet Coat" is really a spy story, centered around the unmasking of Benedict Arnold. All Americans are aware that Benedict Arnold was an arch- traitor whose name is universally reviled. However, it is likely that practically none of them could tell you who he actually was, or what it was that he did to make his name so infamous. That is the subject of "The Scarlet Coat".Unfortunately, however, little is revealed concerning Arnold himself, or his motivations. He remains a shadowy figure on the periphery of the story, what Alfred Hitchcock would have called "The McGuffin", the object about which the story revolves, but about which the audience learns little or nothing. The real subject of "The Scarlet Coat" is the relationship between two spies, American Major John Boulton and British Major John Andre. Despite the fact that the outcome of the war hangs in the balance over the success of their respective enterprises, they are depicted as having been good friends. Of the men two Andre is presented as being by the far the more interesting character of the two.Among movies about the American revolution, "The Scarlet Coat" stands apart in that it does not depict the British as overbearing tyrants. As played by Michael Wilding, Major Andre comes off as an intelligent and gallant gentleman, highly regarded by both friends and foes alike. That aspect of the film, at least, is unquestionably supported by the historical record. It is Major Andre's tragic downfall that provides the climax of the film. It so happens that I reside in the village where Major Andre was tried and hanged, and where he is still regarded as a local celebrity, of not precisely a local hero. The 18th Century Inn where he was held prisoner is still open for business, just across the square from the church where the trial was held. A British officer's red coat, purporting to be that worn by Major Andre, is on display in the Inn, though I cannot vouch for it's authenticity. A monument stands at the place where Major Andre was hanged, probably the only one ever erected in the United States commemorating a foreign spy, and the place where it stands is still officially known as "Andre Hill". One other curious circumstance concerning that village: it has a road that is still called "Kings Highway". That road was established back in the late 1600s and, apparently, after all these years nobody ever bothered to change the name.

DKosty123 John Sturges is a good director & this film shows it. Presented as real History though, I am afraid that some of the story is a bit skewed to fit the cast, & the script enhanced a bit to create better drama. Still, Sturges brings a solid story to the fore & the camera work on the film is quite stunning. Karl Tunberg's script is well envisioned by the director.Cornel Wilde's Major John Boulton is a very solid character, a revolutionary whose mission is to spy on the British convincing them he is a Tory & report back to General Washington. He forms a friendship that is quite compelling with Major John Andre (Michael Wilding). Both men are in love with Sally Cameron (Anne Francis) which is the triangle the story is built around.Where it doesn't ring true is in how good & ethical these people are. While there is some factual basis, I think Tunberg has made these people saints and comparison with their real historic counter parts is in name only. Still this drama is quite a compelling telling of the treason of Benedict Arnold (Robert Douglas). It plays well for the viewer and is very much worth a look.

Richard Green One of the intriguing aspects of this historical drama is the way the "Tories" or British American Loyalists are portrayed, and the sort of gloss given to their ardent support for King George III. In many ways the American Revolution was definitely a family affair, in that some of the wealthier colonial families were split asunder by it. If there is a strong criticism to be made of this film, it is that perhaps the people in this story are made out to be a little bit nicer than they were in real life.In some regards, the actions of the character of Major Boulton, played by Cornel Wilde, make him the least likable member of the cast and the flaw in the storyline. He seems to vary from being a prickly kind of patriot to being a kind of 'anything for the cause,' fellow. This film does concentrate heavily on the notions of personal honor and personal prestige which were a major social 'norm' in that day and age.In its subtext, the fact that about twenty-five percent of the colonial population was decidedly pro-British is glossed over, too. But the strength of the Tory element is not obviously maligned, although the good doctor character is about eighty-five percent upper class twit ( to steal a fine phrase from Monty Python's Flying Circus ). Anne Francis does a whole lot with a rather thin section of the script, and it stands out. She was a good choice for the woman of divided loyalties, a 'gal' who was rather more modern than the social conventions of that day might have allowed -- if there had not been a life and death struggle going on.One good aspect of the film is the way the rivalries of the American revolutionary leaders degenerated into outright jealousies, and how these personal conflicts very nearly sabotaged the entire revolutionary effort. All in all, the leading characters are very well drawn, the minor characters are not just human "props" and the fight scenes are believable enough to carry the dramatic action.This is a great spy movie. It's not quite a great historical drama, but it does satisfy well enough. It rates a seven largely because Cornel Wilde is so deeply immersed in his role, and does it so well, and because Anne Francis makes the most of her supporting effort.The color print used on Turner Classic Movies was very clear, as well, and so it was an enjoyable presentation in that important regard.Hope it runs again soon.

theowinthrop I was glad to see that THE SCARLET COAT, after being absent from television for many years, has begun showing up on cable - usually on TURNER NETWORK. It is one of those films that I have referred to elsewhere that once was shown pretty frequently but then vanished from the small screen.It is not as well recalled as other films about the Revolution - many of which are inferior. People recall 1776 for the solid musical underneath it.They remember THE DEVIL'S DESCIPLE for Laurence Olivier's excellent (and fun) performance as General Burgoyne, and for the good work of his co-stars Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas. But they remember THE HOWARDS OF VIRGINIA, a dull film from the early 1940s that may be the most mediocre performance in Cary Grant's career. Except for 1776 the other two films have stars in them (1776 had some good character actors, William Daniel as John Adams - repeating his stage performance fortunately - and Howard De Silva as Ben Franklin - even in the small role of Edward Rutledge there is John Cullum singing that fascinating economic lecture "Mollasses to Rum to Slave".). So it goes with all of the other films - Griffith's America does have a diabolic performance of Lionel Barrymore as Walter Butler, the Tory. LAFAYETTE has Orson Welles portraying Ben Franklin (oddly enough nobody thought of making the musical BEN FRANKLIN IN Paris into a film - with Robert Preston in the lead as on Broadway). Robert Stack starred as JOHN PAUL JONES (a movie sunk by a wooden, lifeless script). Even Al Pacino could not save REVOLUTION. As for Mel Gibson's THE PATRIOT, it collapses in his desire to show sadistic British incidents which never happened (if a British Cavalry officer had burned down an Anglican Church with it's parishioners inside in the South in 1780, King George III - who took his being head of the Anglican Church seriously - would have had that officer hung!). A sad list - fortunately there is 1776 and DRUMS ALONG THE MOHAWK and THE SCARLET COAT.The conspiracy of Benedict Arnold - Sir Henry Clinton - and Major John Andre is a subject that has only appeared in two movies - and oddly enough both were good. One is the comedy THE TIME OF THEIR LIVES, where Abbott and Costello link their colonial characters to the fate of Arnold's local co-conspirators. However, only the first twenty minutes of the film deal with the conspiracy at all (though the plot hinges on clearing Costello's name of treason charges). THE SCARLET COAT is a solid dramatic treat, and wisely concentrates on the real tragic hero in the story: Major John Andre. Yes, he was a spy, and had he succeeded American history would have been part of the British Empire for at least another century (Arnold was selling more than control of West Point and the Hudson - Washington and his staff were scheduled to be there on the day the trap would have been sprung). But unlike Arnold (whatever blows he unfairly received after doing such marvelous service for the American cause up to 1777) Andre never betrayed his country - he was fighting for his king and homeland, and thought he was in the right. Michael Wilding makes this point very eloquently in the film's court-martial scene. As a result, the viewer's sympathies (as well as those of Cornell Wilde's character, and all the other characters in the film) remain with the Major even unto death. It is interesting to note that in the 19th Century the Arnold Conspiracy did remain the subject of American drama - but the play that held the boards was not named "Arnold" but "Andre". He couldn't be saved but we still regret what happened to him.And then there is this 1955 film.