The Sunday comic strip character gets the CinemaScope treatment in a fine film with marquee names to attract more than passing interest. Robert Wagner is just right as the young Viking prince who seeks to restore his father's throne. Circumstances bring Valiant to King Arthur's court where an English knight becomes his mentor and trains him in the art of combat. James Mason is great as a shadowy figure who figures prominently in the picture. Janet Leigh is a lovely maiden who is smitten immediately with Valiant, and Debra Paget is on hand to be romanced by an English knight. The film has action, suspense and romance, tournaments and thrilling battles before the final confrontation between Valiant and the Black Knight. Great cinematography, beautiful scenery and Franz Waxman's brooding score round out a quality film production.
48 Reviews
Epic and sweeping adventure based on the classic comic strip created by Harold R. Foster
ma-cortes9 February 2017
First and the best adaptation upon ¨Hal Foster's Prince Valiant¨ famous comic strip ; this decent movie (1954) by Henry Hathaway boasts itself a great cast , such as Robert Wagner , Janet Leigh , Victor McLagen , Donald Crisp , Sterling Hayden and Debra Paget . Spectacular adventure with a lot of colorful pageantry and old-fashioned action , concerning about Prince Valiant , Black Knight , and King Arthur , though the movie falls short . It packs a non-sense blending of romance and Dark Ages action , as the screenwriters don't get the appropriate touch . Prince Valiant (Robert Wagner), son of the exiled King of Scandia , journeys to England . There Arthur (Brian Aherne) governs in the legendary citadel that is Camelot . Valiant attempts to become himself a knight at King Arthur's Round Table . His Knights of the Round Table commit acts of derring-do and spend their spare time jousting and enjoying feasts . There young Valiant who wields his sword with vigour is given the task to be the squire to Sir Gawain (Sterling Hayden who easily steals the acting honors) , one of King Arthur's knights along with Sir Tristram (John Dierkes) , Sir Lancelot (Don Megowan) , Sir Kay , Perceval , among others . Later on , Prince Valiant sets out to chase the Black Knight . But our real hero is wounded and he is then cared by the gorgeous princess Aleta (Janet Leigh) , as the young twosome fall in love . Meantime , an evil tyrant , and villainous leader Viking overthrows his father King Aguar (Donald Crisp) , the Christian King of Scandia .
This is a Medieval tale with adventures , full-bloodied action , unspeakable dialog , villainy , terrific jousting , love stories and heroism in the grandeur of Scope although in television set loses splendor . The movie displays breathtaking battles , being ambitious in scope with heroic confrontation and a striking final climax for a mortal duel . Handsome story , being decently written by Dudley Nichols , John Ford's regular , though contains some awkward narrative elements . Excellent settings , monumental castles , outdoors and tournaments or jousts are well staged . However this spectacular film never takes off as it should despite pomp and circumstance showed , being excessively sentimental , so you'll be excited and embarrassed alternately . In any case , filmmaker does some breathtaking set pieces and the attack of a Viking castle turns out to be colorful and vividly thrilling . This is the classic story of romantic adventure come to life enriched by glamorous color and overwhelming fights . Excellent performance by James Mason , displaying efficiently his interpreting skills , proving what a good player he really is . And Janet Leigh and Debra Paget look chastely desirable , as always . Supporting cast is frankly good though wasted , employing such notorious players and not building them roles with which to make a considerable impact , as the screenplay never give them a chance , there appear fine secondary stars as Donald Crisp , Brian Aherne , Barry Jones , Tom Conway and Neville Brand . Brilliant cinematography in CinemaScope by Lucien Ballard who photographs splendidly the jousting scenes and the burning of an impressive stronghold . Rousing and moving musical score by Frank Skinner . The motion picture was compellingly directed by Henry Hathaway .
Other rendition was ¨Prince Valiant¨ (1997) by Anthony Hickock , it is another attempt to literally transfer a comic-strip about the Arthurian saga to the screen , including a modern dialog and the whole cast is far too distinguished to be appearing in this sort of caricature of Medieval legends and non-sense , it stars Katherine Heigl who is inappropriate here , holding an excessive ironic tone prankster , Stephen Moyer , Thomas Kretschmann , Ron Perlman , Joanna Lumley , Edward Fox and Udo Kier . And an animation retelling titled ¨Legend of Prince Valiant¨(1991) with voice by Robby Benson as Valiant and Efren Zimbalist Jr as Arthur . Other movies on the matter of legends of Arthur resulted to be : (1953) the classic ¨Knights of the Round Table¨ (by Richard Thorpe) , the musical ¨Camelot¨ (Joshua Logan), the fantastic ¨Excalibur¨ (John Boorman) , ¨First Knight¨ (Jerry Zucker) and recently ¨King Arthur¨ (Antoine Fuqua) . The picture will appeal to aficionados with chivalric ideals and epic movies fans , it is a passable production that will lose much on small television screen . Rating : 6.5/10 , acceptable , well worth seeing
This is a Medieval tale with adventures , full-bloodied action , unspeakable dialog , villainy , terrific jousting , love stories and heroism in the grandeur of Scope although in television set loses splendor . The movie displays breathtaking battles , being ambitious in scope with heroic confrontation and a striking final climax for a mortal duel . Handsome story , being decently written by Dudley Nichols , John Ford's regular , though contains some awkward narrative elements . Excellent settings , monumental castles , outdoors and tournaments or jousts are well staged . However this spectacular film never takes off as it should despite pomp and circumstance showed , being excessively sentimental , so you'll be excited and embarrassed alternately . In any case , filmmaker does some breathtaking set pieces and the attack of a Viking castle turns out to be colorful and vividly thrilling . This is the classic story of romantic adventure come to life enriched by glamorous color and overwhelming fights . Excellent performance by James Mason , displaying efficiently his interpreting skills , proving what a good player he really is . And Janet Leigh and Debra Paget look chastely desirable , as always . Supporting cast is frankly good though wasted , employing such notorious players and not building them roles with which to make a considerable impact , as the screenplay never give them a chance , there appear fine secondary stars as Donald Crisp , Brian Aherne , Barry Jones , Tom Conway and Neville Brand . Brilliant cinematography in CinemaScope by Lucien Ballard who photographs splendidly the jousting scenes and the burning of an impressive stronghold . Rousing and moving musical score by Frank Skinner . The motion picture was compellingly directed by Henry Hathaway .
Other rendition was ¨Prince Valiant¨ (1997) by Anthony Hickock , it is another attempt to literally transfer a comic-strip about the Arthurian saga to the screen , including a modern dialog and the whole cast is far too distinguished to be appearing in this sort of caricature of Medieval legends and non-sense , it stars Katherine Heigl who is inappropriate here , holding an excessive ironic tone prankster , Stephen Moyer , Thomas Kretschmann , Ron Perlman , Joanna Lumley , Edward Fox and Udo Kier . And an animation retelling titled ¨Legend of Prince Valiant¨(1991) with voice by Robby Benson as Valiant and Efren Zimbalist Jr as Arthur . Other movies on the matter of legends of Arthur resulted to be : (1953) the classic ¨Knights of the Round Table¨ (by Richard Thorpe) , the musical ¨Camelot¨ (Joshua Logan), the fantastic ¨Excalibur¨ (John Boorman) , ¨First Knight¨ (Jerry Zucker) and recently ¨King Arthur¨ (Antoine Fuqua) . The picture will appeal to aficionados with chivalric ideals and epic movies fans , it is a passable production that will lose much on small television screen . Rating : 6.5/10 , acceptable , well worth seeing
A good comic strip movie of the days of knights and chivalry
SimonJack23 January 2019
Ah, for the days of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, when men were knights and boys wanted to be one. "Prince Valiant" is a fantasy swashbuckler film based on the long-time syndicated comic strip of the same name by Hal Foster. Robert Wagner isn't at the level of Douglas Fairbanks Jr. or Errol Flynn, nor is this film quite the actioner of those made by those actors. But, this is a fun and entertaining film from the mid-20th century when the tales of knights, pirates and adventurers were highly popular with Hollywood and audiences.
Foster's comic strip brought to life much of the lore of the legendary early British period. And, this is one of the first films about the main characters of the legend. The film has a fine cast. It's a picturesque story with great sets and costumes as imagined for the period.
The castles, coastal scenes, sword fights and tournaments of knights should still delight young audiences of the 21st century. And, the story isn't without romance with a couple of maiden beauties for whose hands in marriage most red-blooded knights would gladly vie.
This is a particularly good film for young boys well into the 21st century. The hero, Prince Valiant, is not an invincible knight who conquers all. Instead, he's a human being with faults who makes mistakes. Robert Wagner plays the part well as a young lad with dreams who stumbles and falls a couple of times in his pursuit of valor and honor. That makes a better lesson for today than the standard fantasies of super heroes that Hollywood cranks out.
Foster's comic strip brought to life much of the lore of the legendary early British period. And, this is one of the first films about the main characters of the legend. The film has a fine cast. It's a picturesque story with great sets and costumes as imagined for the period.
The castles, coastal scenes, sword fights and tournaments of knights should still delight young audiences of the 21st century. And, the story isn't without romance with a couple of maiden beauties for whose hands in marriage most red-blooded knights would gladly vie.
This is a particularly good film for young boys well into the 21st century. The hero, Prince Valiant, is not an invincible knight who conquers all. Instead, he's a human being with faults who makes mistakes. Robert Wagner plays the part well as a young lad with dreams who stumbles and falls a couple of times in his pursuit of valor and honor. That makes a better lesson for today than the standard fantasies of super heroes that Hollywood cranks out.
Loosen Up
schogger133 September 2003
There are only few - VERY few - classic sword & sorcery adventures out there which deserve more than a glance. Yes, this one's pretty ignorant of Hal Foster's original, and I pity that. But as far as 40's/50's first class adventure romps go, this one ranks right beneath the all-time classic 'The Adventures Of Robin Hood', bravely levels with 'Ivanhoe', and easily settles above 'Knights Of The Round Table'.
This is a classic Sunday afternoon couch with a bag of chips movie.
As long as you don't expect something else, this is the movie for you.
9 out of 10 for what it is and always will be.
* Schogger13
This is a classic Sunday afternoon couch with a bag of chips movie.
As long as you don't expect something else, this is the movie for you.
9 out of 10 for what it is and always will be.
* Schogger13
Hate to Admit it But I Liked This One
ragosaal24 October 2006
I Know: Robert Wagner's hairdo is sort of unbearable; Janet Leigh's white wig is too much; Valiant's sword looks over-sized; Sterling Hayden behaves like a contemporary New Yorker; it's very easy to imagine who the black knight is; vikings didn't have horns in their helmets; and so on.
But somehow I found this medieval story based on Harold Foster's characters entertaining and I even enjoyed it. In fact I think that for 1954 "Prince Valiant" takes the most of Foster's novels about knights and vikings in the times of legendary King Arthur.
Good colorful locations, fine settings, good action scenes and a sort of "sticky" musical score that even sounds appropriate help the picture along with an acceptable script and Henry Hathaway's prolix direction.
Highlights o the movie are James Mason's convincing villain, Brian Aherne's fine portrayal of King Arthur and a violent and smashing final duel between Valiant and the unmasked Black Knight.
If you like medieval costume adventures you'll enjoy this one too.
But somehow I found this medieval story based on Harold Foster's characters entertaining and I even enjoyed it. In fact I think that for 1954 "Prince Valiant" takes the most of Foster's novels about knights and vikings in the times of legendary King Arthur.
Good colorful locations, fine settings, good action scenes and a sort of "sticky" musical score that even sounds appropriate help the picture along with an acceptable script and Henry Hathaway's prolix direction.
Highlights o the movie are James Mason's convincing villain, Brian Aherne's fine portrayal of King Arthur and a violent and smashing final duel between Valiant and the unmasked Black Knight.
If you like medieval costume adventures you'll enjoy this one too.
Prince Valiant - Pure marvelous Hollywood
abfab5027 January 2005
Quite frankly if you are looking for magic and fantasy and fantastic costumes and beautiful women AND beautiful men, "Prince Valiant" is great! Yes, it's the gorgeous Robert Wagner at 24 in a black page boy wig. And.....Janet Leigh with those torpedo breasts that were so typical of that time when whatever women were supposed to be girded up in. But look at some of the other performances. James Mason is as always consummate and thorough. Brian Aherne as King Arthur - well he always looked like royalty - might as well act it. If you want escape from the stark "horrors" that THIS RED STATE millennium has "wrought" - watch this movie. It is Hollywood entertainment at its costly costumed legendary finest! PS - Robert Wagner is gorgeous - he is more beautiful than the women if that is possible.
Ahhhhh, Hollywood...............
PPS - Debra Paget is under-rated - what a sensitive lovely girl she is.
Ahhhhh, Hollywood...............
PPS - Debra Paget is under-rated - what a sensitive lovely girl she is.
Major miscasting! But great for 50s kids
AnnieLola23 August 2010
"A Michigan Yankee in King Arthur's Court"! Well, it's a fun film to watch if you can pretend that you're about ten years old and it's the fifties. Then the sight of Janet Leigh and Deborah Paget with their cantilevered figures doesn't spoil the period feel quite so much. Then you wouldn't cringe at the jarring American accents of so many principal characters contrasted with the beautiful stage-honed British speech of others...
Detroit-born Robert Wagner's Val is a pretty classic example of a 50s studio choice for a young hero; it's all about the bankability of a cute rising actor who's being groomed for teen-heartthrob stardom. I suppose he did his best, but just think how much better this would have been with say, Richard Greene in the title role. Sterling Hayden was a New Englander, but his Gawain somehow reads more like an ol' cowhand than an 'old warhorse' of the Round Table. Of course this was just the sort of Hollywood fluff for which he had nothing but contempt; still, he needed the work so there he is, putting most of his effort into concealing his embarrassment over the whole thing.
Powerhouse pros Donald Crisp, Brian Aherne, James Mason and Victor McLaglen, on the other hand, do their best to elevate the quality of this production (whatever THEIR embarrassment)-- though one is often left wondering what favors might have been owing to involve them in it. Hollywood rides again!
Detroit-born Robert Wagner's Val is a pretty classic example of a 50s studio choice for a young hero; it's all about the bankability of a cute rising actor who's being groomed for teen-heartthrob stardom. I suppose he did his best, but just think how much better this would have been with say, Richard Greene in the title role. Sterling Hayden was a New Englander, but his Gawain somehow reads more like an ol' cowhand than an 'old warhorse' of the Round Table. Of course this was just the sort of Hollywood fluff for which he had nothing but contempt; still, he needed the work so there he is, putting most of his effort into concealing his embarrassment over the whole thing.
Powerhouse pros Donald Crisp, Brian Aherne, James Mason and Victor McLaglen, on the other hand, do their best to elevate the quality of this production (whatever THEIR embarrassment)-- though one is often left wondering what favors might have been owing to involve them in it. Hollywood rides again!
Fun comic book brought to life
kirbyskay201211 July 2013
I watched this movie on the big screen when just 9 years old, a perfect age for the experience. Having avidly read Prince Valiant every Sunday in the newspaper comic section, just the thought of castles, kings, knights, and battles appealed to me very much at that age.
Although this movie only follows the newspaper version in name and premise, it was still a nice treatise of the genre. The sets, costumes, hairstyles, props, and pageantry all bespeak the relative glamour of that era in history. The musical score is appropriate for the subject.
The acting is a little corny, especially viewed 60 years following its original debut, but it is still a fun and action filled romp through the Medieval age, and is good, clean fun for the entire family.
Although this movie only follows the newspaper version in name and premise, it was still a nice treatise of the genre. The sets, costumes, hairstyles, props, and pageantry all bespeak the relative glamour of that era in history. The musical score is appropriate for the subject.
The acting is a little corny, especially viewed 60 years following its original debut, but it is still a fun and action filled romp through the Medieval age, and is good, clean fun for the entire family.
I'm a sucker for these old Medieval epics
cutter-1228 April 2005
Too bad so many aren't good, and this is no exception. Stiff and routine in the extreme. Henry Hathaway was never anything more than a substandard director of action films, but you still thought he'd breathe more life into this production just for the simple reason he had such a decent cast and such scenic locations to work with. It just seemed like no one involved gave much of a damn, least of all Dudley Nichols who adapted the screenplay. Errol Flynn's Robin Hood proved a great film could be made in this genre, and it's a sin this, based on solid comic strip material, is such a clunky, structureless, and mostly badly performed misfire.
Being one of those films that never, or rarely, turns up on TV, and because it boasts a cast with the likes of James mason, Victor McLaglen, Donald Crisp, and Sterling Hayden, I've always had it on my list of classics to see. Sterling Hayden is the only reason I'm not disappointed I did. Don't get me wrong; it's a TERRIBLE performance. So terrible it's good. It could have been a great terrible performance if Hathaway didn't direct the proceedings with such dour seriousness. Hayden's Sir Gawain is so brash, so outrageously miscast, so full of hammy bluster and blunder you keep looking for signs his tongue is welded firmly to the inside of his cheek. Sadly, it doesn't seem to be the case.
Hayden was unintentionally hilarious in other films as well. But What a great character he'd have made in a comic swashbuckler like The Court Jester or A Connecticut Yankee. Every opportunity in this picture for comic asides is killed dead by flat direction. Where's Richard Lester when you need him? The other performances range from career worst (Wagner) to professionally competent (Mason). McLaglen, one of my favorite all-time character actors is given little screen time, and, being his character is under a heavy beard and horned helmet, is therefore easy to miss. Donald Crisp comes and goes in the blink of an eye, and Janet Leigh...well...she's no better or worse than she ever was in this type of film.
The action is actually not bad in the last act. Some nifty tricks from Valiant evading the vikings in the castle while it burns, and the final swordfight between Valiant and Sir Brack is actually quite involved save for the ridiculously over-sized broadswords and tin shields.
Worth seeing only if you must see every Hollywood sword movie. This one can be found on the same scrap heap with Richard Thorpe's Ivanhoe and Knights of the Round Table.
Being one of those films that never, or rarely, turns up on TV, and because it boasts a cast with the likes of James mason, Victor McLaglen, Donald Crisp, and Sterling Hayden, I've always had it on my list of classics to see. Sterling Hayden is the only reason I'm not disappointed I did. Don't get me wrong; it's a TERRIBLE performance. So terrible it's good. It could have been a great terrible performance if Hathaway didn't direct the proceedings with such dour seriousness. Hayden's Sir Gawain is so brash, so outrageously miscast, so full of hammy bluster and blunder you keep looking for signs his tongue is welded firmly to the inside of his cheek. Sadly, it doesn't seem to be the case.
Hayden was unintentionally hilarious in other films as well. But What a great character he'd have made in a comic swashbuckler like The Court Jester or A Connecticut Yankee. Every opportunity in this picture for comic asides is killed dead by flat direction. Where's Richard Lester when you need him? The other performances range from career worst (Wagner) to professionally competent (Mason). McLaglen, one of my favorite all-time character actors is given little screen time, and, being his character is under a heavy beard and horned helmet, is therefore easy to miss. Donald Crisp comes and goes in the blink of an eye, and Janet Leigh...well...she's no better or worse than she ever was in this type of film.
The action is actually not bad in the last act. Some nifty tricks from Valiant evading the vikings in the castle while it burns, and the final swordfight between Valiant and Sir Brack is actually quite involved save for the ridiculously over-sized broadswords and tin shields.
Worth seeing only if you must see every Hollywood sword movie. This one can be found on the same scrap heap with Richard Thorpe's Ivanhoe and Knights of the Round Table.
The Struggles of Wars in Our World, In Camelot of Arthurian Legend or the "Cold War" of McCarthy Era' It's All Relevant, Then and Now!
redryan6422 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Artist/Book Illustrator, Harold Foster started his action/adventure comic strip in 1937. The full color strip was a feature of the weekend Newspapres' Weekend supplements, such as PUCK, The Comic Weekly* of the Hearst Corporation's King Features Syndicate(the Copyright owner).
PRINCE VALIANT, which also has had the subtitle, "In The Days of King Arthur", prospered from the very start. Mr. Harold Foster's excellent draftsmanship, combined with the use of printed text of story and dialog printed under the illustrations, instead of the use of "Word Balloons" gave the strip an appearance of a History Book that's come to life.
Harold Foster was highly experienced at that time as a book illustrator. He also had done illustration for the Black & White Daily Newspaper comic strip adventures of Edgar Rice Borroughs' TARZAN OF THE APES. This was his one and only daily comic strip venture.
By the 1950's the Good Viking Nobleman's career was well known, World Wide. It is at this time that adaptation to the film medium became a reality, bringing the Prince home to untold thousands of previously untapped fans, newly brought to the ranks of the Army of Foster's fictional Viking.** The Film titled simply, PRINCE VALIANT, was given the big time treatment. The filming was done in the 3 strip Technicolor Process,widescreen CinemaScope and Western Electric 4 Track Stereophonic Sound. When combined with the finely designed sets of castles, medieval villages, etc., gave an appearance to its scenes on par with Foster's Sunday Color Panels. Supporting the action and giving a fine mood setting opening theme is the beautiful original score by the old master, Franz Waxman(himself).
A surprisingly good cast presents the story in a very convincing, almost matter of fact manner.(Like, for example, we all have Singing Swords or know someone who does, right?) The plot line involves treachery, betrayal and the problem of finding out just who is the real enemy.
Robert Wagner(with Paige Boy Haircut)portrays Prince Valiant in a most convincing manner. Lovely Janet Leigh is Princess Aleta, Debra Paget(Ilene), James Mason(Sir Brack), Sterling Hayden(Sir Gawain), Tom Conway(Sir Kay)all seen as member Knights of the Round Table. And to preside over the Round Table Boys, we have Brian Aherne as King Arthur.
Rounding out this costumer are such familiar names as Neville Brand, Richard Webb, Don Megowan,Donald Crisp and Primo Carnera(!!). My personal favourite character/scene stealer is Victor McLaglen as Val's old Viking Warrior Buddy, Boltar.
The plot involves states of war between Arthur's Camelot crew and some of its neighbors, both foreign and on the British Isles. (There is even a scene where Val remains mum when asked by Sir Brack, in front of King Arthur (who was a confident and ally of Val's Family) of the whereabouts of Val's Father, the deposed King of Thule, a Kingdom in modern day Norway.)
But even more interesting is the presence of a most dangerous Domestic Enemy in the form of 5th column traitors and spies, who provide the greatest threat to Arthur's benevolent Rule. The leader of this enemy movement is the Black Knight. Evil, treacherous and of an identity unknown, he is the one who presents the greatest threat to peaceful Camelot and the rest of Britain.
And if we stop and make some comparisons, we will find this film very relevant to those 1950's post World War II, Cold War Era. For it was the internal vermin who were the most dangerous in the story. Led by this unknown who desires conquest of Britain by using these collaborators; which is just what the U.S.A. and the Western World was facing up to then. The Black Knight(Joe Stalin & successors Bulgonin, Kruscchev, etc.) pay and use Soviet Spies, Home Grown Reds and "useful Idiots" in certain high positions to try to weaken and eventually defeat the Western Powers.
It seems that this film had some real meaty underlying themes to go along with its value to the Saturday matinée crowd. Either way, it is a film worthy of investing an evening.
* In Chicago's The Herald-American we had PRINCE VALIANT occupying the entire back page of the Color Comics, Puck. Other features seen in the Hearst "funny papers" pages then were BLONDIE, FLASH GORDON, JUNGLE JIM, HI & LOIS, MANDRAKE THE MAGICIAN,BRINGING UP FATHER(Maggie & Jiggs),THE PHANTOM, HENRY, BEETLE BAILEY and TIM TYLER's LUCK!
** This begs the question: Just what took Hollywood so long in bringing us a Prince Valaint flick?
FLASH!! UPDATE! DATELINE January 20, 2011. We watched the film the other night on Turner Classic Movies, in digitally restored condition & Letterbox format. We were very impressed, especially with the depth and magnitude of the photography. This, combined with the action of "When Knighthood was in Flower", led us to wonder if there were plans to release it in the 3 D process.
PRINCE VALIANT, which also has had the subtitle, "In The Days of King Arthur", prospered from the very start. Mr. Harold Foster's excellent draftsmanship, combined with the use of printed text of story and dialog printed under the illustrations, instead of the use of "Word Balloons" gave the strip an appearance of a History Book that's come to life.
Harold Foster was highly experienced at that time as a book illustrator. He also had done illustration for the Black & White Daily Newspaper comic strip adventures of Edgar Rice Borroughs' TARZAN OF THE APES. This was his one and only daily comic strip venture.
By the 1950's the Good Viking Nobleman's career was well known, World Wide. It is at this time that adaptation to the film medium became a reality, bringing the Prince home to untold thousands of previously untapped fans, newly brought to the ranks of the Army of Foster's fictional Viking.** The Film titled simply, PRINCE VALIANT, was given the big time treatment. The filming was done in the 3 strip Technicolor Process,widescreen CinemaScope and Western Electric 4 Track Stereophonic Sound. When combined with the finely designed sets of castles, medieval villages, etc., gave an appearance to its scenes on par with Foster's Sunday Color Panels. Supporting the action and giving a fine mood setting opening theme is the beautiful original score by the old master, Franz Waxman(himself).
A surprisingly good cast presents the story in a very convincing, almost matter of fact manner.(Like, for example, we all have Singing Swords or know someone who does, right?) The plot line involves treachery, betrayal and the problem of finding out just who is the real enemy.
Robert Wagner(with Paige Boy Haircut)portrays Prince Valiant in a most convincing manner. Lovely Janet Leigh is Princess Aleta, Debra Paget(Ilene), James Mason(Sir Brack), Sterling Hayden(Sir Gawain), Tom Conway(Sir Kay)all seen as member Knights of the Round Table. And to preside over the Round Table Boys, we have Brian Aherne as King Arthur.
Rounding out this costumer are such familiar names as Neville Brand, Richard Webb, Don Megowan,Donald Crisp and Primo Carnera(!!). My personal favourite character/scene stealer is Victor McLaglen as Val's old Viking Warrior Buddy, Boltar.
The plot involves states of war between Arthur's Camelot crew and some of its neighbors, both foreign and on the British Isles. (There is even a scene where Val remains mum when asked by Sir Brack, in front of King Arthur (who was a confident and ally of Val's Family) of the whereabouts of Val's Father, the deposed King of Thule, a Kingdom in modern day Norway.)
But even more interesting is the presence of a most dangerous Domestic Enemy in the form of 5th column traitors and spies, who provide the greatest threat to Arthur's benevolent Rule. The leader of this enemy movement is the Black Knight. Evil, treacherous and of an identity unknown, he is the one who presents the greatest threat to peaceful Camelot and the rest of Britain.
And if we stop and make some comparisons, we will find this film very relevant to those 1950's post World War II, Cold War Era. For it was the internal vermin who were the most dangerous in the story. Led by this unknown who desires conquest of Britain by using these collaborators; which is just what the U.S.A. and the Western World was facing up to then. The Black Knight(Joe Stalin & successors Bulgonin, Kruscchev, etc.) pay and use Soviet Spies, Home Grown Reds and "useful Idiots" in certain high positions to try to weaken and eventually defeat the Western Powers.
It seems that this film had some real meaty underlying themes to go along with its value to the Saturday matinée crowd. Either way, it is a film worthy of investing an evening.
* In Chicago's The Herald-American we had PRINCE VALIANT occupying the entire back page of the Color Comics, Puck. Other features seen in the Hearst "funny papers" pages then were BLONDIE, FLASH GORDON, JUNGLE JIM, HI & LOIS, MANDRAKE THE MAGICIAN,BRINGING UP FATHER(Maggie & Jiggs),THE PHANTOM, HENRY, BEETLE BAILEY and TIM TYLER's LUCK!
** This begs the question: Just what took Hollywood so long in bringing us a Prince Valaint flick?
FLASH!! UPDATE! DATELINE January 20, 2011. We watched the film the other night on Turner Classic Movies, in digitally restored condition & Letterbox format. We were very impressed, especially with the depth and magnitude of the photography. This, combined with the action of "When Knighthood was in Flower", led us to wonder if there were plans to release it in the 3 D process.
Maybe a lighter touch would have made it a classic
bkoganbing1 January 2006
The biggest problem that Prince Valiant has is that it takes itself too seriously. It is still entertaining on many levels, but I wish it had been done in a lighter vein. A good example to follow would have been Warren Beatty's Dick Tracy had the studio been able to see into the future.
The Arthurian legends place Camelot to be a generation or three after the fall of the Roman Empire. At that point Christianity was unheard of in Scandinavia where the Vikings were from. In fact Christianity was in heavy competition with the Druid religions of the ancient Britons. So the whole film has no basis in fact.
I do have to say that the film made oodles of money for 20th Century Fox and gave Robert Wagner a career role that he would be identified with for the period of his bobby sox popularity.
Wagner certainly had a good a group of supporting players as you could get to help this film. James Mason is a fabulous villain and his duel with Wagner is a classic. Brian Aherne would get to do King Arthur again in Cornel Wilde's Lancelot and Guinevere and he fits my conception of what the mature Arthur was like.
One thing though. I have to believe that with Arthur's Excalibur and Valiant's singing sword sooner or later these guys would have tangled. Two magic swords in one kingdom, unheard of.
The Arthurian legends place Camelot to be a generation or three after the fall of the Roman Empire. At that point Christianity was unheard of in Scandinavia where the Vikings were from. In fact Christianity was in heavy competition with the Druid religions of the ancient Britons. So the whole film has no basis in fact.
I do have to say that the film made oodles of money for 20th Century Fox and gave Robert Wagner a career role that he would be identified with for the period of his bobby sox popularity.
Wagner certainly had a good a group of supporting players as you could get to help this film. James Mason is a fabulous villain and his duel with Wagner is a classic. Brian Aherne would get to do King Arthur again in Cornel Wilde's Lancelot and Guinevere and he fits my conception of what the mature Arthur was like.
One thing though. I have to believe that with Arthur's Excalibur and Valiant's singing sword sooner or later these guys would have tangled. Two magic swords in one kingdom, unheard of.
I just love this movie!
Nazi_Fighter_David24 January 2009
Henry Hathaway's 'Prince Valiant' is an epic adventure story set in the Golden Age of Chivalry... It is the story of a Viking Prince who pledges to go to Camelot and there strive with honor and diligence to become a Knight at King Arthur's Round Table...
'Prince Valiant' is about a ghost who plots treason, a black-armored knight who appears and vanishes at will... It is about a deadly Black Knight, who uses his disguise to make a pact with a Viking traitor to overthrow a great king...
'Prince Valiant' is about a desperate squire who dares to wear the armor and identity of a chivalrous Knight of the Round Table... And about a loyal squire who crowns a mighty knight with a rock, and tries to win a beautiful princess for himself...
'Prince Valiant' is about the son of an exiled king who seeks King Arthur's help against the usurper, and becomes involved in a court plot... It is about a courageous lad who faces the treachery of a mysterious black knight, who is scheming betrayal and murder...
James Mason portrays the shining knight Sir Brack who suffers the indignity of being challenged on the field of honor by a squire in the guise of a knight...
Janet Leigh plays the lovely damsel with one purpose, to answer love fully...
Robert Wagner plays the young hothead with one vow to fulfill before he can think of anything else...
Debra Paget plays the shy and charming dark-haired princess with a secret wish...
Sterling Hayden plays Sir Gawain, the perfect knight who knows that his duty is to find the Black Knight and destroy him before his treason ripens...
Victor McLaglen plays the Christian Viking hiding behind a red curtain with a long knife in his hand...
Donald Crisp plays the exiled King of Scandia who was overthrown by a Viking traitor and escapes with his wife and son across the North Sea to Britain...
Brian Aherne plays Arthur, King of the Britons, who assures Valiant that 'knighthood cannot be had for the asking...' It must be won! Barry Jones plays the father of two lovely princesses who suffers to get the best knight for one of his daughters...
Well... I just love this movie! Its good old magic moves me to some of the most cherished memories stored in my mind... It is an agreeable historical piece that has prowess, romance, and grace, and a breathtaking duel, one of the best you will ever see...
'Prince Valiant' is about a ghost who plots treason, a black-armored knight who appears and vanishes at will... It is about a deadly Black Knight, who uses his disguise to make a pact with a Viking traitor to overthrow a great king...
'Prince Valiant' is about a desperate squire who dares to wear the armor and identity of a chivalrous Knight of the Round Table... And about a loyal squire who crowns a mighty knight with a rock, and tries to win a beautiful princess for himself...
'Prince Valiant' is about the son of an exiled king who seeks King Arthur's help against the usurper, and becomes involved in a court plot... It is about a courageous lad who faces the treachery of a mysterious black knight, who is scheming betrayal and murder...
James Mason portrays the shining knight Sir Brack who suffers the indignity of being challenged on the field of honor by a squire in the guise of a knight...
Janet Leigh plays the lovely damsel with one purpose, to answer love fully...
Robert Wagner plays the young hothead with one vow to fulfill before he can think of anything else...
Debra Paget plays the shy and charming dark-haired princess with a secret wish...
Sterling Hayden plays Sir Gawain, the perfect knight who knows that his duty is to find the Black Knight and destroy him before his treason ripens...
Victor McLaglen plays the Christian Viking hiding behind a red curtain with a long knife in his hand...
Donald Crisp plays the exiled King of Scandia who was overthrown by a Viking traitor and escapes with his wife and son across the North Sea to Britain...
Brian Aherne plays Arthur, King of the Britons, who assures Valiant that 'knighthood cannot be had for the asking...' It must be won! Barry Jones plays the father of two lovely princesses who suffers to get the best knight for one of his daughters...
Well... I just love this movie! Its good old magic moves me to some of the most cherished memories stored in my mind... It is an agreeable historical piece that has prowess, romance, and grace, and a breathtaking duel, one of the best you will ever see...
Remade as Star Wars
kgwrote-854-1042409 September 2021
Warning: Spoilers
A farm boy goes off on an adventure to find his destiny--and he encounters an older warrior who takes him under his wing to train him to be a knight. He has to battle a mysterious figure garbed in black, using a magic sword that belonged to his father. Also, there's a rescue mission on a fortress controlled by the usurpers of the true government. One of those rescued is a princess.
Hollywood is not much for honesty and so I can only assume the story we are told about how Star Wars came to be is not true. Lucas was instructed by Fox to use this film as the template for the 1977 film. He may have borrowed ideas from Flash Gordon or the Hidden Fortress, but this was the story that formed the basic premise.
It also ends with an award ceremony.
And now we know Indiana Jones was taken from the Paramount film The Secret of the Incas. This isn't advertised either.
Compared to Luke, Prince Val is far more pro-active. He does a lot of the fighting and problem-solving.
I do not know how it compares to the strip but I gather it is considered lacking in some ways.
As a 1950s Hollywood adventure film about knights it is watchable, although I prefer the 1955 film The Warriors starring Errol Flynn for its knight fights.
The musical score by Waxman is great and if you listen carefully you will hear some melody ideas that got used in Star Wars.
Hollywood is not much for honesty and so I can only assume the story we are told about how Star Wars came to be is not true. Lucas was instructed by Fox to use this film as the template for the 1977 film. He may have borrowed ideas from Flash Gordon or the Hidden Fortress, but this was the story that formed the basic premise.
It also ends with an award ceremony.
And now we know Indiana Jones was taken from the Paramount film The Secret of the Incas. This isn't advertised either.
Compared to Luke, Prince Val is far more pro-active. He does a lot of the fighting and problem-solving.
I do not know how it compares to the strip but I gather it is considered lacking in some ways.
As a 1950s Hollywood adventure film about knights it is watchable, although I prefer the 1955 film The Warriors starring Errol Flynn for its knight fights.
The musical score by Waxman is great and if you listen carefully you will hear some melody ideas that got used in Star Wars.
When Pageboys Were In Flower
KingCoody23 February 2005
I like some stupid movies for various reasons;a favorite actor or actress,a setting or plot involving something I find interesting,or I need a laugh after a hard day or night. Prince Valiant ye benighted swine is not one. Sterling Hayden is sooo out of place while James Mason decides he'll earn his money in spite of what's given him to perform. (His distinctive voice would've been perfect speaking as either Gandalf or Saruman) And that herd of "studio" Vikings stampeding over each other with the horned helmets, Kirk Douglas and Ernest Borgnine's characters from the movie The Vikings,must be cringing in Valhalla. Never did like Robert Wagner. He belongs in that class called stars or celebrities pretty can recite their lines on cue,but ever call them actors. It's like watching Alan Ladd in his fading days attempt to become a swashbuckler in the Black Knight,or horrors James Stewart as Spartacus! If you want to see Barbarians storm a castle watch Kirk Douglas's The Vikings or Charlton Heston defend one in The Warlord, only if the infotainment commercial gets truly boring watch this.
Imperfect, but pleasant, with several nice attributes
Poseidon-314 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Wagner took a lot of heat over the years for his pageboy wig in this film (something that was completely beyond his control and also true to the comic strip, even though other aspects of the film weren't!) and he does look ridiculous at times. However, men's period wigs in the cinema from the earliest days on up to about the mid-seventies were rather icky. Think Errol Flynn in "The Sea Hawk", Gene Kelly in "The Three Musketeers" or even Max Von Sydow in "The Greatest Story Ever Told." A lot of guys had to endure cruddy hair and hope for the best. Remember, too, that smooth hair was the rule until the late sixties. Bob can breathe easy that his proposed film with Joan Collins "Lord Vanity", in which he'd have worn a white powdered wig, never saw fruition! Here he plays the title character, a young lad of Viking descent who's living in exile with his parents in Britain. When old Viking enemy Carnera threatens to strike again, Wagner heads off to see King Arthur (Aherne) to become a knight and reclaim his father's kingdom for him. He's waylaid on the way by the dreaded and almost mystical Black Knight and by Sir Gawain (Hayden) who he winds up working for as a squire at Camelot. On a mission gone wrong, Wagner ends up in the home of lovely sisters Leigh and Paget and assorted romantic complications and misunderstandings follow between him and the young ladies and Hayden. Adding to his troubles is are the machinations of Mason, who wishes for a higher position in Britain and who also covets Leigh's hand. It all comes to a head in a heated battle at Wagner's family castle and later at Camelot, where Wagner and Mason square off in a lively sword fight. Wagner displays (ever so briefly) a very fit physique near the start of this film and he appears to be doing a fair number of his own stunts. His enthusiasm in the role goes a long way in making up for his terrible posture and his agonizingly flat accent (emphasized even more so by the wondrous tones of Mason's and other excellent British character actors' voices.) Even Wagner's voice is more suited to the proceedings than Hayden's, though. The film was in dire need of a dialect coach with Wagner spouting out "yuh" instead of "you" and Hayden saying "nuthin'" instead of "nothing" among many other ear-stabbers. Mason is his usual reliable self, providing a nicely menacing touch to his role. Hayden is a big, strapping lug; likable, but not particularly authentic. Leigh doesn't have a great deal to do besides look pretty, which she does, in an almost white, long wig. She's fussed over and fought over a great deal even though Paget is at least as attractive, if not more so! Aherne would get a more fulfilling shot at playing Arthur in the later film "Lancelot and Guinevere". None of the performers, with the possible exception of Wagner, is ever seen in much of a close-up, making it hard to see everyone well on a normal size TV in widescreen. This would not have been the case, obviously, during the film's Cinemascope release, however. The film features a large array of characters, some of them famous, and a lot of them barely registering at all (Lancelot and Guinevere, for example, are used as virtual extras.) There's a lot of pretty scenery, lovely backgrounds and medieval pageantry. The film is enhanced tremendously by an effervescent and rousing score by Waxman. It's got a sort of pat, comic book-style story, yet occasionally reaches an more mature level of violence (still quite tame by today's standards.) In other words, some characters state the obvious in order to make the film clearer to children. It's not a bad time-killer and is worth viewing in order to hear the music and see the lovely Ballard cinematography. And there is no truth to the rumor that Natalie Wood served at Wagner's stand-in during the filming despite his wearing what could have been one of her old wigs!
From comics to the big screen Prince Valiant!!!
elo-equipamentos23 February 2020
Just remembering my childhood days when l had a couple of Prince Valiant comics at my huge collection, when I saw this movie on TV in 1995 it brought good memories, now revisiting it on second time on DVD sounds great, a mix of fictional story over the Camelot and the real Vikings on Brittany land, Wagner plays the Valiant young Viking, his father is an exiled Nordic King, due he became Christian, now hidden somewhere on Brittany he waits to return to the Scandinavia to recover his kingdom, meanwhile his son goes to Camelot, there he meets the great warrior Sir Gawain (Sterling Hayden) and falling in love for the Princess Aleta (Janet Leigh) also he has to struggles against the evil Black Knight who make a deal with pagan Vikings to break down King Arthur, his identity is unknown, however the gloomy Sir Brack (James Mason) is easily discerned, somehow some gaps are blatant, the heavy swords, improper actors accents and finally on Nordic land has a castle, well here we have a real problem, the Vikings never built a castle to live, even in modern times when they already mixed with their neighbors, aside this is an fine entertainment!!
Resume:
First watch: 1995 / How many: 3 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 7
Resume:
First watch: 1995 / How many: 3 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 7
With a haircut like that you have to be able to fight
tomsview26 May 2016
Years ago, when vinyl still ruled, I brought the record of Charles Gerhardt's "The Classic Scores of Franz Waxman". The opening track was music from "Prince Valiant". I hadn't seen the movie, but was surprised that the music seemed so light for an historical epic - almost a send-up of epic scores.
When I finally saw the film, I realised that Waxman had caught the tone of the film perfectly. It is an adventure film that doesn't take itself too seriously although it is based on Hal Foster's beautifully drawn comic strip, which took itself very seriously indeed - "Peanuts" it was not.
Robert Wagner's character, Prince Valiant (Val to his friends), belongs to a royal family of Christian Vikings. When Val's father is dethroned by Sligon, leader of pagan worshiping Vikings, the lad is sent with his pageboy haircut to Camelot to join King Arthur's Round Table as a way of helping his father regain the throne. However he discovers a plot against Arthur, which also involves Sligon. Along the way he gains friends, makes enemies, and finds romance with the tightly bodiced Princess Aleta.
That's roughly the plot; the romantic elements probably wouldn't have been sophisticated enough for an episode of Andy Hardy, however the whole thing is handled with such flair that clichés, overly obvious plotting and the mishmash of American and British accents are brushed away by engaging stars, great locations and brilliant special effects.
Prince Valiant was made shortly after the introduction of Cinemascope and if ever a movie was a showcase for the process it's this one; pan and scan on TV just doesn't do it justice.
Whenever the great cinematic sword fights are listed, the one between Robert Wagner and James Mason in "Prince Valiant", is hardly ever mentioned, but it is one of the best blade-on-blade encounters ever.
The film seems influenced as much by Robert Taylor's "Ivanhoe" as by Hal Foster, especially with all the jousting, and a beautiful blonde heroine contrasted with a beautiful raven-haired one: Joan Fontaine and Elizabeth Taylor in the former, Janet Leigh and Debra Paget in the latter.
The production is lavish even if the Vikings in the film look more like a herd than a horde with ridiculous out-sized horns on their helmets - you would think the biggest danger they faced when raping and pillaging would have been poking each other's eyes out.
Nevertheless "Prince Valiant" is simply good old-fashioned movie making; it's a full-blooded adventure, but given a light touch - it still delivers value for money.
When I finally saw the film, I realised that Waxman had caught the tone of the film perfectly. It is an adventure film that doesn't take itself too seriously although it is based on Hal Foster's beautifully drawn comic strip, which took itself very seriously indeed - "Peanuts" it was not.
Robert Wagner's character, Prince Valiant (Val to his friends), belongs to a royal family of Christian Vikings. When Val's father is dethroned by Sligon, leader of pagan worshiping Vikings, the lad is sent with his pageboy haircut to Camelot to join King Arthur's Round Table as a way of helping his father regain the throne. However he discovers a plot against Arthur, which also involves Sligon. Along the way he gains friends, makes enemies, and finds romance with the tightly bodiced Princess Aleta.
That's roughly the plot; the romantic elements probably wouldn't have been sophisticated enough for an episode of Andy Hardy, however the whole thing is handled with such flair that clichés, overly obvious plotting and the mishmash of American and British accents are brushed away by engaging stars, great locations and brilliant special effects.
Prince Valiant was made shortly after the introduction of Cinemascope and if ever a movie was a showcase for the process it's this one; pan and scan on TV just doesn't do it justice.
Whenever the great cinematic sword fights are listed, the one between Robert Wagner and James Mason in "Prince Valiant", is hardly ever mentioned, but it is one of the best blade-on-blade encounters ever.
The film seems influenced as much by Robert Taylor's "Ivanhoe" as by Hal Foster, especially with all the jousting, and a beautiful blonde heroine contrasted with a beautiful raven-haired one: Joan Fontaine and Elizabeth Taylor in the former, Janet Leigh and Debra Paget in the latter.
The production is lavish even if the Vikings in the film look more like a herd than a horde with ridiculous out-sized horns on their helmets - you would think the biggest danger they faced when raping and pillaging would have been poking each other's eyes out.
Nevertheless "Prince Valiant" is simply good old-fashioned movie making; it's a full-blooded adventure, but given a light touch - it still delivers value for money.
Fun
Philipp_Flersheim12 September 2022
Films where middle-aged men in fur kilts and horned helmets play vicious 'vikings' and middle-aged men in plastic armour with lances their knightly antagonists are not everyone's cup of tea. However, if you manage to enter into the spirit of 'Prince Valiant' it becomes great fun. The film is unashamedly trivial. There is no attempt at 'deepness', a 'message' that resonates with the present (that is, with the present of 70 years ago) or anything of that kind. The acting is not outstanding either (but neither is it bad). The sets are fine, so is the plot, and 'Prince Valiant' has a lightheartedness that I am missing in modern fantasy of the kind of 'The Rings of Power': Take for example Gawain (Sterling Hayden) misunderstanding the situation about Valiant (Robert Wagner) and Aleta (Janet Leigh). All in all, I spent an enjoyable 100 minutes watching 'Prince Valiant'.
No, it's not "good", but it's fun to watch! So there! (An internal dialogue)
petrelet16 July 2016
Warning: Spoilers
"You can't be serious. SEVEN STARS?"
Yeah.
"Are you serious?? What in this movie is worth seven stars? The acting?"
Hey, Janet Leigh and James Mason aren't bad.
"And which of them plays Prince Valiant? Wait, it was neither of them. It was Robert Wagner, right? How was his delivery?"
Not great, but did you see his physical work, leaping around and on horses and wall hangings and swinging around on ropes and all that stuff? Lots of that! That was fun to watch, no?
"Granted, he or his stunt double earned his pay. Do you think he did well as a Viking prince, with his coal-black hair and New York-ish accent?"
Does that matter? Would you prefer he speak Old Norse with subtitles?
"Say, how about Sterling Hayden as Sir Gawain? What accent would you call that? Oklahoma?"
Um, maybe Kansas. Let's call it non-traditional casting. Look, these are not historical personages!! There's nothing they "really" sounded like!
"How about historical verisimilitude?"
Don't use such big words.
"You realize that King Arthur (or his legend, whatever) and jousting and Viking raiders come from different historical periods over a span of about 800 years?"
Uh..
"And how about this heavy-handed Christian triumphalism where they decide that since Christianity is the true religion you should have no qualms about burning your enemies to death?"
You can't say that's not a contemporary viewpoint.
"Too true. So, okay, look, what did you really like about this film?"
The landscapes were nice.
"Yes, the Croatian coast is pretty. And?"
Some of the plotting was okay.
"Like the part about where Gawain thinks Aleta loves him?"
No. I was thinking of the ring business.
"The ring with the chess knight symbol on it? Puh-leez."
And the big swordfight scene! I have always really liked it. It really gave the impression of guys trying to hammer each other to death with their iron swords, clanging and crashing ...
".... beating up each other's aluminum shields...."
Yeah! Really crushing them. And the singing sword!
"Wait, when you say you have 'always' liked it, when did you see it first?"
On NBC Saturday Night at the Movies I think. In 1961 or so.
"When you were eight?"
My inner child is still eight.
"I should be glad you didn't give it eight stars."
Deal with it.
Yeah.
"Are you serious?? What in this movie is worth seven stars? The acting?"
Hey, Janet Leigh and James Mason aren't bad.
"And which of them plays Prince Valiant? Wait, it was neither of them. It was Robert Wagner, right? How was his delivery?"
Not great, but did you see his physical work, leaping around and on horses and wall hangings and swinging around on ropes and all that stuff? Lots of that! That was fun to watch, no?
"Granted, he or his stunt double earned his pay. Do you think he did well as a Viking prince, with his coal-black hair and New York-ish accent?"
Does that matter? Would you prefer he speak Old Norse with subtitles?
"Say, how about Sterling Hayden as Sir Gawain? What accent would you call that? Oklahoma?"
Um, maybe Kansas. Let's call it non-traditional casting. Look, these are not historical personages!! There's nothing they "really" sounded like!
"How about historical verisimilitude?"
Don't use such big words.
"You realize that King Arthur (or his legend, whatever) and jousting and Viking raiders come from different historical periods over a span of about 800 years?"
Uh..
"And how about this heavy-handed Christian triumphalism where they decide that since Christianity is the true religion you should have no qualms about burning your enemies to death?"
You can't say that's not a contemporary viewpoint.
"Too true. So, okay, look, what did you really like about this film?"
The landscapes were nice.
"Yes, the Croatian coast is pretty. And?"
Some of the plotting was okay.
"Like the part about where Gawain thinks Aleta loves him?"
No. I was thinking of the ring business.
"The ring with the chess knight symbol on it? Puh-leez."
And the big swordfight scene! I have always really liked it. It really gave the impression of guys trying to hammer each other to death with their iron swords, clanging and crashing ...
".... beating up each other's aluminum shields...."
Yeah! Really crushing them. And the singing sword!
"Wait, when you say you have 'always' liked it, when did you see it first?"
On NBC Saturday Night at the Movies I think. In 1961 or so.
"When you were eight?"
My inner child is still eight.
"I should be glad you didn't give it eight stars."
Deal with it.
Show this to a world history teacher and make their heads explode with the inaccuracies!
planktonrules6 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
A historical note: Although tons of pictures of Vikings with horned helmets have been produced over the years, this is actually a myth. They never, to our knowledge, wore such helmets. And, if you think about it, this makes sense, as the horns would make such a helmet unwieldy and difficult to wear. Plus, you might get stuck going through doorways! This traditional view of Vikings is more the Wagnerian view of the people. In fact, the wonderful movie "The Vikings" is so wonderful, in part, because it gets this point correct. Also, while this might disappoint you, most historians don't believe King Arthur ever lived or if he did, the stories about him are all false. The stories you read about him were often written as much as 1000-1300 years after he was to have lived and vary tremendously--and they are essentially myths. Sorry to spoil this for you, but I was a history teacher--and I love debunking myths.
The film begins with Valiant (Robert Wagner) being sent by his daddy the king (Donald Crisp) to the court of King Arthur to become a knight. Crisp's friend, hidden under all that makeup and hair, is Victor McLaglen, by the way. It seems that Crisp has had his kingdom stolen from him and why he would then choose to send his son away is a bit of a mystery. What also is a mystery is why a Viking would go to the UK and serve Arthur. Oh well, it's no worse than a film I saw years ago where a Saracen (who were from the Middle East) was also in Arthur's court! At least Scandinavia is kind of near Britain! On his way there, he stumbles upon a Viking making a dirty deal with a Brit--and accidentally stumbles into the midst of the traitors. He manages to escape(!) but is now a man pursued by many who wish to bash in his skull! In addition to avoid getting killed, much of the film concerns Valiant's new career as a squire. While he hates to have such a lowly job, such is the way to career advancement in the knighthood game. Oh, and by the way, knights were NOT the noble dudes you see in the film. Mostly, they were used to beat up the peasants for their lords and fight various wars. They were an incredibly violent and non-chivalrous group and I'd love to see a film portray them like they really were--often, a bunch of raping, murdering scalawags. Now THAT would make for an interesting film! So, as you can tell, I hate this film for its many, many inaccuracies. However, I can enjoy such a film on purely an entertainment level. So is it entertaining and worth seeing? Well at least on a aesthetic level, it's a nice film. It has the wonderful touches that you'd expect from an A-picture from Twentieth-Century Fox. Great music, lovely period costumes, wonderful locations and nifty castles--it sure looked wonderful (though the castles used were all built much too late for the time period in the film--gosh, that history teacher in me is rearing up its ugly head again).
As for the writing, dialog and acting, it's not a film that impresses. Much of the dialog seems strangely anachronistic and dull. Some is even rather dumb (such as when Janet Leigh confronts Valiant at the 50 minute mark). The characters all seem a bit flat and dull. The actors, though often accomplished, are not at their best here. Sterling Hayden, a wonderful actor, just seems out of place as does James Mason. The biggest problem, however, is Robert Wagner. In this period in the 1950s he was very much an up and coming actor--having starred in quite a few plum roles. However, Hollywood often didn't seem to know how to use this handsome man--putting him in films that simply didn't seem to fit him. Here, he plays a Viking and in "Broken Lance" (also 1954), they cast him as a macho cattle rancher!! I mean no disrespect, but he was not the action hero sort of guy. He would have been better in romances or such films as "A Kiss Before Dying"--where he very effectively played a guy who romanced and then murdered women. You can't blame Wagner for these roles--he was young and the studios paid well...and they were starring roles. Too bad he just wasn't right for them--and his accent and manner seemed to have NOTHING to do with Vikings. I would have much preferred to see some rugged ruffian in the role instead (such as Ernest Borgnine or Victor Mature).
As far as action goes, for an adventure film it is strangely static and filled with dialog. I would have loved a good castle siege or sacking here and there throughout the film...and I kept waiting and waiting and it only came too late--after I was pretty bored with the film. Sure, there were a few nice attempted murders here and there (cool) but not enough to make the film seem "actiony"--instead, it was much too much like a stuffy costume drama much of the time.
Now if I wanted to watch a rousing and completely historically inaccurate film, there are a lot of dandy ones out there. "Ivanhoe" and "The Adventures of Robin Hood" are fantastic costume dramas and are first-class entertainment. And, if you are some sort of weirdo and want to actually see something with more realism and accuracy (but with tons of really, really cool action), try "The Vikings"--a rousing and wonderful bit of entertainment that actually touches on some of the themes seen in "Prince Valiant". It isn't that this film is terrible (it isn't), but there just are a lot better and more entertaining films out there to see first. Heck, now that I think of it, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" would definitely be my choice as the best Arthurian film out there!
The film begins with Valiant (Robert Wagner) being sent by his daddy the king (Donald Crisp) to the court of King Arthur to become a knight. Crisp's friend, hidden under all that makeup and hair, is Victor McLaglen, by the way. It seems that Crisp has had his kingdom stolen from him and why he would then choose to send his son away is a bit of a mystery. What also is a mystery is why a Viking would go to the UK and serve Arthur. Oh well, it's no worse than a film I saw years ago where a Saracen (who were from the Middle East) was also in Arthur's court! At least Scandinavia is kind of near Britain! On his way there, he stumbles upon a Viking making a dirty deal with a Brit--and accidentally stumbles into the midst of the traitors. He manages to escape(!) but is now a man pursued by many who wish to bash in his skull! In addition to avoid getting killed, much of the film concerns Valiant's new career as a squire. While he hates to have such a lowly job, such is the way to career advancement in the knighthood game. Oh, and by the way, knights were NOT the noble dudes you see in the film. Mostly, they were used to beat up the peasants for their lords and fight various wars. They were an incredibly violent and non-chivalrous group and I'd love to see a film portray them like they really were--often, a bunch of raping, murdering scalawags. Now THAT would make for an interesting film! So, as you can tell, I hate this film for its many, many inaccuracies. However, I can enjoy such a film on purely an entertainment level. So is it entertaining and worth seeing? Well at least on a aesthetic level, it's a nice film. It has the wonderful touches that you'd expect from an A-picture from Twentieth-Century Fox. Great music, lovely period costumes, wonderful locations and nifty castles--it sure looked wonderful (though the castles used were all built much too late for the time period in the film--gosh, that history teacher in me is rearing up its ugly head again).
As for the writing, dialog and acting, it's not a film that impresses. Much of the dialog seems strangely anachronistic and dull. Some is even rather dumb (such as when Janet Leigh confronts Valiant at the 50 minute mark). The characters all seem a bit flat and dull. The actors, though often accomplished, are not at their best here. Sterling Hayden, a wonderful actor, just seems out of place as does James Mason. The biggest problem, however, is Robert Wagner. In this period in the 1950s he was very much an up and coming actor--having starred in quite a few plum roles. However, Hollywood often didn't seem to know how to use this handsome man--putting him in films that simply didn't seem to fit him. Here, he plays a Viking and in "Broken Lance" (also 1954), they cast him as a macho cattle rancher!! I mean no disrespect, but he was not the action hero sort of guy. He would have been better in romances or such films as "A Kiss Before Dying"--where he very effectively played a guy who romanced and then murdered women. You can't blame Wagner for these roles--he was young and the studios paid well...and they were starring roles. Too bad he just wasn't right for them--and his accent and manner seemed to have NOTHING to do with Vikings. I would have much preferred to see some rugged ruffian in the role instead (such as Ernest Borgnine or Victor Mature).
As far as action goes, for an adventure film it is strangely static and filled with dialog. I would have loved a good castle siege or sacking here and there throughout the film...and I kept waiting and waiting and it only came too late--after I was pretty bored with the film. Sure, there were a few nice attempted murders here and there (cool) but not enough to make the film seem "actiony"--instead, it was much too much like a stuffy costume drama much of the time.
Now if I wanted to watch a rousing and completely historically inaccurate film, there are a lot of dandy ones out there. "Ivanhoe" and "The Adventures of Robin Hood" are fantastic costume dramas and are first-class entertainment. And, if you are some sort of weirdo and want to actually see something with more realism and accuracy (but with tons of really, really cool action), try "The Vikings"--a rousing and wonderful bit of entertainment that actually touches on some of the themes seen in "Prince Valiant". It isn't that this film is terrible (it isn't), but there just are a lot better and more entertaining films out there to see first. Heck, now that I think of it, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" would definitely be my choice as the best Arthurian film out there!
Worth seeing!
JohnHowardReid18 July 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Copyright 2 April 1954 by 20th Century-Fox Film Corp. New York opening at the Roxy: 6 April 1954. U.S. release: April 1954. U.K. release: 27 May 1954. Australian release: 2 September 1954. Sydney opening at the Plaza. 9,020 feet. 100 minutes.
COMMENT: Although it doesn't go anywhere near matching the appealingly diverse characters, the intriguing plots or the vivid background detail of Harold Foster's popular and deservedly famous Sunday newspaper comic strip, "Prince Valiant", the movie, is actually rather fun.
Fortunately, it doesn't really matter whether you laugh at this movie or with it, the whole energetic yet juvenile quality of the movie's luscious three million dollars production (a really huge sum back in 1954) spreads itself right across the vast CinemaScope screen.
Aside from the somewhat inadequate, if appropriately boyish Robert Wagner in the title role of the valiant prince, plus the casting of a decidedly incongruous Sterling Hayden as Sir Gawain, there's a great cast, led by James Mason, really in his element here as the villainous Sir Brack.
COMMENT: Although it doesn't go anywhere near matching the appealingly diverse characters, the intriguing plots or the vivid background detail of Harold Foster's popular and deservedly famous Sunday newspaper comic strip, "Prince Valiant", the movie, is actually rather fun.
Fortunately, it doesn't really matter whether you laugh at this movie or with it, the whole energetic yet juvenile quality of the movie's luscious three million dollars production (a really huge sum back in 1954) spreads itself right across the vast CinemaScope screen.
Aside from the somewhat inadequate, if appropriately boyish Robert Wagner in the title role of the valiant prince, plus the casting of a decidedly incongruous Sterling Hayden as Sir Gawain, there's a great cast, led by James Mason, really in his element here as the villainous Sir Brack.
Not exactly a live-action comic book...at least not with such leaden performers
moonspinner5515 October 2009
Exiled King of Sandia, whose throne was usurped by force, is given refuge by King Arthur at a secret location; now, the troubled King's green son is anxious to make matters right, leaving the family's hideout and eventually tangling with the elusive Black Knight of the forest. Simpleton epic based upon the King Features comic strip by Harold Foster is beautifully photographed by the esteemed Lucien Ballard, who manages to get a sheen from just about every location chosen. The costumes and castles are terrifically splendid, yet the film's miscasting quickly negates interest in the action. Robert Wagner isn't quite right for the energetic leading role; his perpetually blank look, callow manner, and wooden line readings are often embarrassing...and certainly the black wig does him no favors. Prince Valiant is chosen as squire to Sir Gawain (Sterling Hayden, in an even worse performance than Wagner's) and the two have romantic complications with a pair of sisters (Janet Leigh and Debra Paget, both lovely). James Mason is the mysterious Sir Brack, who may be after King Arthur's throne, but Mason doesn't exude much mystery--with his arch delivery and decadent manner, we know right away he's up to no good, which kills any suspense the plot might have had. The ladies are fun, and the presentation is certainly colorful; otherwise, this "Prince" is a pallid player in the Medieval adventure genre. ** from ****
Valient rises above the comic book genre........
vitaleralphlouis1 April 2008
Fifty years ago moviegoers found that Fox's PRINCE VALIENT was much better than expected, thanks to Henry Hathaway's fine direction and a wealth of good sense from 20th Century-Fox. Fox was still well-taken with their new CinemaScope process that just begged for action and beautiful, colorful settings. This movie excels at all, but it's mostly the rock-solid story of King Arthur and the Vikings that makes it.
Screen beauties Janet Leigh and Debra Paget almost never showed any leg in any movie, and herein (sorry) are fully covered as usual. Anyway, it's the men who dominate this story. Robert Wagner is perfect as Valient, and Sterling Hayden is at the top of his form, as is James Mason.
Truth is that in the age of comic book movies (2000-2008) Hollywood's cocaine sniffers have no clue how to craft this genre with any classic quality. The secret is to focus on (1) story, (2) character development, (3) spectacular sets and scenery, (4) challenge, redemption, faith, patriotism. The religion and honor in Prince Valient would make today's godless movie industry cringe.
These days the focus (if any) would be on animation, choppy editing, almost no dialog, and the usual/identical musical score: vim, vim, vim, vim on a violin while a chorus belts out wordless chants. Boring! Thus films like Jerry Bruckheimer's "King Arthur" -- to name just one, is no longer even a memory, let alone a classic.
Treat yourself! Rent "Prince Valient" on DVD.
Screen beauties Janet Leigh and Debra Paget almost never showed any leg in any movie, and herein (sorry) are fully covered as usual. Anyway, it's the men who dominate this story. Robert Wagner is perfect as Valient, and Sterling Hayden is at the top of his form, as is James Mason.
Truth is that in the age of comic book movies (2000-2008) Hollywood's cocaine sniffers have no clue how to craft this genre with any classic quality. The secret is to focus on (1) story, (2) character development, (3) spectacular sets and scenery, (4) challenge, redemption, faith, patriotism. The religion and honor in Prince Valient would make today's godless movie industry cringe.
These days the focus (if any) would be on animation, choppy editing, almost no dialog, and the usual/identical musical score: vim, vim, vim, vim on a violin while a chorus belts out wordless chants. Boring! Thus films like Jerry Bruckheimer's "King Arthur" -- to name just one, is no longer even a memory, let alone a classic.
Treat yourself! Rent "Prince Valient" on DVD.
Well it looks nice at least.
hitchcockthelegend23 June 2009
Prince Valiant is son of the exiled King of Scandia. Travelling to Camelot, he hopes to join the round table knights and reclaim his fathers throne. But in his way is the mysterious Black Knight, and love of course will create its own set of problems.
The first thing one needs to know is if certain members of the Valiant cast are playing it for laughs? Or, as I suspect, they are badly hamming for all they are worth. Robert Wagner, resplendent in Cromwellian wig and Sterling Hayden are particularly bad, with poor Janet Leigh looking shocked to be in the film at repeated intervals. It's hard to divert attention from such glaring overacting, which is a shame as there is decent adventure movie at its heart. It looks real nice courtesy of Lucien Ballard's photography, and director Henry Hathaway knows how to craft action sequences (the final sword fight between Valiant and Sir Brack is very special). But there is a reason why the likes of Errol Flynn and Tyrone Power are revered in the genre, it's because they had the swagger to go with the swash. Neither Hayden (sounding like he's reading from auto-cue) or the hopelessly miscast Wagner come close to making a convincing fist of it. Not even James Mason on villain duties as Sir Brack can stop this from being a candidate for worst medieval picture ever made.
4/10 for its look and costumes.
The first thing one needs to know is if certain members of the Valiant cast are playing it for laughs? Or, as I suspect, they are badly hamming for all they are worth. Robert Wagner, resplendent in Cromwellian wig and Sterling Hayden are particularly bad, with poor Janet Leigh looking shocked to be in the film at repeated intervals. It's hard to divert attention from such glaring overacting, which is a shame as there is decent adventure movie at its heart. It looks real nice courtesy of Lucien Ballard's photography, and director Henry Hathaway knows how to craft action sequences (the final sword fight between Valiant and Sir Brack is very special). But there is a reason why the likes of Errol Flynn and Tyrone Power are revered in the genre, it's because they had the swagger to go with the swash. Neither Hayden (sounding like he's reading from auto-cue) or the hopelessly miscast Wagner come close to making a convincing fist of it. Not even James Mason on villain duties as Sir Brack can stop this from being a candidate for worst medieval picture ever made.
4/10 for its look and costumes.
Exuberant Camelot/Viking Adventure a Great Family Film...
cariart20 November 2003
There is such a sense of childlike wonder and fun in Henry Hathaway's 1954 Camelot tale, PRINCE VALIANT, that it's easy to forgive the obvious incongruities in accents (Robert Wagner's broad American tones...hard to believe he plays Donald Crisp's son...Sterling Hayden, looking and sounding more like Wild Bill Hickok than Sir Gawain...Victor McLaglen as the most Irish Viking you'll ever see!), and concentrate, instead, on the energy, pageantry, and sweep of the adaptation of Hal Foster's classic comic strip.
Certainly, one would be hard-pressed to assemble a finer cast; in addition to Wagner, Hayden, McLaglen, and Crisp, you have James Mason as the villain, Sir Brack, dazzling, and far more believable than he had been as Rupert of Hentzau in MGM's remake of THE PRISONER OF ZENDA; Janet Leigh and Debra Paget, both ethereally beautiful as the sisters, Aleta and Ilene; and Brian Aherne, as King Arthur, so perfect in the role that you wish his part had been larger.
In the early 1950s, there was a resurgence of swashbuckling films in Hollywood, and a new sub-category appeared, 'Knights in Training', with Fox's PRINCE VALIANT, and Universal's THE BLACK SHIELD OF FALWORTH (starring Tony Curtis) both devoting ample screen time to the education of squires in the knightly skills of jousting and sword fighting. These scenes are great fun to watch, particularly for children (knights had to go to school, too!), and paint a far more accurate picture of the difficult work involved in mastering the required talents than did the recent film, A KNIGHT's TALE.
As we follow the adventures of the Viking Prince as he restores his kingdom, finds love, and wins a place at the Round Table, special credit must be given to Franz Waxman's spectacular music. One of the most memorable scores ever produced for a film, the theme has become a staple at the Hollywood Bowl, and for the Boston Pops. Once heard, it is not forgotten!
While the magical elements of the story are downplayed (the mystical powers of the 'Singing Sword' are more implied than actually shown), the story itself has such a sense of wonder that it isn't missed. The heroes of Camelot are all present (Arthur, Lancelot, Guinevere, Gawain, and Galahad), and the Round Table scenes are as majestic as any film has ever accomplished.
PRINCE VALIANT may not be in a league with EXCALIBUR, but it certainly holds it's own against KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE, CAMELOT, and FIRST KNIGHT, and as a family film it can't be beat!
Certainly, one would be hard-pressed to assemble a finer cast; in addition to Wagner, Hayden, McLaglen, and Crisp, you have James Mason as the villain, Sir Brack, dazzling, and far more believable than he had been as Rupert of Hentzau in MGM's remake of THE PRISONER OF ZENDA; Janet Leigh and Debra Paget, both ethereally beautiful as the sisters, Aleta and Ilene; and Brian Aherne, as King Arthur, so perfect in the role that you wish his part had been larger.
In the early 1950s, there was a resurgence of swashbuckling films in Hollywood, and a new sub-category appeared, 'Knights in Training', with Fox's PRINCE VALIANT, and Universal's THE BLACK SHIELD OF FALWORTH (starring Tony Curtis) both devoting ample screen time to the education of squires in the knightly skills of jousting and sword fighting. These scenes are great fun to watch, particularly for children (knights had to go to school, too!), and paint a far more accurate picture of the difficult work involved in mastering the required talents than did the recent film, A KNIGHT's TALE.
As we follow the adventures of the Viking Prince as he restores his kingdom, finds love, and wins a place at the Round Table, special credit must be given to Franz Waxman's spectacular music. One of the most memorable scores ever produced for a film, the theme has become a staple at the Hollywood Bowl, and for the Boston Pops. Once heard, it is not forgotten!
While the magical elements of the story are downplayed (the mystical powers of the 'Singing Sword' are more implied than actually shown), the story itself has such a sense of wonder that it isn't missed. The heroes of Camelot are all present (Arthur, Lancelot, Guinevere, Gawain, and Galahad), and the Round Table scenes are as majestic as any film has ever accomplished.
PRINCE VALIANT may not be in a league with EXCALIBUR, but it certainly holds it's own against KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE, CAMELOT, and FIRST KNIGHT, and as a family film it can't be beat!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
