55 Days at Peking (1963)

55 DAYS AT PEKING is one of those all-star Hollywood historical adventure films made during the 1960s. It stars Charlton Heston and Ava Gardner as two of a huge cast of Western characters who are caught up in the 1900 Boxer Rebellion in China. This saw ordinary folk rise up at the behest of the Boxer revolutionaries in a tide of anti-Western sentiment to get rid of all the country's foreigners. The story is distracted by some 'yellow face' make up here and there but otherwise works well in terms of an epic-feeling setting and plenty of lavish action scenes which delight in an old-fashioned way. The ensemble cast contains at least 20 actors of note from the era and most of them give fun, straightforward performances. It's not a classic nor one of Heston's best movies, but at the same time it's not bad at all and I enjoyed it for the spectacle alone.

the Chinese are described a barbarians, the film did make the Chinese (the Boxer who were in fact the nationalist movement) as bad guys. Keep in mind that foreign traders were making money selling opium to Chinese, and you can understand some of the animosity. It would be like Columbian drug cartels using force of arms to demand their right to sell cocaine in the U.S. But putting the political correctness aside, it is a very good film about an event that happened. You might also watch "Khartoum" about the battle between Muslim religious fanatics and British colonialism.Colonists are never popular, To glorify the intruding foreigners' actions in China in the wake of the Opium Wars during the late colonial period is a terrible thing to do. Doing so is along the same lines as glorifying the Nazis' actions in the invasion of Poland and in the Holocaust. To put things into perspective, for those who may not understand just how bad (morally) this movie is, imagine how Jewish people might feel, should a Hollywood movie be released that not only viewed the Holocaust from the Nazi perspective, but went so far as to glorify their actions. Looking at it from the other side's perspective is one thing (the German perspective of WWII and Holocaust, or in the case of this movie the foreigners' perspective). However, glorifying it is something else altogether - and this movie crossed the line in no small measure. To add insult to injury, the Chinese characters were portrayed by white actors, and even caricatured. This is stupid anti Chinese crap !Here's the setup: The foreign imperialists from Europe, America and Russia are the GOOD guys. The Boxers who are trying to defend their nation, their empress and their way of life from the onslaught of expansionists are the BAD guys. Barely anything about this movie is correct. History actually proved that the foreign forces actually suffered huge losses in close quarter combat with the Boxers, but you would never see a western film maker with the balls to acknowledge that, and so the Boxers are treated as just as savage and sloppy as Native Americans where depicted in films of this era.

I saw this movie in full cinemascope in 1963 - it was part of the epic assembly line through the fifties and sixties, especially form Samuel Bronston made in Spain studio. At the time I did not feel that it climbed the heights of 'El Cid' but that it was an attractive blockbuster with action, sub plots, decent acting and direction. It is a film about 1900 and it was made in the early sixties - so please let us not have the bleeding heart sensibilities of liberal anti-colonialists of modern times excusing Chinese violence but condemning Western atrocities. The story concerns the native Chinese Boxer Rebellion of 1900 against the West's trading and Christian influence in China - with not too much made of the violent killing of western missionaries and Chinese christians by the rebels - and the subsequent siege by the rebels of the Diplomatic Quarter in Peking for 55 days. The film focuses inwards rather than outwards, as against large odds the Westerners fight off the rebels (this is the truth by the way!). But on seeing it again almost 50 years on, the story and script have a lot more going on than seems at first viewing. There are lots of questions about why the US is on the Asian mainland (cue early Vietnam issues) and historically Western nations fighting each other in proxy wars on foreign soil - very relevant in the early sixties. the film itself allows Charlton Heston to inhabit a rather less than heroic role as he blunders through relationships knowing only how to fight battles as a marine. David Niven gives an old school charm and believability to the leading British diplomat faced with trying to keep rival nations together. Ava Gardner looks good and her part as fallen aristocrat who bedded a Chinese general can be seen as a parallel and touchstone to attitudes to the black struggle for equal rights in the US at the time. The action and script run out of steam towards the end but a satisfying re-watch with so much more to be understood in a very clever script.

See it- Outnumbered, surrounded, insurmountable odds. These are all ingredients in the recipe of a good action movie. But these aren't the typical bad guys the good guys are fighting. They're Boxers. This is undeniably the best movie ever made about the Boxer Rebellion in China in 1900. And when you've got a rebellion on your hands, who you gonna call? Charlton Heston of course. David Niven teams up with Heston in the defense of Peking with an allied force made up of soldiers from the 10 different nations that had foreign embassies in China. I thought it was pretty cool to watch the various soldiers from the different armies marching around in their respective uniforms. Kind of like the opening ceremony in the Olympics. My only complaint is that this movie is a bit too long. I swear every Charlton Heston movie has an intermission. But you will be surprised by how much action this movie actually has. For some reason this film is largely unknown. But it is very exciting, and has plenty of "storming-the-castle"type siege scenes. Everyone likes an underdog, and this is a very underrated film. 3.5 out of 5 action rating