Matrixston Wow! Such a good movie.

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Nayan Gough A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Juana what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

A_Different_Drummer For the record, this film when released was shamelessly called The Prince and the Pauper.Do you remember the 70s? It helps if you do.Having survived the post-war era, rock and roll, and the chaos the 60s, the 70s ushered in big hair, big disco, big cars, big meals and ... well you get the drift.Especially big Hollywood productions like this one.Against such a backdrop it is easy to imagine a bunch of studio suits looking at the wonderful 1947 version of the Prince and the Pauper (a version your humble reviewer has seen over a dozen times) and saying something like .. bah humbug we can do better.No in fact, they could not. They could do it bigger and more lavish. But better is hardly a word I would use to describe a version so different in every way that, years after release, they even changed the title (presumably to avoid reviews just like this one.) The 1947 version is sweet and clever and constantly interesting. And very true to the original story.This version, aside from the interesting attempt to cast Reed against type, is worth one watch, maybe and my guess is you will never want to see it again.Advice? See the original. Accept no imitations.

Bogmeister Brought to us by the same producers of "The Three Musketeers" and "The Four Musketeers" of several years earlier, this also brought along some of the same cast - Reed, Welch, and Heston - in an attempt to duplicate the success of those earlier adventures. It doesn't quite reach that level but is a fairly faithful adaptation of the Mark Twain story, with solid entertainment value. This was a final gasp in the child star career of Mark Lester, who gained fame as the title character of "Oliver!" from 9 years earlier. A tall gangly young man by this point, he seems out of place here, as if they waited a couple of years too long to film this. He plays the pivotal dual roles of a poor pauper kid who switches places with his double, Prince Edward of England. Reed is the wandering soldier of fortune who takes pity on and befriends the prince, now mistaken for a peasant who seems mad. Reed basically repeats his 'Athos' role from the Musketeers movies, but that's not really a bad thing - it is Oliver Reed, after all.The movie also piles on as many big stars as possible, a habit of the producers, though many of these stars had their best roles behind them. Heston is on hand as the blustery King Henry, dying about halfway through. Welch doesn't appear until the 2nd half, playing Reed's old girlfriend, now married to his evil brother (Hemmings). Borgnine hams it up as the mean brutal dad to the pauper, while Scott puts in an appearance as a ruler of thieves or beggars, whatever. Harrison is a royal duke, reminding one of his role as Caesar long ago in "Cleopatra"(63). This benefits from the long experience of most of the actors, who lend a humorous, carefree style to most of the scenes. There's even some poignancy in the later scenes between Lester & Reed, who begins to wonder if this may truly be the new king of England he's trying to protect, and it helps to have a nice score, as usual, from Jarre. Twain knew how to write a good story, complete with suspense as we wait for the finale, and this shows through at the end.

Poseidon-3 Touted as the latest answer to the 1973 version of "The Three Musketeers", this film can't hold a candle to the light wit, sumptuous splendor and game cast of the first film. (The movie even cribs no less than 4 actors from the prior film.) Based on the story by Mark Twain, it concerns a pick-pocketing urchin (Lester) who finds himself in the room of King Henry VIII's son (also Lester) and discovers that the two are virtually identical. They swap places as a lark and soon find themselves up to their necks in the problems of each others' lives. Lester, so adorable in "Oliver" years before, is a lanky, fright-wigged, one-note presence. On the occasions when he stands up straight, he TOWERS above everyone including the extras, looking gangly and awkward. He has a pinched facial expression and fraught eyebrows through the entire film...as both characters! This gets very old, very quickly. Reed shows up as a game, but bulky swordsman who aids the one who's stuck as a pauper. Second-billed Welch barely appears in the film, turning up at the very end (and looking stunning.) Four (count 'em) Best Actor Oscar winners round out the cast to no great effect, done in by the laggy direction and the uncreative script. Heston (with no authentic accent) unconvincingly and hammily plays Henry VIII to the one filling in as a prince. Borgnine (in another distractingly non-British accent) plays the urchin's overbearing father. Harrison has little to do (he's offscreen for a significant portion of the film) as one of Heston's political rivals. Scott has a cameo as a grizzled leader of thieves. The good things about the film (the sets, costumes, star wattage) are done in by the bad things (mundane storytelling, lazy cinematography, a ghastly, anachronistic score by Jarre.) The biggest flaw is the casting of Lester. So much hinges on him and he is just wrong for the role by this time. Comparing this so-so piece of work to the majestic, classy and rich "The Three Musketeers" and "The Four Musketeers" is blasphemy.

peacham This was always one of my favorite adventure films as a boy. a fine cast of legendary actors complimented the story wonderfully. Mark Lester was a bit old to play the title roles but, still a good young actor. George C Scott and Oliver Reed are standouts as is Sir Rex Harrison as the curmudeonly Duke of Norfolk. Harrison has the best line in the film when the King's Guards come to escort him to prison. "Oh, you are arresting me? I always thought that was an honor reserved for His Majestey's unfortunate wives." On the down side, Charleton Heston was ridiculous as an overly made up (and stuffed ) King Henry. Heston never seems to learn how limited an actor he is. Overall a very fun film that never bores and never makes you stop enjoying yourself.