Not the biggest or best of the 60's epics, and largely forgotten today despite the presence of two powerhouse actors as its hero and antagonist, this morally complex movie futzes with history a little in order to paint the Mahdist rebellion as a genocidal bloodlust intending to conquer as far as Europe. While it's impossible to read the Mahdi's mind almost a century and a half after his death, I feel that Olivier's performance of him veers somewhat into the cartoonish. However it is fun to watch. Heston fares less well as Chinese Gordon, who would have been better performed by co-star Nigel Green or another British actor of similar caliber. Even someone like Nigel Davenport would have done well with it too, though he certainly lacked the star power at the tome to carry an epic film. Same goes for the other Nigel. What's with all these Nigels?
At least Heston attempts the accent for about 60% of the film, though it can be somewhat explained away that he spent a lot of time outside of England. The rest of the cast is all-round excellent, with Richard Johnson in his dashing youth bringing charm as his conflicted lieutenant sent on a few too many away missions.
This film gets note of all the big historical epics as having one of the biggest downer endings. Anyone who knows their history won't be surprised, though you never know if a film like this will find a way to spin it into something positive. The narrator makes a few bold political statements and the film takes a clear side in the necessity of British expeditionary militaristic intervention which may make modern audiences on both sides of the aisle squirm. On one hand, the British are Christian "white saviors" who show up and impose their values, but those values here include saving the lives of several Egyptian Muslims, many of whom (as well as the Sudanese) appear to welcome their presence. On the other hand, they aren't committed enough or fast enough, leading to several potential massacres and misery the country. Makes you think, don't it? Perhaps history isn't something easy to paint with a giant broad brush?
As for the film, technically it delivers a few great action sequences such as the riverboat breakthrough and the climactic siege. There's also some excellent dramatic moments like Heston's staring down at his attacker and (surprisingly enough) the more talky diplomatic scenes. Unfortunately this film is just a tad too talky and slow where it could have used a little more emotional punch. An easy opportunity would have been to expand the character of the little girl Heston has a couple run-ins with and show her or her family get savagely butchered by the enemy in order to communicate why he needs to stay and protect the people despite the great risks. As is, his character comes off as foolish and aloof, which I doubt the real Gordon would appreciate.
Fits in well with the slightly later, slightly better film YOUNG WINSTON as well as the several versions of THE FOUR FEATHERS which cover similar historical territory.
At least Heston attempts the accent for about 60% of the film, though it can be somewhat explained away that he spent a lot of time outside of England. The rest of the cast is all-round excellent, with Richard Johnson in his dashing youth bringing charm as his conflicted lieutenant sent on a few too many away missions.
This film gets note of all the big historical epics as having one of the biggest downer endings. Anyone who knows their history won't be surprised, though you never know if a film like this will find a way to spin it into something positive. The narrator makes a few bold political statements and the film takes a clear side in the necessity of British expeditionary militaristic intervention which may make modern audiences on both sides of the aisle squirm. On one hand, the British are Christian "white saviors" who show up and impose their values, but those values here include saving the lives of several Egyptian Muslims, many of whom (as well as the Sudanese) appear to welcome their presence. On the other hand, they aren't committed enough or fast enough, leading to several potential massacres and misery the country. Makes you think, don't it? Perhaps history isn't something easy to paint with a giant broad brush?
As for the film, technically it delivers a few great action sequences such as the riverboat breakthrough and the climactic siege. There's also some excellent dramatic moments like Heston's staring down at his attacker and (surprisingly enough) the more talky diplomatic scenes. Unfortunately this film is just a tad too talky and slow where it could have used a little more emotional punch. An easy opportunity would have been to expand the character of the little girl Heston has a couple run-ins with and show her or her family get savagely butchered by the enemy in order to communicate why he needs to stay and protect the people despite the great risks. As is, his character comes off as foolish and aloof, which I doubt the real Gordon would appreciate.
Fits in well with the slightly later, slightly better film YOUNG WINSTON as well as the several versions of THE FOUR FEATHERS which cover similar historical territory.