La espada bengalí

The cast tries hard to make a go of this entry into the British Raj in India genre, a genre which is still far and away dominated by RKO's Gunga Din released in 1939. Mostly it's a futile effort. The film comes up short on many levels. The screenplay isn't in the same league as the RKO classic and Stewart Granger, Robert Newton and Cyril Cusack are a pale shadow of Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen and Douglas Fairbanks Jr. Granger forces the issue constantly, trying to ape Cary Grant's performance in Gunga Din and it comes off primarily grating though he does have a few amusing moments.

The humor between the three is passable enough but Newton and Cusack just don't offer much chemistry or star power, and the script rarely gives them anything to do but banter at Granger and each other and down pints. David Niven, wasted in the role of a superior officer, would have been way better served to have been cast as one of the threesome instead of Cusack. Walter Pigeon, too, gives one of his clunkiest performances as the Colonel, much consternated British bluster is attempted but fails to be very humorous or believable.

The best sequence in the film is the brawl in the tavern with the Scottish soldiers, which is very much reminiscent of Gunga Din's opening, and the battle at the end is well staged and action packed, it just takes about 70 mostly wasted minutes to get there.

Overall the picture is not unentertaining, it has its moments but it's barely half the adventure masterpiece Gunga Din is.

Soldiers Three is a harmless comedy about three british soldiers serving in India (played by Stewart Granger, Robert Newton and Cyril Cusack). The three are great friends after spending 18 years in the army together. Now the colonel (Walter Pidgeon) has had enough of the unruly fellow, and wants to separate them by making one of them (Granger) a sergeant. Of course, sergeants and soldiers cant get along with each other so Granger tries to get degraded to a soldier again...

Gargantuan thrill ride it ain't, you might think. Indeed its nothing special or exciting. Its merely a standard Hollywood studio film of its day, but of course, the standard Hollywood films in 1951 were much more enjoyable than now 50 years later. (at least in my opinion) So this might be worth your time on a lazy tuesday afternoon (If you are not working), just to see a few likable actors like Stewart Granger and David Niven (playing a british officer, a role he fits more than well)

Other posters complained that in Soldiers Three Granger imitates Cary Grant in Gunga Din. I'm a fan of Gunga Din but hadn't really thought of comparing the actors as I watched Soldiers Three. Instead I found myself admiring, and frequently amused by, Granger's comic abilities--of which he showed flashes in other movies but of course he was better known as a romantic swashbuckler or, later, a western hero comfortable with the ladies.

Another complaint is that the film is a Hollywood potboiler, but what's surprising is how much British comic style survives in this production from the West Coast of North America. The comic pace may seem "lazy," but it's familiar even now in the Brit-coms that play Saturday nights on PBS. Granger's timing and interplay with Sykes and Cusack are admittedly unspectacular but nonetheless well-practiced in technique and pleasantly warm with human feeling.

As a final recommendation, the story, characters, and dialogue may be closer to authentic Kipling than Gunga Din, whose screenplay was a free expansion of a not-very-long poem that contributes little to the film with the same title. Long ago I read Kipling's Plain Tales from the Hills partly about English servicemen in India and introducing the characters of Soldiers Three. I think there were later stories collected under the title Soldiers Three. Anyway the plain and humane style remind me of those early stories by Kipling, which gambol between stereotypes and humanity. Kipling's Anglo-Indian writings benefit from his youth and early journalistic career primarily in what is now Pakistan. The film of Soldiers Three seems true to this author's spirit.

"Soldiers Three" is a great example of the sort of pro-British colonialism that was popular in American films of the 1930s-50s. I really have no idea WHY the films of the USA so strongly supported the British in these stories....and when I see many of them today, I find myself rooting for the 'bad guys'...folks who are fighting for freedom and independence from the Crown!

In this rather inconsequential film, the writers seem to be trying to re-create the magic from RKO's "Gunga Din"...and the story is very similar. Like "Din", this one features three irrepressible and irresponsible enlisted men who manage to rise to the occasion when the chips are down.

This film seems to scream 'time passer'....with a lot of plot holes, one-dimensional characters and a sense of fun. Not one of MGM's better films...but enjoyable in a mindless sort of way.

Through the time appears some war comedy like that, it's very unusual and quite often rare movie, it's very amusing production because it remove from the war all kind of suffering and madness and replacing for laughs an good humor, MGM wisely brings to Hollywood five top billing casting from England to make a priceless and remarkable comedy, light and easy and delightful entertainment for everyone, this title as far l know it wasn't have an official release in Brazil yet...

Resume:

First watch: 2018 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD-R / Rating: 7