Something of Value

"Something of Value" is a film about the so-called 'Mau Mau Rebellion' which took place through much of the 1950s in Kenya. The fact that it was made there and the uprising was still going on do make this an unusual movie.

The story begins by showing the contempt that many of the white British colonists have towards the native Kenyans. Because of this, it's very easy to see how these black men and women would become disaffected by British rule...and Peter (Rock Hudson) can see the wicked way these folks are treated. He is especially appalled to see his friend Kimani (Sidney Poitier) slapped around and treated like dirt. At the same time, the film tries to look at both sides and shows the brutal way in which the Mau Maus tore apart the white colonists. How will all this resolve itself and what will happen to these two friends who are now on opposite sides in the conflict?

This is generally a very good film, though I wonder why Rock Hudson was chosen for the movie. After all, he sounds about as British as a talking taco! But he is very good despite this. As for Poitier and Juano Hernandez and many of the other black actors, they were more convincing in their roles and at least approximated the right accents. Some seeing it today might feel a bit torn, after all, I was. Who would you root for in the film when BOTH sides seemed in the wrong. And, you certainly could applaud the locals' rights to self-determination. Well worth seeing.

Thoughtful people around the world have despaired for Africa, the most abused and exploited continent on our globe. The year that the film version of Robert Ruark's novel Something Of Value came out, the first colony of British Africa, the Gold Coast became the independent Republic of Ghana under Kwame Nkrumah. When we see film like Leonardo DiCpario's Blood Diamond come out fifty years later, you have to wonder whether Africa's many problems will ever be solved in the lifetime of most of us.

Rock Hudson and Sidney Poitier play childhood friends who grew up side by side in Kenya colony. But race and racial politics have driven them apart as Poitier has joined the nascent Mau Mau movement whose mission it was to kill all the white settlers and drive them from their part of the continent. Hudson who believes the races can peaceful exist together in the Kenya colony and soon to be independent country wants to reconcile with Poitier. The film concerns his attempts to do so.

Some very good supporting performances by Dana Wynter, Wendy Hiller, Ivan Dixon, and William Marshall are in Something Of Value. Best scene in the film other than the final confrontation with Hudson and Poitier is Hudson's father played by Robert Beatty successfully breaking down Mau Mau leader Juano Hernandez into giving up his cohorts. Beatty's knowledge of the Kikuyu tribe culture comes into play here.

The white racist attitudes are exemplified by Michael Pate whose Australian accent makes him sound the most authentically African or the closest to it among the white cast members.

Sad to say this most authentic of African stories is still very relevant today as seen by the critical and popular acclaim that Blood Diamond received in 2006. Hudson, Poitier, and the rest of the cast do some of their best work in Something Of Value.

This film is an interesting memento of a period seemingly long ago, but actually in the recent past. It raises some of the same questions brought to mind in "The Battle of Algiers," specifically, what methods is it justifiable to use to further a just cause, especially the cause of an oppressed people. Another question, should all members of the oppressor class, in this case whites of British ancestry and citizenship, be regarded and treated as oppressors, even if they are sympathetic to the cause of the oppressed? To its credit, the film doesn't oversimplify. One character, Matson, is a cardboard villain, but the whites are generally portrayed sympathetically. And, although at the time this film was made Kenyan independence was only six years away, it is clear that, to almost all the whites, independence and black majority rule are still unthinkable. It is clear that many of the whites regard the land as just as much theirs as it is the blacks'; most of them were born there. The film doesn't make a case for independence, just for equality of treatment.

The film moves along and is never boring. It tells a good story and is generally well acted. It's too bad that Rock Hudson didn't, or couldn't, attempt a British accent. Although it's clear that all the whites in the film are British, Hudson just moves right along with his American accent, quite un-self conscious about it all. (Maybe it's just as well; he might have ended up sounding as ridiculous as Marlon Brando in "Mutiny on the Bounty.") This is in stark contrast to Sidney Poitier, who manages an African accent quite well. Poitier is actually superb in his role; this was well before he assumed the persona of the saintly characters so superior to everyone else that he played to excess in the 60s. This film appears not to be available on video, so you'll probably have to wait until it appears on Turner Classic Movies again. 8/10

I read Robert Ruark's book twice, Once before I went to Kenya in 1968 and once after my return. I had never seen the movie until recently. While in Africa, I was told by the Black Kenyans and the British Kenyans that the story was exaggerated, but this often happens to keep the interest alive. Having visited there, I thoroughly enjoyed the scenery and remembering many places where I had been and the animals running across the plains with Mount Kenya in the background. It was a treat to see young Rock Hudson, beautiful Dana Wynter and the talents of Sidney Poitier and Wendy Hiller. The action and the supporting actors are fine and I think I will watch it again before I return the tape to the video store.

Sidney Poitier is excellent in this study of Kenya's fight for independence and backlash against their former oppressors. William Marshall, Michael Pate and Wendy Hiller are superb in poignant supporting performances. But, Rock Hudson is terribly miscast, and his character too good, even beyond sainthood. And the focus on his character ultimately throws the movie off-balance. Still worth watching though, but it's a bit of a shame since the elements of greatness are all here, but the result is thought-provoking but unsatisfying. 7/10.