NOTES: A very close remake of Paramount's 1922 12-reel feature When Knighthood Was In Flower which starred Marion Davies as Mary Tudor, Lyn Harding as Henry VIII, and Forrest Stanley as Charles Brandon. The screenplay was penned by Luther Reed, the director was Robert G. Vignola.
COMMENT: Despite the great care that went into its preparation and execution, this film was neither a critical nor a particularly popular success. Most audiences had sated their appetites with Disney's previous live action swashbuckler with Richard Todd and James Robertson Justice, The Story of Robin Hood (1952) which was also produced by Pearce, directed by Annakin from a screenplay by Watkin, with sets by Dillon, photography by Unsworth and music by Parker. As for the critics, what they objected to was Major's free way with history. But why they didn't raise these objections when the novel was first published back in 1898 but saved them up to level at Disney fifty-five years later is just another arrow in the movie-maker's quiver of gripes against the third estate in general, critics in particular. The freedom with which Major treated history was bound to rile some 1953 purists, however, but please don't count me among them. That didn't worry me. What did concern me is that the script is so lightweight it never really engages our interest on any but the most superficial level. The characters are little more than the stock heroes, heroines, villains and fools of juvenile historical fiction. The players can do little to breathe life into such pasteboard figures, though there are some engaging performances, particularly James Robertson Justice's hearty Henry VIII. The direction too is not without vigor. Real locations are used with skill, sets and costumes are most attractive. A moderate budget is cleverly made to look more expansive through skilled matte work. Although the plotting is as predictable as the characters one-dimensional, The Sword and the Rose still adds up to passable entertainment, inoffensive and innocuous, for anyone with 93 minutes to while away.
COMMENT: Despite the great care that went into its preparation and execution, this film was neither a critical nor a particularly popular success. Most audiences had sated their appetites with Disney's previous live action swashbuckler with Richard Todd and James Robertson Justice, The Story of Robin Hood (1952) which was also produced by Pearce, directed by Annakin from a screenplay by Watkin, with sets by Dillon, photography by Unsworth and music by Parker. As for the critics, what they objected to was Major's free way with history. But why they didn't raise these objections when the novel was first published back in 1898 but saved them up to level at Disney fifty-five years later is just another arrow in the movie-maker's quiver of gripes against the third estate in general, critics in particular. The freedom with which Major treated history was bound to rile some 1953 purists, however, but please don't count me among them. That didn't worry me. What did concern me is that the script is so lightweight it never really engages our interest on any but the most superficial level. The characters are little more than the stock heroes, heroines, villains and fools of juvenile historical fiction. The players can do little to breathe life into such pasteboard figures, though there are some engaging performances, particularly James Robertson Justice's hearty Henry VIII. The direction too is not without vigor. Real locations are used with skill, sets and costumes are most attractive. A moderate budget is cleverly made to look more expansive through skilled matte work. Although the plotting is as predictable as the characters one-dimensional, The Sword and the Rose still adds up to passable entertainment, inoffensive and innocuous, for anyone with 93 minutes to while away.