User reviews

George Bernard Shaw put great trust in Gabriel Pascal and that trust was pretty well justified but one cannot help wondering what our second greatest playwright, had he lived to see it, would have thought of this sorry version of his two act play.

It is not one of Shaw's greatest works to be sure but it deserved better than to be turned into a second rate 'sword-and-sandals' movie.

Lovely Jean Simmons is Lavinia, one of Shaw's customary strong, independent women who resists the manly charms of the 'handsome Captain' played by Victor Mature. Most of Mr. Mature's speeches have been cut which I'm sure was as much a relief to him as it is to us. He remains one of Hollywood's most accomplished Cigar Store Indians. As a Christian martyr Miss Simmons is warming up for her role as Diana in 'The Robe'. At the end Lavinia and the Captain agree to meet up occasionally in order to 'argue'. The mind boggles!

The only character whose Shavian dialogue remains largely intact is that of Ferrovious who is played superbly by Robert Newton. By far the best scene in the film is where he turns the other cheek to the Lentulus of Reginald Gardiner. Ferrovious is a man of violent disposition who has become a gentle giant since his conversion to Christianity. It is one of Shaw's trademark paradoxes that this man of peace, having slain a few gladiators, accepts an offer from the Emperor to join the Praetorian Guard. This is a theatrical device by which Shaw draws our attention to the horrors perpetrated by Mankind whilst holding a weapon in one hand and a Bible in the other.

The Emperor is one of Shaw's 'cynics' but Maurice Evans alas lacks the required bite. Such a pity that George Sanders, considered for the role, was unavailable.

Shaw's love of animals is evident here in his depiction of the Lion. It is played by Woody Strode, who later described this as his most difficult role!

I have purposely left the Androcles of Alan Young until last as his casting is without doubt the most contentious.

By all accounts he was a replacement for Harpo Marx, surely one of the greatest clowns of all time. This showed a lamentable error of judgement on the part of Howard Hughes and must have contributed to the film's failure. Mr. Young enjoyed a long and successful career but this role requires far more than he is able to give. That is the politest way I can think of putting it.

Apparently, in order to spice things up, Nicholas Ray was brought in to direct an extra 'Vestal Virgin bathing scene' which unsurprisingly never made it to the screen. The film would not be complete of course without the mandatory close-ups of Roman ladies licking their lips at the prospect of seeing someone torn limb from limb.

Chester Erskine is no Nicholas Ray and under his direction Shaw's 'fable' is just plain feeble.

This is the flaming story of history's most fabulous era, a period of regal splendor, beautiful women, pursued Christians and spectacular combats on the circus arena during the glittering days of pagan Rome. Stage-bound Hollywood rendition based on George Bernard Shaw's great play about a taylor : Alan Young, in imperial Rome who saves Christians from a hungry lion who had formerly befriended.

This attractive film packs sharp dialogue, laughs supreme, entertainment and a lot of fun-midst scenes of sensational wonders into the Roman world . Including a sympathetic, intelligent and charming plot within the bounds of Hollywood. The film is pretty well, but it isn't an extraordinary yarn , but a simple and plain amusement, resulting to be a semi-satisfactory morsel. Harpo Marx was originally cas as Androcles but he was fired by the famous financer and producer Howard Hughes five weeks into the filming. Main and support cast are frankly good, such as : Alan Young as the likeable and silly Androcles , Jean Simmons as Christian damsel in distress , Maurice Evans as the proud emperor and Victor Mature as a Centurion, the latter also played other Colossal films as "The Robe" and "Demetrius and the Gladiators" . Along with an awesome support cast, such as : John Hoyt, Alan Mowbray, Elsa Lanchaster, Gene Lockhart, Noel Willman, Lowell Gilmore, Jim Backus, and several others.

It displays an atmospheric cinematography in black and white by cameraman Harry Stradling Sr, though mostly shot in studio . The motion picture was professionally written and directed by Chester Erskine and uncredited Nicolas Ray . Chester Erskine was a good craftsman, a prestigious writer who made a few movies, such as : "Irish whiskey rebellion" , "A change in the wind" , "A girl in every port", "The egg and I" , "Take one false step" , "A change in the wind" , "Frankie and Johnny" , among others. Rating : 6/10. Passable and acceptable. Well worth seeing.

An adaptation of a lesser George Bernard Shaw play. It supposedly doesn't "get" the original play, at least according to some other reviews I perused. I'm not even sure what the point of it all was (perhaps that, throughout all times, Christians have been annoyingly self-righteous, but at least during Roman days, you could feed them to lions), and it's a pretty big mess. However, I have to admit, almost grudgingly, that I sort of enjoyed it, perhaps just because of its weirdness. Alan Young plays Androcles, a comedic character with a hen-pecking wife (Elsa Lanchester, really playing it up - I have to wonder why they didn't have her carry a rolling pin). Because of his apparent friendship with a lion (from whose paw, of course, he pulled a thorn), people accuse him of witchcraft, and he is suggested to the Caesar (Maurice Evans) as a potential sacrifice. Also among those sacrifices are Jean Simmons, a beautiful young Christian, and Robert Newton, a pious warrior. Young is amusing in his way, and Evans is quite amusing, but the real reason to watch this film are for Simmons and Newton, both of whom are wonderful. Victor Mature is the least successful member of the cast, playing an army captain who falls for Simmons. He looks as if he's about to have a stroke most of the time. Alan Young is perhaps most famous for playing Wilbur on Mr. Ed, but to my generation he's even better known as the voice of Scrooge McDuck in stuff like Mickey's Christmas Carol and, of course, DuckTales. He's in his 90s nowadays and is still doing Scrooge McDuck.

George Bernard Shaw was hesitant about allowing his plays to be turned into movies. He was impressed with motion pictures, and frequently allowed himself to be in short subjects where he could reveal his current social theories. Shaw was probably the first major literary figure to leave several reels of film interviews. But he was aware of the liberties taken with literary properties turned into movies - particularly plays. Shakespeare had not fared too well in the movies up to the 1930s. Most filmed plays seemed cut up - the screenwriters, producers, and directors being concerned with time factors. Shaw did not trust his works in their hands.

Shaw found an above-average producer in Gabriel Pascal. Pascal loved Shaw's works and he went to see him. He admitted that he had little money but showed his devotion to Shaw's ideas. Shaw gave him a contract to produce all his plays. From 1938 to 1950 Pascal only produced three films but they were PYGMALION with Leslie Howard and Wendy Hiller, MAJOR BARBARA with Hiller, Robert Morley, Rex Harrison, and Robert Newton, and CAESAR AND CLEOPATRA with Vivian Leigh, Claude Rains, Steward Granger, and Flora Robson. They all remain memorable movies to this day. Although Shaw did complain of some deletions he was well served by these films.

In 1950 Shaw died, but his contract with Pascal was to last until Pascal died. However, Pascal only produced one last film, ANDROCLES AND THE LION. Produced by RKO it was the shortest of the Pascal movies, most likely due to the production standards and controls of RKO boss Howard Hughes. The casting was quite unique, in that the roles were played by pretty well known actors: Newton again, Alan Mowbray, Reginald Gardiner, Victor Mature, Jean Simmons, and Maurice Evans. Although Mature is stiff he gives a capable performance. Newton (not drunk here, like he was in BLACKBEARD) showed what a fine comic actor he could be. Witness the scene where he almost frightens Gardiner to death while explaining why he has become a changed man since he converted to Christianity. Maurice Evans, best recalled now as "Maurice" the father of Samantha on BEWITCHED, gave one of his three best lead parts (with his villain in KIND LADY and his Sir Arthur Sullivan in THE GREAT GILBERT AND SULLIVAN)as the philosophic Roman Emperor. Simmons lightens the film's love story with Mature. She always gave good performances. The interesting role in the film is the lead: Alan Young.

Young's career was taking off in 1952. He had started appearing on television in his own weekly variety/comedy program. He also was looking forward to other film roles. There would be another lead part in the now forgotten AARON SLICK FROM PUNKIN CREEK shortly afterward, and eventually nice supporting roles in TOM THUMB and (possibly his best performance) THE TIME MACHINE (1960). And then his role as Wilbur Post in MR. ED. Not a tremendous career but it got quite a bit of mileage in it, and it is still recalled fondly. He gives a nice performance as a soft-spoken, meek Androcles, who represents the truest spirit of Christianity of all the characters in the film (most of whom do not fully grasp the simplicity and quiet goodness at the heart of the faith). It does not hold center stage or attention in the movie (in fact it is forgotten while we concentrate on the antics of Newton's "muscular" Christianity or the Simmons/Mature romance or Evans' cat and mouse game with a courtier who happens to be a secret Christian, but also a political opportunist). But when Young turns up again, he does keep our attention in his scenes.

The result is an enjoyable film, but not of the standard of the three preceding ones. It would be the model (now that Shaw was dead, and soon after Pascal) of how the movies would treat Shaw's plays. The great dramatist was lucky that Pascal gave his all on those first three, for (except for the film of the musical version of PYGMALION - MY FAIR LADY) most of the remaining films of Shaw's plays (THE DOCTOR'S DELEMMA, THE DEVIL'S DISCIPLE, THE MILLIONAIRESS, GREAT CATHERINE) showed more of the cutting and rewriting - and usually inferior rewriting - that Shaw dreaded. Of the post-1952 films only THE DEVIL'S DISCIPLE and MY FAIR LADY hold up really well.

But there is one intriguing mystery about this film project. Pascal and Howard Hughes did come up with an odd casting of the lead role that was not seen to it's conclusion to the everlasting loss of motion pictures. Androcles was not originally cast for Alan Young, but for Harpo Marx. There were discussions with Harpo to play the role, and there may have been some actual footage shot for about a month, when Hughes decided it was not going to work out. Harpo was removed from the film, and Young got the role. Leaving a great hole in the story: what was the original film to be - was Harpo to perform his usual way (pantomime) or did he actually essay for the first time in his career to speak the lines. We don't know. While footage of lost movies occasionally turns up (such as Joseph Von Stenberg's I CLAUDIUS), most of these films that are jettisoned are destroyed. One hopes that Harpo's attempted performance was put on some film that has survived. It would be wonderful to see him in a talking role in a serious play by an English literary master. Harpo prided himself on his erudition and self-taught education He was a member of the Algonquin Circle with Kaufman and Hart, Alexander Woolcott, Edna Ferber, and Morris Ryskind. He should have made a fascinating figure as Androcles, but instead he was replaced. I safely feel it was our loss.

A famously bad movie of a minor Shaw play, Androcles and the Lion isn't bad so long as one doesn't approach it expecting a sparkling and witty adaptation along the lines of Major Barbara. To be fair to producer Garbriel Pascal, who loved Shaw's work dearly, and director Chester Erskine, an experienced theatre man, the play wasn't that good to start with. In trying to make their picture look like a spectacle, and casting hunky Victor Mature in a major role, Pascal and Erskine at least give the viewer something pleasing and familiar to look at. The presence of Jean Simmons doesn't hurt, either, though her padrone, studio chief Howard Hughes, was in the process of inadvertantly wrecking her American career with inferior movies.

In the roles as early Christians, Alan Young and Robert Newton make a terrific pair, and ought to have been co-starred again. Mr. Young's endearingly innocent, child-like and effeminate Androcles makes a fascinating contrast with Newton's bellowing, hyper-virile Ferrovius, and one wonders, if one adds to the mix the mere presence of Victor Mature, was going on subliminally in the minds of Pascal and Erskine when they cast this film. (Young fared far better with the animal kingdom some years later on television, as friend and companion of the irascible and unpredictable equine, Mr. Ed.)

Androcles is a devout Christian, all creatures are friends of the Earth. During an encounter with a lion, who is roaring in pain, he removes a huge thorn from the beasts' paw, thus creating a friend for life. A short time after the incident, Androcles and a number of other Christians are arrested and condemned to death in the arena. They are to die by fighting with gladiators or eaten alive by lions, is there any chance that Androcles and his companions can survive their fate?

During my viewing of this film I was eating some soup and bread, I literally nearly choked on the bread and expelled the soup via my nose! Such is the hammy comedy on offer here, Androcles And The Lion, adapted from a George Bernard Shaw play, is an enjoyable picture if one is prepared for just what a ham sandwich it is. The cast, featuring Victor Mature, Jean Simmons, Alan Young and Robert Newton, play it as cardboard cutouts {Simmons possibly the only one taking it serious}, with the technical aspects so bad I dare you not to laugh out loud as Young dances with a man in a Lion suit!!

Don't take it serious and you should be OK, and I'm certainly not annoyed that I sat thru it, but I would rather wrestle a Lion and two Tigers before I had to sit and watch it again! 4/10

I last saw this film as a child some 50 odd years ago. I remember after all these years, watching Alan Young, Mr. Ed's owner, waltzing with a lion in the Coliseum in Rome. I also remember knowing that the Romans did not treat the Christians very well in this setting. Shame on you George Bernard Shaw. Mr. Young, who apparently just turned 96 years old, a character actor of some merit, plays an insipid man who, in a most dingle-jolly way, is taken with a group of Christian prisoners to provide entertainment. He is docile and so trusting with those big eyes. Even a man who lives in a kind of la la situation would recognize that pain and death were just around the corner. He tries to inspire the others who are all giddy with their heads in the clouds. They somehow have learned Hymns that were written at least 700 years later. I guess this is supposed to be a comedy. The Roman soldiers are a bunch of silly Teddy bears, sort of like Sergeant Schultz on Hogan's Heroes. A laugh fest in a German prison camp. It also has Victor Mature, one of the most one dimensional actors of all time. Why the pretty young Christian girl played by Jean Simmons would want anything to do with someone so boring, I don't know. There is a fine line between comedy and tragedy. Making the Romans straight men who would never have fawned over those who were anathema to them was insulting. Watching the emperor chased by the lion was the final touch in a marvelously forgettable film.

G.B.S. declared in the lengthly "Preface" to this play, written years after its 1913 premiere (the "Preface is actually longer than the play itself), that he had written it in pique at the one J.M. Barry play he had ever thoroughly disliked - PETER PAN! The sentiment certainly sets a bench mark for measuring what Shaw may have accomplished in his charming, witty examination of a "Greek wizard" Christian (Androcles) who finds animals of all stripes and species more lovable and easy to get along with than his long (and vocally) suffering wife and neighbors.

It also may explain why Hollywood missed with this neatly produced filming despite a number of inspired casting choices (Maurice Evans as Caesar, Elsa Lanchaster as Androcles' wife & Robert Newton as the warrior/Christian, Ferrovius) and deft directorial touches.

In trying to focus on the "family friendly" (deadly words in the Hollywood lexicon) aspects of Shaw's charming satire, the film gives a bad case of the "cutsies" to the central role (it would have been interesting to see this Alan Young performance before he became so identified with his role, Wilbur, in TV's iconic MR. ED) and soft pedals or ignores most of the legitimately humorous byplay among his fellow Christians who wish martyrdom to wildly varying degrees and the infighting of the professional gladiators who echo (in somewhat more bloodthirsty fashion) the outrageous practicality of Captain Bluntschli in Shaw's early ARMS AND THE MAN.

Having made the decision to play the lion *as* a lion (before or after Harpo Marx departed the production?), the delicious hold on adult satire Shaw infused his play with was probably a lost cause, but what remains remains a very pleasant diversion worth a Saturday afternoon. For lovers of good Shaw however, it's more than a little watered down - perhaps most surprising of all, more watered down that the later equally enjoyable musical version Richard Rodgers and Peter Stone did for TV with Noel Coward as Caesar and Norman Wisdom as Androcles!

I assume back in his day, the Brits thought that George Bernard Shaw was incredibly brilliant and droll for concocting the play "Androcles and the Lion". However, despite Shaw being held in great esteem today as then, I couldn't believe how awful this film was. Perhaps the translation to the big screen was at fault--perhaps Shaw himself just didn't age well with this story. All I know is that I hated everything about this horrible story of the early Christians. Heck, it was so bad, I assume the film did much to encourage the cause of atheism the world over. Yes, it was THAT bad.

When the film begins, you know you are in trouble for two reasons. First, the background paintings are incredibly fake looking and the studio seemed to do nothing to make them look better. Second, and a far more serious problem, is the god-awful dialog. Again and again, the dialog between Alan Young and his wife, Elsa Lanchester, made me cringe--and it was clearly SUPPOSED to be funny. Unfortunately, this same problem continued throughout the film--with horribly corny humor and incredibly anachronistic and stupid dialog uttered by everyone. It was painful it was so bad.

The bottom line is that although I hate stilted Biblical costume dramas (such as "David and Bathsheba"), I learned tonight that I hate comedic Biblical costume dramas even more. The film has wasted the talents of everyone associated with it and the likes of John Hoyt, Victor Mature and Jean Simmons clearly were given third-rate material. As for Young, he was right in his element. Avoid unless you are a masochist.

In a lengthy letter to the editor in the October 1960 issue of "Films in Review," a very young Robert Osborne supplies some erudition on the casting of "Androcles and the Lion." According to the film historian, shooting began with Harpo Marx in the title role and continued under the direction of Chester Erskine for five weeks. Osborne states that the film's producer and Shaw impresario Gabriel Pascal thought him "the perfect Androcles," and maintains that the rushes were thought to be "brilliant." However, RKO studio boss Howard Hughes had recently seen Alan Young on a TV show, and impetuously insisted that the part be recast. That meant all the footage involving Harpo had to be reshot.

Unfortunately because of the delay two other principle cast members were lost to other commitments: Rex Harrison as Caeser and Dana Andrews as the Roman captain. Footage with them was scrapped and is presumed lost. They were replaced with Maurice Evans and Victor Mature. The two other stars, Robert Newton and Jean Simmons, making her American film debut, were able to stay.

Although IMDb trivia claims that Harpo was only considered for the role, Mr. Osborne's reputation, gravitas, and record of film scholarship gives this anecdote credibility. It certainly is typical of the idiosyncratic and fickle Hughes that he would have these kind of caprices. Just one year earlier after John Farrow had completed "His Kind of Woman," the unpredictable billionaire brought in Richard Fleischer to shoot some additional scenes. Incredibly Fleischer ended up reshooting virtually the entire film when Hughes suddenly decided he now wanted Raymond Burr as the villain and had a large expensive set built in the studio tank for a superfluous sight gag involving Vincent Price that lasted only a few seconds on screen.

Although it's unlikely that any of this footage will surface, if indeed it exists, but one can always hope.

P.S. Victor Mature had a refreshingly off-beat sense of humor, and unlike other egotistical stars of the period, never took himself too seriously. According to co-star Jim Backus, he and Mature decided to go to a local café for lunch rather than suffer through a meal at the RKO cafeteria. The waitress was surprised to see the two men in ancient Roman military uniforms and was shocked and amused to hear the actors ask for the usual "servicemen's discount."

After his gargantuan Technicolor folly 'Caesar and Cleopatra' nearly bankrupted Lord Rank, producer Gabriel Pascal ended his film career with a whimper at RKO with a final, much cheaper Shavian adaptation in black & white.

It's not really any more stagy than the earlier epic, and provides the satisfaction of seeing a radiant Jean Simmons promoted from a bit player in the former film to the female lead. Elsa Lanchester's a scream as the hero's nagging wife, Robert Newton as Ferrovious, described as having "the strength of an elephant and the temper of an angry bull" is fearsome even when turning the other cheek; and it's not every day you see Jim Backus playing a centurion!

I think Androcles and the Lion was supposed to be a comedy, but it was so awful, I couldn't be sure. In the midst of the 1950s biblical craze, Hollywood created a film about a group of slaves who are rounded up and sent to the gladiator pit to fight a lion, because they are Christians. Of course, the Roman bad guys are all portrayed as buffoons, since they are not Christians, and the overwhelming theme is "Christians are good, and everyone who isn't is a terrible bad guy who should learn his lesson". That theme isn't necessarily a bad one, especially since Hollywood made a ton of biblical films in the 1950s and 1960s, but the ridiculous feel of the film ruins it, not to mention the over-the-top moronic performance of Alan Young as the title character, Maurice Evans as Caesar, Elsa Lanchester, Gene Lockhart, Robert Newton, Jim Backus—the list goes on. Jean Simmons, a Christian slave, and Victor Mature, a Roman soldier who falls in love with her, aren't particularly over-the-top, but the few scenes they have together are hardly worth it. In reality, if he'd been found hiding and protecting a slave, and if she'd repeatedly sassed her captors, they both would have been killed.

Alan Young loves animals, so when he comes across an injured lion in the middle of the road, he coos it with baby talk and takes the thorn out of his paw. It's pretty ridiculous, almost as ridiculous as the rest of the film.

In reference to a previous comment, the Lion's name, Tommy, comes from the original text of Shaw's play at the end of Act II. Androcles also talks baby talk to the Lion while he is removing the thorn from his paw in the Prologue (or first scene) of the play. Also I think Victor Mature does a pretty good job as the Captain, although some might be put off by the clash of his accent and acting style with the rest of the mostly British cast. However, Mature's style is well suited to the no-nonsense, pragmatic officer trying desperately to save the patrician Lavinia from being sacrificed in the arena. He tells her to lie and recant her Christian beliefs if that is what it takes to save her life; then she can go home and believe whatever she wants. Mature's less polished acting style underscores his amoral pragmatism as well as his worldly desire for Lavinia. He is her temptation, her incentive the deny her faith. That she resists this demonstrates her dedication to her religion.

"Androcles and the Lion" is a film adaptation of a 1912 play by George Bernard Shaw. The Irish playwright and author wrote in various mediums with humor and often biting social commentary. He was an avowed socialist and atheist. But, during much of his later life he expounded on a belief in an advanced state of society and being. He thought of it coming about by evolution.

This film and play is a whimsical version of a tale about an early Christian tailor who is taken prisoner and sent to Rome to be tortured and killed in the coliseum. Most people know the tale, so it doesn't come as a surprise. The humorous jabs at religion, history and government enliven the original tale. One might imagine that the play went over well with audiences in the early 20th century, yet Shaw's laborious prologues or narrations afterwards wore out audiences with his vaunting of socialism and lambasting of everything else. Much of Shaw's intent was to parody the early Christian persecution with the treatment by the British government of the common folk of his day. He says so directly in his Afterword to the play. That was Shaw's vehicle to get on his soapbox for socialism.

But, by the mid-20th century, the allure of socialism was fast fading. And, with the memories of war with heathen enemies still fresh, the spoofing of Christianity had lost its appeal. The film flopped at the box office. Many decades later, just some of the script retains its humor, and the film seems slow and quite dated.

The spoofery of early Christianity in the pagan Roman Empire is apparent at the start. As the captives are being marched off to Rome, they sing "Onward Christian Soldiers." The popular English hymn was written and composed in the late 19th century. The early 20th century audiences of Shaw's play would have known that.

The film has a cast of prominent Hollywood and English actors of the time. A couple of other reviewers give some history about the film delays and cast changes after shooting began. So, Rex Harrison, Dana Andrews, George Sanders and Harpo Marx aren't in the film. Victor Mature is a Roman captain in charge of the Christian prisoners. He is attracted to one of the very joyful (and beautiful) Christians, Lavinia, played by Jean Simmons. Can anyone possibly guess how that might turn out?

Elsa Lanchester, Reginald Gardiner, Gene Lockhart, Alan Mowbray, Jim Backus and Strother Martin are some more of the well-known actors of the day. But the person who steals the show and every scene he is in is Robert Newton as Ferrovius. His role and performance are the bulk of the humor in this film. It's solely for his performance that I give this film six stars. His humor of restraint is very funny, while his lines also convey an accurate quality of the early martyrs that people have admired over the centuries. One wonders if Shaw realized that he was as much honoring the early martyrs as he was poking fun at their cause.

Here are some favorite lines from the film.

Spintho, "Christianity is very contagious, captain. You never can tell where it will strike next. We want to be certain that it does not strike our valiant soldiers... and their officers."

Spintho, "The enemy within is just as dangerous as the enemy without, captain."

Spintho, "Her name is Lavinia. I envy the lion." Captain, "Which lion?" Spintho, "The one that will eat her."

Lavinia, "If I don't behave, I shall be thrown to the lions. And if I do behave I shall be thrown to the lions, just the same. Is that what you mean?"

Centurion, "Now, remember that you're a Christian. You gotta return good for evil."

Androcles, "Easy, Ferrovius, easy. You broke the last man's jaw." Ferrovius, "Yes, but I saved his soul. What matters a broken jaw?"

Androcles, "Let him go, brother. Our religion forbids you to strike him." Ferrovious, "On the contrary, it commands me to strike him. How could he turn the other cheek if he's not first struck on one cheek?"

Editor of the Gladiators, "Caesar will go down in history as the emperor who eliminated these cranks. Hail Caesar!" Emperor Antoninus (Caesar), "On the contrary. I'm more likely to be remembered as the man who did more to perpetuate them." Editor of Gladiators, "You, Caesar?" Emperor Antoninus, "I dare say I am doing more to spread Christianity than all their preachers, missionaries and Gospel writers put together. I shouldn't be surprised if finally I wind up as one of their heroes." Editor of Gladiators, "Caesar jests of course." Emperor Antoninus, "Caesar does not jest. I wager that for every Christian that dies in the bloody sand, two new ones leave the coliseum." Editor of Gladiators, "Perhaps then, Caesar should change his tactics." Emperor Antoninus, "Impossible. I am a subject of history and I must submit to its inevitable course. It is my destiny to fan the fires of Christianity by offering them martyrdom in the arena."

Androcles, "The coliseum! I never thought I'd live to see it."

Emperor Antoninus, "Metellus, you see now the disadvantages of two much severity. These people have no hope, therefore there's nothing to restrain them from saying whatever they like to. They're almost as important as the gladiators."

Ferrovius, "I will not fight. I will die. Better to stand with the archangels than with the Praetorian Guard." Emperor Antoninus, "I cannot believe that the archangels, whoever they may be, would not prefer to be recruited form the Praetorian Guard."

I should note that I've never read any of George Bernard Shaw's works. I happened to come across "Androcles and the Lion" in a local video/DVD store and decided to watch it. I'm not sure how to interpret it. It comes across as a reminder that Christians got persecuted in ancient Rome; how ironic that Rome's leadership later converted and turned Rome into the capital of Christianity (never mind that Christians later became the persecutors).

It's a surprise seeing who stars in the movie. One of the title characters gets played by Alan Young, a decade away from being known as the owner of a talking horse,* and a few decades away from voicing Duckburg's wealthiest citizen. Jean Simmons (not to be confused with the guy from KISS) was a renowned actress in her own right. Also appearing are Jim Backus (a decade away from being known as an old-money plutocrat stranded on an uncharted island) and Maurice Evans (a decade away from being known as a witch married to a human). It's like a TVLand movie of the week!

So, it's good if you simply see it as what it is; the movie is in fact a pretty advanced take on human-animal relations for that era. Otherwise, it comes across as a soap opera.

*As I often note, I only liked that show because I found Wilbur's wife Carol a total hottie. Why'd Wilbur pay any attention to a horse when his wife was such a babe?

Jean Simmons is radiant and shows just what a beautiful and fine actor she was. I find it to be the one virtue in this death obsessed scenario. Instead of watching this farcically nasty film I suggest viewers read Shaw's preface to the play on which the film is based, and his opinions on Christianity. There is a scene where Robert Newton asks a Roman to turn the other cheek before hitting him, and the scene works. The rest tries to be a satire on the Christians going to their death and although the violence is minimized it is all pervading in the dialogue, and some of the mental torture is painfully specific. It is totally unfit for children and surprisingly got a UK ' U ' certificate when the film ' Quo Vadis ' received an ' X ' certificate in 1951, a year before the film came out.

In the opening scene 2 "romans" are in discussion about the forthcoming games with 1 remarking..."Im going into the country to catch a load of Christians for your games"....then switches to the "lower members of society" who are laughing about "being fed to lions"....seriously poor dialogue which isn't worth any viewing time. Christians were fed to lions for their faith, something that other faiths have managed to avoid!

I remember this movie fondly as a very young child. The reviewer may have seen this film many years later, but at the time, it was a believable and wonderful film to watch. I was moved to tears (believe it or not) by the plot and the main character (Alan Young) who later took the role he was most famous for opposite that stupid horse on Mr. Ed. The film, however, is the thing I remember and will always hold close to my heart. It's really too bad that the nice bubbles we hold close get burst so easily by people how have no clue they are even doing such a disservice. It's OK though. It's why I don't read or listen to reviews and I will continue to avoid them in the future.

Androcles And The Lion (1952/3) -

I hadn't expected this film to be quite so silly. I was actually hoping for a more traditional and sensible telling of the story akin to 'Spartacus' (1960) or 'The Ten Commandments' (1956), but this one seemed to be more like a cartoon or fairytale. I nearly gave up on it just after Androcles started baby talking to the creature he had saved, because Alan Young was so stupid to watch and sooo irritating. Throughout the film I felt that he was almost Vaudevillian in his comedy with terrible jokes and an expectation that he would light a cigar and say "Wakka, Wakka" all the time.

The Lion/Tommy however was actually beautiful and a superb actor, unlike Victor Mature in his role of The Captain who was as wooden as a forest and delivered his lines as if he was double parked and had to get back to his car before a traffic warden gave him a ticket.

The script and the story was highly flawed, nowhere near as bloody and ruthless as even some of the early sword and sandal tales, which made it really hard to believe and quite pantomimic. The Centurion's were ignorant to the goings on and basically useless and the Christian's gallows humour was even more difficult to buy.

Although the one part of the story that I did like was the fact that the gathered prisoners all refused to take arms and would rather be martyred, because they had such faith in their God, something that I hadn't seen in other films before, except perhaps 'Monty Python's Life Of Brian' (1979).

It also appeared that the actors in the Roman roles were all deliberately asked to be very gay, as if that would make them villains, but Ferrovius (Robert Newton) and Androcles weren't exactly the traditional depiction of manly either.

And it was laughable that the producers thought we wouldn't notice Robert Newton's stunt double so obviously fighting his fights for him.

Thank goodness for Jean Simmons as Lavinia and John Hoyt playing Cato, for they at least added some decorum to the film, although Lavinia and The Captain's romance was almost completely unbelievable and made me cringe at times.

With the story's origins in George Bernard Shaw's play I could only imagine that he had a vested interest in Christianity as the script certainly seemed to contain moralistic and thoughtful arguments dotted throughout, which stood out as honourable sentiments, but not necessarily they weren't necessarily followed through, which I felt diminished their message.

It felt odd to me that the persecuted people were worshipping Christ only 161 years after his death. By today's standards it would be like taking Queen Victoria or Abraham Lincoln as a God. I felt that to celebrate something so much it should at least be old enough to be well established, but then I've never really understood the fascination of religion and I'm obviously coming from a very different time. I supposed that Jesus had already had followers when he was alive too, so after some thought it made a bit of sense, but it certainly had me pondering on it to start.

Being kind to one another should be a given in life and I suppose that a lot of our laws and beliefs (Generally beneficial to a modern world) have a basis in religion and I think that having faith or spirituality could provide happiness for some, but blind faith to a God that allows people to die of terribly painful diseases and takes a register every Sunday is really not for me. I would certainly fight for my right to live and sod being a martyr.

I'll get down from my soapbox long enough to say that this was not a film that I enjoyed (Obviously), especially as, for the most part, it didn't really deliver what the title claimed by making the story far more about The Captain, Lavinia and Ferrovius than Andy and his feline friend. Although that tack did improve the way the film was going. Androcles only really bookended the film with his stupid shenanigans, but I suppose it wouldn't have been a very long film if it was just about his specific adventure.

It wasn't offensive as such, but very daft in places and slow at others. I'm not really sure how I made it to the end, but at least now I can say that I have seen it.

417.16/1000.

This 1952 film was the first film version of a George Bernard Shaw play produced after the playwright's death, and the compromises are already obvious.

Shaw had had artistic control over three films produced from his plays-- the 1938 "Pygmalion", "Major Barbara" (1941) and "Caesar and Cleopatra" (1945), and his influence had clearly been felt, some would say for both good and bad. He had had absolute final say-so over the casting, and, after his experience with "Pygmalion", Shaw became somewhat more demanding and insisted that not a word be cut from both "Major Barbara" and "Caesar and Cleopatra", a decision that resulted in both of these excellent films being flops. "Androcles and the Lion" clocks in at less than two hours.

The casting suffers without Shaw's influence. Because this is an RKO release directed by Chester Erskine, a not especially distinguished American director, the cast features two American actors in major roles, and the clash between their style of acting, and that of the British actors who HAVE had experience with Shaw, is apparent. Some other American actors can be seen in bit roles.

In a blatant effort to court the average movie audience who wouldn't recognize a Shaw play if it hit them in the face, movie hunk Victor Mature (yes, the very same actor who appeared in "The Robe" and "Samson and Delilah") is cast in the somewhat demanding role of a Roman captain trying to understand the Christian martyrs. An actor like James Mason or Stewart Granger might have been perfect and would have had the necessary acting ability, but Mature, although apparently trying hard, comes close to wrecking the film and destroying its Shavian flavor. And he gets second billing!

Alan Young, whom most people will remember as Wilbur from the "Mr.Ed" TV series, is also American, but is a far better actor than Mature, and although his style sometimes seems as if it straight out of a sitcom rather than a Shaw play, Young does quite a good job in the all-important lead role of Androcles. But was it the Hollywood adaptors, or is it REALLY Shaw who gave the lion the endearing name of "Tommy"? Or is that just another sop to the movie-going crowd who loves animals with cute names?

The rest of the cast is just fine--Jean Simmons excellent, and not syrupy, as a devout woman willing to face martyrdom in the arena, Robert Newton, hilarious as a hulking strongman converted to Christianity who can barely be kept from singlehandedly demolishing his enemies, Noel Willman, Elsa Lanchester in the brief role of Androcles' wife, and, in his best screen performance, Maurice Evans (Dr. Zaius in the 1968 "Planet of the Apes") as the Roman emperor. They make this film exactly what it should be.