User reviews

This is a very lavish looking, picturesque romp that should have been a sure fire hit. "Porridge" scriptwriters Dick Clement and Ian Le Frenais were the men responsible for turning the classic Anthony Hope into a comedy, which shouldn't have been too difficult bearing in mind the ridiculous scenario linked to the main story. However, this scenario is all they went for, and any characterisation or satirical touches are abandoned and a lot of cartoonish setups such as Gregory Sierra's role and also other segments such as the explosive bowls game and the early scene in the restaurant replace any serious comedy. Therefore, in his dwindling health and sorrowful state, Sellers looks a bit out of place amongst the diving into the water routines and the jumping of a tall castle stints. It is very similar to his Fu Manchu experience two years later (when he also played two roles) in that he's still putting the work in but to little effect. The film is a reminder of his earlier years and really backfires as a poor man's Pink Panther. However, he still proves that he can act (which is a lot more than most actors these days) despite the poor material and backed by a host of regular artists such as Catherine Schell, Elke Sommer (both stars of Pink Pantherfs), Graham Stark, John Laurie, Jeremy Kemp (who had starred in Sellers' The Blockhouse in 1972) - it should have been better considering the quality of Sellers' other films at the time, but it does fall very flat.

An amusing parody about the commoner forced to impersonate a beleaguered and weak king . This The prisoner of Zenda¨ (1979) by Richard Quine boasts a good cast with Peter Sellers , Lionel Jeffries , Elke Sommer , Lynn Frederick , among others . This is a story of royal romance , humor with tongue-in-cheek , as well as breathless and flashing sword play . This is a fun swashbuckler concerning an innocent cabbie , Rudolf V's identical double , in a small European country , as he results to be the exact doppleganger of its king and gets involved in a murder plot . In order to save King Rudolph of Ruritania from assassins and murderous usurpers , the kingdom aristocrats hire a look-a-like London man to impersonate the Monarch . Sellers stars in the double role of Prince Rudolph of Ruritania and a cockney cab driver named Syd (Peter Sellers) when the Prince is jailed by his nasty brother (Jeremy Kemp) to take the throne .Is the cabbie the King or is the King the cabbie ? Confusion reigns in Ruritania.

His is a slight and budgeted enough retelling about the durable Anthony Hope's novel with all-star-cast . Stars Sellers who plays the nobleman forced to impersonate a king in a mythical European country , as he's asked to risk his life and impersonate the would-be king when his relative is kidnapped before his impending coronation , a situation that rises to some moments from which filmmaker Richard Quine manages to extract intrigue , humor and tension enough . A warm and comical movie despite the lack of critical acclaim , it is packed with derring-do , suspense , a sensitive love story , action , drama and thrilling as well as dazzling swordplay . And , of course, lots of gags and sketches , some of them funny but in the movie lacks a real freshness , including grotesque situations and above all , it especially contains catching touches of humor and irony . Resulting to be an entertaining and zany swashbuckling with lavish production financed by Walter Mirish , glamorous gowns , lively musical score by Henry Mancini , brilliant photography by Arthur Ibbetson and luxurious settings . Sellers is not too fun as the foppish king , but nice as the London cabby who steps into his shoes . In spite of it , Sellers gives a hilarious acting , but inferior than other previous classic roles by playing a look-alike communer who stands in for the endagered king of Ruritania . The fifth of six movie versions of Anthony Hope's famous adventure that failed at box office at its day . This is a flashy Technicolor remake of the notorious and better 1937 Ronald Colman and 1952 Stewart Granger retellings . As the tale carries its excitement with thrills , noisy action , swashbuckling , hilarious scenes , an attractive romance and anything else . Cast and support cast are frankly excellent , such as Jeremy Kemp who's stylishly over-the-top as the main villain, the jealous brother , Stuart Wilson whose Rupert of Hentzau is a well-modulated spoof of Douglas Fairbanks Jr , as well as Lionel Jeffries ; furthermore , three gorgeous actresses as Elke Sommer , Catherine Schell and the early deceased Lynne Frederick who in real-life married Peter Sellers .

There are several versions about this classy story , these are the following ones : ¨The prisoner of Zenda¨(1922) by Rex Ingram with Lewis Stone , Alice Terry , Robert Edeson , Stuart Holmes , Ramon Novarro . ¨The Prisoner of Zenda¨ (1937) by John Cromwell with Ronald Colman as Major Rudolf Rassendyll / The Prisoner of Zenda , Madeleine Carroll as Princess Flavia , C. Aubrey Smith , Raymond Massey . ¨Prisoner of Zenda ¨(1952) with Stewart Granger , James Mason, Louis Calhern, Robert Coote , Janet Leigh.

The 1979 remake of Hope's Zenda story is a prime example of the sort of poor judgement Peter Sellers was so often subject to in his choice of films. The whole thing is roundly dispiriting to watch, and "palpably uneasy" as Halliwell's Film Guide comments. The script lacks any sense of the comic or adventurous that one would expect of a Zenda filming with Sellers. So often, exaggeration and chatter take the place of any sort of acting. Even Sellers, often impressive in such bad films, creates two very uninteresting characters, based it seems, solely on the rather stereotypical voices he creates for them. Other performances pass by, indistinguishable from each other and unwanted. John Laurie has nothing to do whatsoever, the token females are particularly dull... the whole thing is completely pointless and all too far from being enjoyable... Most certainly as bad, if not worse than the more derided "The Fiendish Plot of Fu Manchu". Rating:- */*****

Prisoner of Zenda should have much to be proud of: nice music by Henry Mancini, good dual performance by Peter Sellers and gorgeous-looking cinematography and impressive sets and locations.

Unfortunately, all this adds to nothing. The film is as if it were written seriously with the screenwriters assuming that it could be turned into a comedy simply by having Gregory Sierra overact and bulge his eyeballs every now and then and the rest of the cast move about in a humorous way. But it doesn't work that way, even Sellers cannot inject enough comedy into this film(in fact, much unlike Sierra, he is slightly underplaying his roles, which is good).

In the end, one gets the impression that the team had a large amount of money and a good cast, but didn't know what to do with them.

This movie is only saved by the brilliant performance by Peter Sellers, the rest of the film are bad and repetitive jokes. Its a good film to see the genius of Sellers, but you'll have to suffer the movie.

This is pretty fun, there is a lot of things going on that become garbled especially toward the latter from the plot like badguys switching to be good guys suddenly? This is cancelled by the nonstop narrative that just becomes action of people battling and all that stuff and it is here there is a vortex of hypnotism as you just follow this narrative without thought but just action. As I check this I keep thinking this must be a mid-60s movie and am surprised to check the release here. If you like candlelit castle locales at night well this movie is for you.

I`m not very familiar with THE PRISONER OF ZENDA . I know it`s a novel by Anthony Hope that involves an English commoner who so resembles the King of Rurtinia so much that he becomes a stand in , I know that Robert Donat starred in a well regarded film version , and that the 1978 DOCTOR WHO story The Andriods Of Tara was based on Hope`s novel . That was all I really knew as I sat down to watch this comedy version of the story

I was totally unimpressed , not by the bare bones of the story but by the obvious fact that there`s no laughs in this alleged comedy . I can`t think of one moment when I cracked a smile never mind burst out laughing . In fact about half way through all the evidence points that writers Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais just gave up attempting to make lame jokes and just wrote a traditional version of the story . But my major gripe is with director Richard Quine who spent twelve and a half million dollars on this movie which looks like it has a budget less than a tenth of that sum . All the interior sets look totally cheap and fake and there`s an action sequence involving a stage coach which is laughably bad . The whole sequence is shot at ground level to disguise the fact that the coach isn`t moving more than 10 mph , cut to some abysmal back screen projection with Peter Sellers wrestling with one of the bad guys , then cut back again to an exterior shot of the 10mph coach with all the characters looking away from screen so you won`t notice the characters are played by stuntmen . I wasn`t fooled by this type of sequence in James Bond films from the 1980s and I wasn`t fooled here

King Rudolf IV (Peter Sellers) crashes his balloon and dies falling into a well. General Sapt (Lionel Jeffries) and his nephew Fritz travel to London to retrieve the playboy son Rudolf V (Sellers) from a gambling house. The King's half-brother Michael sends an assassin to kill him. He's having an affair with the married Countess Montparnasse (Elke Sommer). Cab driver Frewin (Sellers) rescues him from an assassin. General Sapt hires Frewin as a coachman but really he's being used as a decoy without his knowledge. Frewin is attacked by Michael's men and the new King meets him. Rudolf is captured and imprisoned in Michael's castle of Zenda. Frewin is coronated instead but Rudolf's fiancée Princess Flavia (Lynne Frederick) notices the ruse.

Peter Sellers is playing multiple roles once again. There is nothing wrong with the plot. It's functional as a drama except it has no intention of being one. As a comedy, there are very few laughs. It's late in director Richard Quine's career and maybe the laughs weren't in him anymore. The slapstick is lazy. The jokes aren't there.

This film is not great, but it is certainly interesting especially for avid Sellers' fans.

Peter Sellers made a career mining humor and whimsy from weakish scripts; problem is you have to look hard to find those lesser-if-worthy vehicles where his performances make a major difference, and when you do, you may feel disappointed anyway. But give something like "The Prisoner Of Zenda" a chance, and you may be entertained, albeit fitfully.

With the sudden death of Ruritania's ruler Rudolf IV, the crown falls to his clueless, lascivious twit of a son. Already being hunted by a cuckolded count (Gregory Sierra), Rudy (Sellers) now must also escape the murderous attentions of his half-brother Michael (Jeremy Kemp) and his confederates. But help arrives from an unlikely place, a hansom cab driver named Sidney (also Sellers) who is the spitting image of Rudy. Sidney goes along for the sake of a comfortable sinecure for his aging horse, but soon wonders if "this king game" is worth the risk.

The clock was running out on poor Sellers, and you can see it. The old manic energy that once drove him visibly flickers as you watch him here. Making his life's dream "Being There" was just around the corner, but being Sellers, he couldn't resist another trip to the light- comedy well first for some quick cash.

"You might have noticed the king has trouble with his R's," Sidney is told, referencing the speech impediment which Sellers employs when playing "Wudy."

"Yeah, I had that once," Sidney replies. "You get it from sitting on damp grass."

That's about the apogee for the one-liners offered in "Zenda," which coasts along more on ambiance, colorful supporting characters, a glittery Henry Mancini score, and Sellers impressing by working the corners effectively in his two starring roles. He plays Sidney especially with the same lighter touch he would employ more effectively as Chance the Gardener in "Being There," this time channeling Michael Caine rather than Stan Laurel.

I like this film, sometimes a lot, but it's not an easy one to defend. It starts out painfully slow, opening on the soon-to-be-departed Rudolf IV (Sellers again, in what amounts to a cameo in his own movie) taking a balloon ride to celebrate his 80th birthday, a sequence that involves him cackling a lot and playing with a telescope and a champagne bottle before literally ending with a wet splat when the doddering monarch does a full header into a well.

Scriptwriters Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais don't offer much in the way of comic setpieces; for the most part they are content simply replaying the familiar "Zenda" storyline and sneaking in light humor where they can. After a while, a long while, it sort of works, as when Sidney finds himself caught in bed with Rudy's mistress and her very angry husband.

Sierra is very much over-the-top, but solidly so, as the avenging count, setting up various silly traps that end up hurting only him. Meanwhile, Lionel Jeffries and Simon Williams as a pair of Rudy's loyal aides enjoyably try to keep a reluctant Sidney working for them. Stuart Wilson makes a strong impression as the wicked but sporting Rupert, working against Rudy but playing his own side. His maniacal laugh is one of the movie's more amusing recurring bits.

Director Richard Quine supplies his twin Peters with the affectionate attentions of three leading ladies. Elke Sommer and Catherine Schell starred with Sellers in other films, while the third, Lynne Frederick, was at the time Sellers fourth wife, and would become his widow the following year. All add to the general merriment without standing out too much; Schell does so the most when she leads Sidney in an exchange of chicken imitations.

By this time, the movie finally kicks in as something worthwhile, but it may be too late for all but Sellers' faithful fans. As I count "The Pink Panther Strikes Again" as my all-time favorite film, I enjoyed the way "Zenda" works in the same spirit, Mancini music and pratfalls involving Sellers doubles abounding. There's even a scene between Sidney and regular Sellers cohort Graham Stark involving a growling dog that brings to mind one of "Strikes Again's" most remembered scenes, even getting its own agreeable payoff.

But if you aren't a Sellers fan going in, "Zenda" may not only fail to pull you in but leave you wondering what the fuss with him was all about. It's the subtle stuff that clicks for me, the little moments of grace and dignity from Sidney, and Rudy making randy with Sommer's stately torso ("We have mowtains to cwimb!") The real problem with "Zenda" is not its own fault, but the fact it was about all Sellers would have left to give in the way of silly comedy. I liked what I got, but wished it had been more.

I really wanted to like this. How could it go wrong with Peter Sellers and Lionel Jeffries on board as well as composer Henry Mancini and script-writers Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais? Sadly, something did go wrong, and I am still puzzled as what the biggest problem was with this film. Not all is bad though, the film has gorgeous sets and costumes and is beautifully shot, and Henry Mancini's score is great as you would expect from the composer of the Pink Panther movies, Great Mouse Detective and Breakfast at Tiffanys. However, the writing had all the ingredients to be funny but instead came across as forced(which is bad news for a spoof remake, which considering the source material was something I felt wasn't going to work in the first place), while the story as well as being sluggishly paced just lacks wit and thrills and the characters are rather cartoony(especially George Sierra). The acting fares little better, with Peter Sellers, who I consider a comic genius, coming across as both exaggerated and uninterested, while George Sierra even with bulging eyes makes little of his admittedly cartoony character and everyone else, especially John Laurie, have little to do and are dull as a result. In conclusion, not a complete disaster but just didn't work for me. 3/10 Bethany Cox

This must be one of his best movies. The movie was made on location in Austria. The Castle in Vienna is the real Schoenbrunn castle where the empire of the Habsburg monarchy ruled for almost a 1000 years. The sets are original and outstanding. Peter Sellers played a double role where he plays a London cab driver (coachman) Sydney Frewin who is a look a like of the crown prince Rudolf of Rurotania who's brother wants to get rid of him and take on the crown himself after the death of their father. The movie starts when the King dies celebrating his 80tiest birthday in a balloon. When he accidentally punctures his balloon with a cork from his Champaign bottle, plummets to the ground, his balloon gets tangled up onto a tree in a village square and then he finally falls into the well below while giving a speech to the locals from the tree in the balloon. Crown prince Rudolf's spends most of his time in the London Saloons but he must return to Rurtania where his life is in danger. The London cab driver, Sydney Freud is accidentally discovered as look a like by the crown princes assistant and send ahead to Rurotania as a decoy. Sydney Freud is unaware of the real reason why he was offered a good position in Rurotania till he arrives there. Prince Rudolf has an affair with a beautiful countess. When her husband the count discovers this he is also after the crown prince. As the real prince gets kidnapped, Sydney takes his place till the real prince can be recovered. Sydney can not understand at first why the count is always after him wanting to slit his throat.. There is too much to tell but the movie has a happy ending where Sydney Frewin becomes the King and the princess gets the man she really loves. The real crown prince Rudolf goes back to London this time as Sydney Freud where he does what he loves best. Visiting the London gambling clubs and maintaining his affair with the countess. Great family entertainment! The only bad thing about this movie is that it's not available.

"The Prisoner of Zenda" has been made and re-made many times. And, considering how good the 1922, 1937 and 1952 versions were, it's amazing that they'd think to remake it yet again in 1979. And, in hindsight, this probably was a bad idea (see the IMDB trivia if you don't believe me). Like many of Peter Sellers' films (especially late in his career), for every wonderful movie he made, he made at least a couple disappointing failures.. The wonderful film he made about this time was "Being There" and the disappointments were this movie as well as "The Fiendish Plot of Dr. Fu Manchu"....two painfully unfunny pictures which make you wonder why he agreed to make them in the first place. Apparently, Sellers or his agent had a hard time picking decent movie projects.

The story is supposed to be a humorous version of the classic story...and it's obvious this is the case in the silly opening scene where the elderly king (Sellers) falls to his death while ballooning. Now, the dead king's foolish and dissolute son is to become the new ruler of Ruritania (also Sellers). And, enemies of the new king are out to destroy him. His advisors come up with a plan to save him...to have an identical looking cab driver pretend to be the king!

The problem with "The Prisoner of Zenda" is not that it's terrible...it's actually watchable. But the earlier versions were wonderful...and by comparison it is terrible. Plus the film too often relies on dopey humor and slapstick (such as the king's speech impediment and the exploding croquet ball).

By the way, although it didn't work well here, Peter Sellers could be wonderful playing multiple roles in a movie. Try watching "The Mouse That Roared" or "Dr. Strangelove" and you'll see him do this marvelously.

I like Peter Sellers a lot, one of the greatest comedians of all time. He is fantastic in the Pink Panther series and in "The Party". But, in this movie, he tries very hard to be funny and he doesn't succeed at all, the whole scenario is stupid. Lynne Frederick was indeed very beautiful here. Elke Sommer, very beautiful 15 years before, here is no longer what she was. Same Catherine Schell, here she is not anymore the super-beauty which she was just 7 years before in "Madame Sin". As women get older, women become ugly faster than men, many of them.

Apart some few Sellers's movies where he was really funny, all remains is hard to watch, this one is palatable and has funny moments really, on triple acting this movie is a spoof of so good movie made previously by Stewart Granger, quite often Sellers didn't make me laugh, but this turn is quite acceptable acting, having a valuable supporting casting as the funiest Lionel Jeffries, an already older Elke Sommer and the gorgeous newcomer Lynne Frederick!!

Resume:

First watch: 1988 / How many: 2 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 7.

The new king is a fop, and a London cabbie, who is a gem, looks just like him (the old king used to come to London for recreation) so the cabbie is hired to stand in for the king. While assassins try to kill him, the pretty lady sees him for what he is - and falls in love with him. I cannot give away the ending, it's too amazing.

This movie is full of jokes of all kinds, from subtle funny looks, to hilarious switcheroos; I think Peter Seller's very best movie. He's very funny, from the slapstick to the dumb looks in strange situations, etc. He was abused in the Pink Panther movies - having to do the same jokes over and over. Here we see some different ones, and quite good too. "She did an owl!!!" "He did a chicken!!" "What are you doing?" "That's my secret chicken signal." "You can't do that; that's my secret chicken!!!" "Whooo whooo!!!" "Bok bok bok!!!" The principle actors do their parts very well. I find myself cheering for the valiant cabbie, what a dude! and disgusted by the foppy prince - and have to stop and realize, it's the same actor! The actresses are one thing they certainly should be: gorgeous. And some of the minor parts are really nicely played, too. "Take this." "What is it?" "It's a ring, stolen from the Hapsburgs. It's priceless." Jailer squints at it trying to decide if it's worth risking his life over, and drops it in the sewer. "Ow... got anything else?" The look on his face is perfect.

And there are themes of vast import behind the story. We are all fops and gems, rolled into one; the gem part of us is a prisoner inside, and the fop is what the world has cultivated.

I haven't seen much of the other movies based on this same book, but this one does the story justice, and adds the funny element. I'd say it well improves the book, which was a little too baroque for my tastes.

This movie has the one flaw that it looks like it was made in the 40's or 50's: the special effects are cheap, like the king falling down the well - these people could have gotten those effects looking better, but they chose not to for some reason. Let's assume that it was because they loved the old time movies with those fake-looking special effects. I just think of it as quaint and relax and enjoy the show. Maybe they spent their budget on sets and costumes - a lot of them look pretty elaborate. My copy is a VHS I taped off of WKRP or somewhere one night - the music sounds like it's been thru the grinder - and I still watch it occasionally and enjoy it for its immense merit as a story, and the acting and the jokes. Actually the fights aren't all that bad. I actually like the one on top of the carriage. Pretty amusing... "We're driverless!!!" "Not while I'm here you're not!"

The accent Sellers has while playing Rudolf is amazing. Better film than the rating suggests.

This films is really good. One of those films that you should see if you like Peter Sellers.

I should probably begin this review by mentioning my familiarity of the source material - or rather, the lack of it. I have never read the novel, nor have I seen any of the previous film versions. Pretty much all I knew about "Zenda" before watching this movie was the basic premise. I also knew the story was originally serious in tone. But I was open to it being done in a comic fashion, because with stuff like mistaken identity, the premise did indeed have comic possibilities.

Sadly, everyone involved with this movie drops the ball. I'll start with Sellers. I have found him funny in other movies, but he simply isn't funny here. His performance here simply lacks energy and seems sluggish. I do know he was having health problems at this point in his life, and this may explain his lack of enthusiasm.

But even if Sellers was in top form here, it's unlikely he could have saved the movie. The movie is terribly directed - the slow-moving story feels as sluggish as Sellers. And when it comes to delivering the (very sporadic) comedy, there is a curious feel to it. The comedy feels like it's being directed by someone intentionally trying to make it as serious as possible. Though many of the gags would still be dead on arrival even with a top comedy director, since they are predictable and very familiar.

Judging by the ragged look of the old print Universal is currently using for the movie's television appearances, they are in no hurry to restore this movie. No wonder.

This film is a tremendous parody. To enjoy it in the way it was meant, you have to watch either the 1937 version or the 1952 remake first. Both are exciting, entertaining, and full of the things we love about movies. But then, when you see the Sellers version, and hear some of the same dialog in its new context, you get how hysterically the later film plays with the genre. It was obviously a labor of love, and in no way does a disservice to the earlier films. Sellers' Rudolf must have been modelled on Terry-Thomas, and his cabbie Syd is pretty close to his Michael Caine impressions. Both work splendidly. Jeremy Kemp does the Doug Fairbanks Jr. laugh to the manner born. Production values are topnotch. A gem!