Kings, Crowns, And Crumbling Dreams In Distant Lands

“The Man Who Would Be King” (1975) — movie review
Today’s review is for the sweeping adventure epic “The Man Who Would Be King” (1975), directed by John Huston and adapted from Rudyard Kipling’s novella.  The film stars Sean Connery as Daniel Dravot (a bold ex-soldier whose ambition drives him to claim divinity), Michael Caine as Peachy Carnehan (his loyal comrade, torn between friendship and conscience), Christopher Plummer as Rudyard Kipling (the journalist who frames the tale and bears witness to its tragic arc), and Saeed Jaffrey as Billy Fish (the interpreter who bridges cultures and loyalties).  Notably, Shakira Caine (Michael Caine’s wife) appears as Roxanne, the pivotal figure whose presence tests the illusion of Dravot’s godhood and catalyzes the story’s collapse.
Background:  I have seen this movie multiple times and each time it’s been associated in my mind with “Zulu” – probably because they both star Michael Caine, but also because of the British “Red Coats” worn in both.  LoL.  By coincidence, I bought both DVDs at roughly the same time – back around the mid-2000s – and I have tended to watch them in pairs ever since.  …Probably every five years or so.  Released in 1975, the film was a long-cherished Huston project and stands as a late-career triumph.  It earned four Academy Award nominations, including Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Art Direction, cementing its standing within the adventure canon and drawing comparisons to Huston’s earlier moral fable, “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre” (review here).
Plot:  Set in the late 19th century, Kipling encounters a ragged Peachy Carnehan, who recounts his journey with Dravot.  Restless in colonial India, the two ex-soldiers set out to conquer Kafiristan, a land untouched by outsiders since Alexander the Great.  Through cunning, courage, and audacity, they convince (conive) the locals of Dravot’s divinity and rule as kings — until human frailty intrudes.  Dravot’s desire to marry, the disastrous exposure of his human mortality, and the erosion of faith lead to betrayal and death, leaving Peachy as the lone survivor and witness to their hubris.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  excellent;  majestic and immersive;  a few;  absolutely.
Any good?  Yes.  “The Man Who Would Be King” is classic adventure — thrilling and cautionary.  It balances spectacle with moral weight, reflecting on ambition, colonialism, and friendship without losing momentum or humanity.
Acting:  Connery delivers one of his finest performances, embodying Dravot’s charisma and tragic pride.  Caine grounds the film with wit, warmth, and loyalty;  their chemistry is electric, their banter sharp, and their parting devastating.  Plummer lends a quiet gravitas as Kipling, while Jaffrey adds texture and cultural fluency.  Shakira Caine’s Roxanne is crucial — both a test and a turning point — humanizing the stakes and exposing the fragility of manufactured divinity.
Filming / FX:  Oswald Morris’s photography renders mountain passes, temples, and deserts with muscular clarity and mythic sweep;  Maurice Jarre’s score amplifies the grandeur without attempting to dominate it.  The production design builds a tactile world of stone and ceremony, and the practical stunts — especially the bridge sequence — remain gripping and credible even by modern standards.
Problems:  Minor.  The pacing can linger, and the portrayal of native characters reflects the colonial vantage point of its source.  The imperialist framing feels dated (racist), yet it’s accurate and therefore inseparable from the tale’s critique of hubris and the ethics of conquest.  Unrelated to any readers of this review, the price of this film has not come down to my “price point” yet, so I watched it on DVD.  The interesting point is the film was in an older format and I had to flip the DVD over mid-film for part two.  LoL!!
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes.  It’s exhilarating and sobering.  Huston delivers spectacle with consequence;  Connery and Caine make the myth intimate;  and the final image stays with you long after the credits.
Final recommendation:  Strong recommendation.  “The Man Who Would Be King” endures as a landmark of adventure cinema — majestic, morally resonant, and historically significant for its awards recognition and Huston’s masterful late-career craftsmanship.  If you’re drawn to tales of empire, brotherhood, and downfall, this is essential viewing.
.
Click here (28 December) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »