"The Man Who Would Be King"
Take a pinch of Michael Caine, a dash of Sean Connery, and sprinkle lightly with Christopher Plummer. Stir together with director John Huston and the end result is The Man Who Would Be King adapted from a story by Rudyard Kipling of the same name. Having these four signature men come together for this one project makes for one majestic feature.
Daniel Dravot (Sean Connery) and Peachy Carnehan (Michael Caine) are British soldiers living in India (back when India was still under British rule) who are always causing some sort of shenanigans. They eventually grow weary of their present setting and decide to make a pact to travel to Kafiristan. The duo's goal is to become kings. They even draw up a contract with Rudyard Kipling (Christopher Plummer) as their witness to make it official.
Once Daniel and Peachy finally do arrive after their perilous journey across treacherous to Kafiristan they promptly begin making waves. They train the savage locals to fight like British soldiers and eventually have a small army following their command. Soon Danny and Peachy find themselves reaching heights of grandeur that neither of them could have fathomed. How will they ever keep their composure?
While watching this film it almost feels like John Huston is channeling David Lean. It has the size and scope of a Lean epic minus the three hour run time. The canvases which Huston has to paint his images are fully utilized by Oswald Morris' photography. Edith Head's costumes and Alexandre Trauner's sets are period perfect.
Aesthetics aside, Huston is also able to manage his two leads quite well. Caine and Connery are acting alongside each other in just about every scene. The two of them have unbelievable on screen chemistry. Whether the scene has them using their wit to commit some sort of high jinks or has them being much more dramatic and serious, the two actors play off of each other remarkably well. It is quite a letdown nowadays to see films that boast and brag about having assembled these huge casts when the end result is one or none of the actors share little to any screen time together.
The screenplay which was written by Huston and Gladys Hill deals with some interesting themes of morality, societal standards, eternal glory, and friendship. Despite dealing with these complex motifs the characters are able to convey them to us without it being overblown. A good screenplay should always have some level of complexity but when it gets to the point of being preachy and self - righteous that is when we begin to lose interest in its characters and subject matter.
Daniel Dravot (Sean Connery) and Peachy Carnehan (Michael Caine) are British soldiers living in India (back when India was still under British rule) who are always causing some sort of shenanigans. They eventually grow weary of their present setting and decide to make a pact to travel to Kafiristan. The duo's goal is to become kings. They even draw up a contract with Rudyard Kipling (Christopher Plummer) as their witness to make it official.
Once Daniel and Peachy finally do arrive after their perilous journey across treacherous to Kafiristan they promptly begin making waves. They train the savage locals to fight like British soldiers and eventually have a small army following their command. Soon Danny and Peachy find themselves reaching heights of grandeur that neither of them could have fathomed. How will they ever keep their composure?
While watching this film it almost feels like John Huston is channeling David Lean. It has the size and scope of a Lean epic minus the three hour run time. The canvases which Huston has to paint his images are fully utilized by Oswald Morris' photography. Edith Head's costumes and Alexandre Trauner's sets are period perfect.
Aesthetics aside, Huston is also able to manage his two leads quite well. Caine and Connery are acting alongside each other in just about every scene. The two of them have unbelievable on screen chemistry. Whether the scene has them using their wit to commit some sort of high jinks or has them being much more dramatic and serious, the two actors play off of each other remarkably well. It is quite a letdown nowadays to see films that boast and brag about having assembled these huge casts when the end result is one or none of the actors share little to any screen time together.
The screenplay which was written by Huston and Gladys Hill deals with some interesting themes of morality, societal standards, eternal glory, and friendship. Despite dealing with these complex motifs the characters are able to convey them to us without it being overblown. A good screenplay should always have some level of complexity but when it gets to the point of being preachy and self - righteous that is when we begin to lose interest in its characters and subject matter.
The Man Who Would Be King is a period piece that has all the ingredients for a tasty viewing experience. It has real actors doing real acting. The screenplay is adapted from a beloved author. Past films from the director are such greats as The Maltese Falcon, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, and The African Queen so we know what to expect in terms of quality. Lastly the picture is on a level of film making that is rarely seen in this day and age. Truly a meal fit for a king.
Wow so I totally thought you were talking about a recently released film, then was like: Wait didn't Sean Connery retire!? Then I was all kinds of confused!
ReplyDeleteI'm ok now though. Good review, seriously this is making me want to see all these films!