King Richard and the Crusaders (1954)

It's Bad Reputation Preceding It, the Preconceived Notions are Confirmed Virtually From Scene One. This is a Cinemascope, Warner-Color, Stereophonic, Costumed Movie Magnet that Attempts to Draw Audiences Away from the Idiot Box. It Didn't.Mid-Fifties Moviegoers Smelled a Rat and Stayed Away in Droves. They Released it Again in 1962. Still No One Came. With an All-Star Cast and a Busy, Epic Looking Ad Campaign the Movie Never Managed to Shake its Rep as a Dull Dud.It has a Colorful Palette but the Scenes are Stiff Even When Fights and Battles are Engaging. The Dialog is Legendarily Lame, the Characters are Laughable, and the Whole Thing is One Giant Embarrassment. Laurence Harvey Just About Steals the Show with Such an Intense Performance He Appears Ready to Come Unglued Routinely. Rex Harrison Hams it Up as the Muslim Leader but is Forced to Warble Guitar Serenades and Recite Endless Islamic Platitudes. George Sanders is Woefully Miscast as King Richard.Overall, Worth a Watch for Bad Movie Lovers, Max Steiner's Rousing Score, and to See Why the Hollywood Studio System was On its Death Bed.

I give it a NINE as a 12-year-old. As a mature person, I can't say because it's not available, even on Netflix. At the time, I thought it a great adventure film. So they scrambled history a bit and the lines were corny; but with costumes, intrigue, and romance, plus Rex Harrison and the always impeccable George Sanders, what more could a kid want?Especially loved the part "where King Richard meets Saladin and shows him 'the strength of English steel' by cutting through an iron mace placed across the backs of two chairs. Saladin responds in kind by throwing a silk veil in the air which separates as it falls across his scimitar, and he replies that 'sometimes it is not the strength of the steel but the sharpness of the blade.'"Didn't you ever like some film as a kid for reasons known only to a 12-year-old?

I find myself agreeing with this English reviewer's assessment.( December 24,2006)It really should have had Errol Flynn as Sir Kenneth.He must have been unavailable for any one of a variety of reasons,and Harvey the closest substitute available.LH was capable of some things,and doing them quite well(although, for the life of me, I can't place my finger on a single one of them right at this particular moment.)But, warm, dashing, romantic, swashbuckling,he really was not.And why didn't they find Richard Todd, or Richard Greene, or any one of a number of up and coming young actors in the "bull pen" to perform the role of Sir Kenneth.

Have to admit I didn't read Sir Walter Scott's "The Talisman" in which this film is supposed to be based on. If "King Richard and the Crusaders is a good version of the book I'm glad I didn't.This movie is sort of colorful with some acceptable gowns (I didn't say accurate), Virginia Mayo has some good profile shots (I didn't say scenes), George Sanders renders an acceptable performance as the title character and Robert Douglas plays fine one of his usual costume villains. And that's about all.The medieval extravaganza looks definitely as a low budget one with not much credible situations, lots of full speed horseback riding towards nowhere, standard swordplay and that originally ridiculous undercover doctor (Saladin himself) curing his enemy Richard wounded by an arrow thrown by his own men. Nobody understands either why really Douglas wants to kill his king; I mean they say why, but its not enough reason (too standard). And there's one of the most insipid and dull heroes ever in a medieval film: Laurence Harvey as Kenneth The Leopard with a blonde wig, a wooden acting and ridiculous lines in his romantic scenes with Mayo (it's hard to understand how Harvey went into a reasonable film career if his first roles where like this one).The only explanation for this picture being made could be that the producers tried to take advantage of the ticket box's success of "Ivanhoe" (based on Walter Scott's best novel) and "Knights of the Round Table" both released a short time before. If my guess is right, they failed completely.