JohnHowardReid Copyright 2 April 1954 by 20th Century-Fox Film Corp. New York opening at the Roxy: 6 April 1954. U.S. release: April 1954. U.K. release: 27 May 1954. Australian release: 2 September 1954. Sydney opening at the Plaza. 9,020 feet. 100 minutes.COMMENT: Although it doesn't go anywhere near matching the appealingly diverse characters, the intriguing plots or the vivid background detail of Harold Foster's popular and deservedly famous Sunday newspaper comic strip, "Prince Valiant", the movie, is actually rather fun.Fortunately, it doesn't really matter whether you laugh at this movie or with it, the whole energetic yet juvenile quality of the movie's luscious three million dollars production (a really huge sum back in 1954) spreads itself right across the vast CinemaScope screen. Aside from the somewhat inadequate, if appropriately boyish Robert Wagner in the title role of the valiant prince, plus the casting of a decidedly incongruous Sterling Hayden as Sir Gawain, there's a great cast, led by James Mason, really in his element here as the villainous Sir Brack.

mike48128 It's not exactly Errol Flynn's classic "Robin Hood" but it's far better than the critics would have you believe. The sets are wonderful, and a majority of (at least the exteriors) were shot at real English-Scottish castles instead of matte paintings. Good stuntwork and a rousing musical score which even reminds me of "Robin Hood" in the way it punctuates the action scenes. The costume design is pretty good, but oh that bad hair! The "page boy" wigs that Robert Wagner (and the other squires) had to wear! Did they borrow them from Doris Day? The swords look a bit "flimsy" and oversized. The horns on the Vikings are wrong, but the pageantry is still all there. The jousting match is every bit as much fun as the tournament in "Robin Hood". Outstanding cinematography and luscious Technicolor. The story is relatively easy to follow, but as a kid, I couldn't understand the difference between the "bad" and "good" Vikings (which all looked the same). As always, it's the Heathens vs. the Christians, isn't it? The princesses are both gorgeous too. Love those push-up bras and their perfect wigs! Like "Robin Hood", there is a climactic "duel to the death" between good and evil. Some awkward dialog and unintentional accents, but I enjoy this film in spite of it's faults. One of the first films I ever saw on a "Really Big Screen" in the 1950's. It's a lot of fun-to-watch and doesn't drag on forever like most Medieval adventures. If you still don't like this movie, then consider that the lead of "Valiant" was first offered to Tony Curtis, who did "The Black Shield of Falworth" instead. The video transfer is disappointing. Weak colors (especially the blue skies), some replacement footage and "video shimmer". (Due to "MacroVision CP") Practically "blood-free" and therefore suitable for most audiences. Note: There was a bad remake in 1997, which was quickly forgotten.

MovieKen Robert Wagner is Prince Valiant, who is on a quest to restore his father to his rightful throne. He travels to Camelot in an attempt to become one of the Knights of the Round Table, serving under King Arthur. While doing this, he discovers a Black Knight who has his own evil quest.I usually love films like this, so I thought I'd check it out. I'm sorry to say that though it took place in one of my favorite time periods, I wasn't very impressed with the film overall.The script was pretty much what you'd expect from films of this kind, and the scenery and costumes seemed pretty authentic. The plot was fine, though it was a bit disjointed in places, and at times, it was a bit boring. But once everyone stopped talking and the action started, it became pretty enjoyable. The attack on the castle and the last sword fight were by far the best parts, and both of those take place in the last 30 minutes of the film. The rest of it was rather forgettable.I don't need constant action to be entertained. In fact, one of my favorite films of all time is the Henry Fonda version of 12 Angry Men, which is all talk and no action. But the difference is that 12 Angry Men had an intelligent script, detailed characters and excellent acting.Prince Valiant had none of these things. In fact, I never thought I'd say this about any film starring James Mason, but the acting here is just terrible. Mason's performance is OK, though anyone could have played his part just as well, because it wasn't a very demanding role. There are no other memorable performances, and in all honesty, most of them were just awful. Robert Wagner has never impressed me with his acting skill, but in this picture, he's completely wooden. Just listen to the way he recites his lines. It's as if he put no attempt whatsoever into becoming the character. Actually, the same goes for just about everyone, except Mason. The actor playing Gawain was especially bad.I guess what plagues this film the most is the director. Judging by how the film turned out, it seems he mostly cared about the action sequences and nothing else. As I said before, the action in this movie is by far the best thing about the entire film. If this film's director were working today, he'd be just like George Lucas, who creates films with all style and no substance.The bottom line: 1 point for costumes/scenery, 3 points for action, 1 point for entertainment value, 0 points for acting, 0 points for directing. Total 5/10.

Blueghost This film is one of those inane market deals. In the tradition of today's teenage driven film market this movie preceded today's SFX B-flick bonanzas with the same formula to grab young people's money.One of Robert Wagner's early roles sees him miscast (and in this way appropriately cast) as a civilized pagan Norseman, with altruistic ideals, but little experience to back up his high minded values.Comically over-sized swords are counterweighted by some of the battle scenes, but nearly no research went into this film, which isn't too surprising as its sights were aimed all that high in the first place.It's an interesting window at what 1950s Hollywood considered fluff action drama, and it's worth a look for that alone. Otherwise give it a pass.