calvinnme Yes, I know that Billy and Bobby Mauch are playing the title roles, but my complaint still stands. Errol = cute; Mauch Twins= Not so much. Flynn really rocks thigh high boots well-- a look that really only works if you're tall and long legged.Flynn was his usual dashing hero self and Rains was excellent as the Earl. The Mauch twins were fine, though there was a little too much giggling for my tastes. I thought that they brought Mark Twain's story to life pretty well.I enjoyed Errol's 2:1 sword fight and his eventual duel with Alan Hale. This may be the only film in which Errol and Alan are adversaries rather than allies. While normally I wouldn't have a preference for a film being in color or black and white, I cannot help but think that this film would have looked better in Technicolor. With the elaborate sets and costumes, the addition of Technicolor would have aesthetically enhanced the the look of the film.

SimonJack I've always thought of Mark Twain (nee, Samuel Clemens) as America's Charles Dickens. The two men lived barely a generation apart. Their lifespans actually overlapped some 35 years, from Twain's birth in 1835 to Dickens' death in 1870. Dickens's books were published from 1836 to his death in 1870. Most were printed initially as magazine serials in England. Twain no doubt read some of them, either in follow-up American serials or books. But, it's very unlikely that Dickens would have read any of Twain's work. Twain's first book, "The Innocents Abroad," was published in 1869 – the year before Dickens died. It was based on Twain's first trip to Europe – a Mediterranean sojourn in 1867. I like to fantasize what it would have been like had the two literary giants met – say toward the end of Dickens' life. The elder Dickens, an accomplished beloved English author, and a young American adventurer and journalist who was just beginning to write novels. The two would be among the most masterful, most read and most beloved storytellers of all time. Why all this comparison of Twain and Dickens? Because I think Dickens would have enjoyed thoroughly Twain's "The Prince and the Pauper." The two men wrote with obviously different references – cultures, times, people. And, with somewhat different phases of the cultural language. Yet their knack for and approach to story telling was very similar. Twain's Prince and Pauper was published in 1882. Twain and Dickens share one other distinction. I don't know the numbers, but the two authors have had more movies made on their works than any other two authors in history. Some of their books have had multiple renditions put on film. And that brings me now to this first sound production of "The Prince and the Pauper." It's a wonderful rendition of this classic tale that I think has become a classic in itself. It has a stellar cast for the period in Errol Flynn, Claude Rains, Henry Stephenson, Barton MacLane, Alan Hale and Eric Portman. And the twin brothers, Billy and Robert Mauch give top performances as the prince and the pauper. This is a delightful fictional story with just a little bit of an historical look at the times and place. It's a nice family film that educates on literature and history while it entertains.

normschaefer The Prince and the Pauper is a charming and witty film. Errol Flynn, although appearing a little late in the film, gives a great performance as an adventurer who protects what he believes is a delusional boy. The Mauch twins, Billy and Bobby, are perfect foils for Flynn, who's interaction with the Prince of England is touching, warm and comedic. As usual with Flynn's films Erich Wolfgang Korngold's music is brilliant, weaving a childlike main theme with an undercurrent of adventure. Every time you hear the score one almost picture a child giggling, while playing hide-and seek. It is one of Korngold's least known scores, but it is a gem. Flynn was a tragic figure, a larger then life adventurer and lover who 's reputation, after death, naturally, was smeared by a several books, now proved to be false. Truly, a man born in the wrong century. There is no actor capable of pulling off what Flynn did in his hay day. He has been largely ignored by Hollywood. Hypocrites, I think might be an appropriate term to attach to today's Academy moguls. A rake, drunk and scalawag? Yes. But he was the guy who has a least a half dozen classics that have stood the test of time. Unfortunately, the Prince and the Pauper is rarely seen on TV nowadays. A shame. Where would we Walter Mitty's be without the last of the true swashbucklers?

blanche-2 Bobby Mauch and Billy Mauch are "The Prince and the Pauper," a 1937 film based on the Mark Twain story. The film also stars Errol Flynn and Claude Rains. When Tom, the pauper, is caught by the guards, the young Prince sees a playmate in him and invites him in. They change clothes so that the Prince can go and get his dog from the kennel for their next game, but he's caught by the cruel guards who think he's the pauper. This leaves the hapless Tom stuck in the palace as a prince who is about to become king any minute. He has a protector forced upon him, the Earl of Hertford (Rains), who does not have the best interests of the English people in mind.While he's in Tom's world, Prince Edward gets a good look at the horrible way the English people are forced to live because of bad laws. Eventually he meets Miles Hendon (Flynn) who saves him from Tom's wretched father. The question is, once Hendon is convinced that he's in the presence of the true King, can he get him to the coronation before the beggar is crowned? This is a wonderfully fun movie, filled with the meanest of the mean in Alan Hale as a palace guard, Barton MacLane as Tom's father, and the diabolical, unfeeling Earl. All are very convincing. The twins are delightful. As for Errol Flynn, he's as dashing and charming as ever as he wields a sword and rides a horse. A great cast and a marvelous film for the whole family. Highly recommended.