The Prince and the Pauper (1977) - film review

In the mid-16th century, Tom Canty is an urchin boy who is abused by his father and forced to steal to support his family.  To evade capture when his attempt to steal a purse is noticed, he takes refuge in the gardens of a palace belonging to King Henry VIII.  Pursued by the king’s guards, he hides up a chimney and is discovered by the heir to the throne, Edward, Prince of Wales.  Seeing that they resemble one other perfectly, the two boys swap their clothes for a lark.  But the jokes goes badly awry when the prince, virtually unrecognisable in the pauper’s rags, is expelled from the palace by the guards.   Despite his protestations, Tom is mistaken for the prince and makes a feeble attempt to accustom himself to court etiquette.  To the annoyance of his older sister Elizabeth, he neglects his duties and pursues an amorous liaison with Lady Jane.  Meanwhile, Prince Edward comes under the protection of war veteran Miles Hendon after saving his life in a street fight.  Hendon soon grows weary of his young companion’s assertions that he is the rightful heir to the throne and becomes convinced that he is mad.  When Henry VIII dies, it looks likely that a pauper will be crowned as his successor...

A stellar cast and some stunning production values make this adaptation of Mark Twain’s The Prince and the Pauper an enjoyable family favourite, although it fares poorly when compared with the superior 1937 version, which featured Errol Flynn and a pair of real-life twins in the main roles.  Richard Fleischer directs the film with his customary gusto, and is clearly far more interested in delivering a pacey adventure yarn in The Three Musketeers line than a serious piece of drama.  The numerous fight scenes are certainly well choreographed and compensate for the stilted dialogue and shallow characterisation, whilst the split-screen sequences (depicting the prince and the pauper in the same shot) are impressive even by today’s standards. It is almost worth watching the film just for the humorous coda at the end, which makes a very cheeky allusion to its lead actor’s famous drink problem.

The all-star cast is a mixed blessing which drew the film some unfavourable criticism when it was first released.  Whilst Oliver Reed, George C. Scott and Ernest Borgnine deliver the goods with their enjoyably bravura performances, Raquel Welch and Rex Harrison look horribly out of place and do little for the film’s credibility.  Mark Lester’s lack of dramatic range is also problematic, although his slightly inept portrayal of both his characters is more endearing than annoying (and do we care that he is clearly much older than the nine year olds he is supposed to be playing?).  The most creditable performances are supplied by the supporting cast, notably Harry Andrews, David Hemmings and (future Dr Who assistant) Lalla Ward.  Charlton Heston’s interpretation of Henry VIII turns out to be less sacrilegious than you might think - if you can overlook the American accent and fairly modest girth, he is surprisingly convincing in the role.  Overall, this screen version of The Prince and the Pauper is an amiable romp, the perfect distraction for a wet Sunday afternoon or dull bank holiday, and nearly as much fun as the original novel.

© Alex Sullivan 2011

Write a review for this film...

What do you think of this film?