The Prisoner of Zenda (1979)

If you can manage to sit through the tedious intro with Peter Sellers as the aged king, the movie itself is not half as bad as we might expect. In fact, some of the sequences are genuinely amusing. And whilst it's true that Sellers is far too indulgently treated by the writer, the cameraman and the director, it must be admitted that the film has been produced with rare pomp and splendor on actual Austrian locations. The scenery is great and a lot of money has been spent on both location and studio filming. A fair amount of the action sequences are played fairly straight, and some of them even build up a modicum of suspense. True, the Elke Sommer sub-plot is often a bit of a bore, but the special effects are so outstanding, they thoroughly eclipse anything Whitlock has done before. Director Quine makes the most of his budget and puts the production money where it belongs, namely up there on the screen!

I really wanted to like this. How could it go wrong with Peter Sellers and Lionel Jeffries on board as well as composer Henry Mancini and script-writers Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais? Sadly, something did go wrong, and I am still puzzled as what the biggest problem was with this film. Not all is bad though, the film has gorgeous sets and costumes and is beautifully shot, and Henry Mancini's score is great as you would expect from the composer of the Pink Panther movies, Great Mouse Detective and Breakfast at Tiffanys. However, the writing had all the ingredients to be funny but instead came across as forced(which is bad news for a spoof remake, which considering the source material was something I felt wasn't going to work in the first place), while the story as well as being sluggishly paced just lacks wit and thrills and the characters are rather cartoony(especially George Sierra). The acting fares little better, with Peter Sellers, who I consider a comic genius, coming across as both exaggerated and uninterested, while George Sierra even with bulging eyes makes little of his admittedly cartoony character and everyone else, especially John Laurie, have little to do and are dull as a result. In conclusion, not a complete disaster but just didn't work for me. 3/10 Bethany Cox

The new king is a fop, and a London cabbie, who is a gem, looks just like him (the old king used to come to London for recreation) so the cabbie is hired to stand in for the king. While assassins try to kill him, the pretty lady sees him for what he is - and falls in love with him. I cannot give away the ending, it's too amazing.This movie is full of jokes of all kinds, from subtle funny looks, to hilarious switcheroos; I think Peter Seller's very best movie. He's very funny, from the slapstick to the dumb looks in strange situations, etc. He was abused in the Pink Panther movies - having to do the same jokes over and over. Here we see some different ones, and quite good too. "She did an owl!!!" "He did a chicken!!" "What are you doing?" "That's my secret chicken signal." "You can't do that; that's my secret chicken!!!" "Whooo whooo!!!" "Bok bok bok!!!" The principle actors do their parts very well. I find myself cheering for the valiant cabbie, what a dude! and disgusted by the foppy prince - and have to stop and realize, it's the same actor! The actresses are one thing they certainly should be: gorgeous. And some of the minor parts are really nicely played, too. "Take this." "What is it?" "It's a ring, stolen from the Hapsburgs. It's priceless." Jailer squints at it trying to decide if it's worth risking his life over, and drops it in the sewer. "Ow... got anything else?" The look on his face is perfect.And there are themes of vast import behind the story. We are all fops and gems, rolled into one; the gem part of us is a prisoner inside, and the fop is what the world has cultivated.I haven't seen much of the other movies based on this same book, but this one does the story justice, and adds the funny element. I'd say it well improves the book, which was a little too baroque for my tastes.This movie has the one flaw that it looks like it was made in the 40's or 50's: the special effects are cheap, like the king falling down the well - these people could have gotten those effects looking better, but they chose not to for some reason. Let's assume that it was because they loved the old time movies with those fake-looking special effects. I just think of it as quaint and relax and enjoy the show. Maybe they spent their budget on sets and costumes - a lot of them look pretty elaborate. My copy is a VHS I taped off of WKRP or somewhere one night - the music sounds like it's been thru the grinder - and I still watch it occasionally and enjoy it for its immense merit as a story, and the acting and the jokes. Actually the fights aren't all that bad. I actually like the one on top of the carriage. Pretty amusing... "We're driverless!!!" "Not while I'm here you're not!"

Anthony Hope's swashbuckling 19th Century novel has been filmed numerous times, perhaps the most successful occasion being the 1937 Ronald Colman version. It's a fabulous story – one of my all-time favourite novels, in fact – and really lends itself well to movie adaptations. Alas, this 1979 remake is a pretty weak affair which is played primarily as a spoof, thereby giving star Peter Sellars the chance to indulge in some risqué double entendres and slapstick swashbuckling. Various rumours abound that Sellars was difficult on set, sabotaging the entire production with his outlandish behaviour. Despite this he still has some priceless scenes along the way, but between the infrequent highlights it emerges a leaden and largely ineffective film that does justice neither to its marvellous source material nor its amazing cast.Victorian cabbie Sidney Frewin (Peter Sellars) inadvertently saves the life of a soon-to-be-crowned European prince named Rudolph (Sellars again). Since there are many in Rudolph's home nation of Ruritania who plot to see the prince assassinated, Sidney is hoodwinked into travelling to Ruritania as a "decoy" target. Along the way, the real prince is kidnapped by the agents of Black Michael (Jeremy Kemp). Michael plans to seize the throne himself when the prince fails to turn up at his coronation…. but his plan is thwarted when the prince's loyal sidekicks Fritz (Simon Williams) and Sapt (Lionel Jeffries) persuade Sidney to attend the coronation posing as the prince. Reluctantly, Sidney carries out the charade but is unable to convince the prince's future wife, the gorgeous Princess Flavia (Lynne Frederick), that he is who he claims to be. Gradually, others begin to figure out the deception – including Black Michael himself – and Sidney's game of switched identity escalates into a desperate struggle to protect the throne and rescue the real prince.A few things about the film really jar with me. Firstly, as much as I like Sellars - and as funny as I find him in many of his comedy films - The Prisoner Of Zenda simply isn't the right choice of story for a spoof movie. Secondly, the book concludes with one of the most heartbreaking scenes ever written – a scene that would make for deeply moving cinema if handled in the right fashion – but this film completely neglects the original ending and opts for something unsuitably light and fluffy. Thirdly, the film is punctuated with some absurd slapstick violence that would fit better in a Road Runner cartoon – especially the ludicrous scenes featuring Gregory Sierra as a jealous Count trying to kill Sidney (a la Wile E. Coyote). There are a handful of compensations to be found – Sellars is enjoyable, especially in his "Sidney-scenes" (has anyone noticed how remarkably like Michael Caine he sounds from time to time?) Also, the film has a sprightly score by the dependable Henry Mancini, and some attractive sets and cinematography. It's just a shame that the occasional bright spots are far outweighed by the misfiring elements, making this version of The Prisoner Of Zenda perhaps the weakest of them all.