The American director Henry Levin once described THE DARK AVENGER as a "western in armour", which is an apt description of this colourful saga. The casting is hilarious: Errol Flynn, born in 1909, plays the son of Michael Hordern, born 1911. Although Sir Michael aged quickly, Flynn is no spring chicken either, and looks all of his 46 years. The result of living in the fast lane is right up there on the screen. Christopher Lee shines in one of his early roles and demonstrates keen swordmanship in his duel with Errol Flynn. Actually Lee duels with British Olympic sabre champion Raymond Paul - with Flynn taking over in the close-ups. The supporting cast is full of future TV household names. Rupert Davies and Ewen Solon had considerable success years later in "Maigret". Richard O'Sullivan, a talented child actor, went on to play swashbuckler "Dick Turpin" in the 70's. Fans of Patrick McGoohan had better not miss the beginning of this movie, the star of the cult TV classic "The Prisoner" only has a few lines in a brief appearance. This movie always crops up on Sam Kydd's filmography but spotting him is virtually impossible, maybe Sam was edited out of the finished film. THE DARK AVENGER was filmed on the abandoned IVANHOE lot and is enjoyable comic strip history, it's a good way to spend a rainy Sunday afternoon.
Add a Review
-
James_Byrne27 August 2005
-
henri sauvage27 June 2012During the Hundred Years' War, in the aftermath of the English victory at Poitiers King Edward the Third (Michael Hordern) lays down the terms of his truce to a group of captured French nobles: If they promise to submit to English rule in their province of Aquitaine, they'll be released and allowed to keep their lands and titles.
Although the nobles are at first inclined to tell the King what he can do with his truce, even at the cost of their lives, the wilier Comte de Ville (Peter Finch) persuades them that the wiser move would be to appear to accept the truce while working on the sly against their English overlords.
So the stage is set for nasty plots and feats of derring-do, as the King leaves his son, Prince Edward (Errol Flynn) to rule the barely-pacified province in his stead, while he returns to England. When Edward's widowed cousin and romantic interest Joan (Joanne Dru) is kidnapped by the Comte de Ville and held hostage, this hands-on monarch embarks on a quest to rescue her and her children.
Flynn the actor doesn't seem to have much zest for this production, no doubt regarding Allied Artists as a B-list outfit (as they generally were) compared with the major studios for whom he'd once worked. The romancing here is decidedly muted, compared to the classic swashbucklers of his early career. But even though his years of high living have obviously told on him, Flynn's still a commanding presence, and this role as a middle-aged warrior prince suits him well.
The story is nothing remarkable, with its share of duels and disguises and battles and hair's-breadth escapes. Although there's an interesting ambiguity to its being set during the Hundred Years' War: Here the conquering English prince is the hero, while the Comte de Ville and his French compatriots are the villains. Yet barely ten years prior to the release of this movie, who would have questioned the morality of resisting an invading army by fair means or foul? At least as regards Europe, and by this time colonialism had mostly fallen out of favor, too. So it seems to me a bit hard to believe that most viewers then or now wouldn't feel at least a little sympathy for the French conspirators, even if Edward's claim to the Aquitaine had some foundation in medieval law and custom.
For an Allied Artists flick, though, this has unusually good production values. (I was lucky enough to catch it on TCM, in letterbox format in a near-pristine print.) Besides Flynn himself, and a brief role for stunningly beautiful Yvonne Furneaux, the best things about this film are the cinematography, the fine British actors, the sets and costuming, and the staging of the battle scenes, especially de Ville's assault on the castle where Edward and Joan take refuge. For once, the armor is appropriate to the era and in a scene that's pretty unique for the genre, a pair of authentically primitive-looking cannon (yes, they had them back then) protected by a kind of giant shield-on-wheels known as a "mantlet" are used to shatter a castle gate.
This is the sort of movie that used to be called a "popcorn cruncher", before the reign of the frenetic, bloated, CGI-saturated summer blockbuster. It makes no pretense at being anything but what it is: A passable way to spend a rainy afternoon. -
Moor-Larkin17 February 2008Walter Mirisch produced this movie in England. It was a star vehicle for Errol Flynn, who was 46 by then. Along for the ride was Peter Finch, only a couple of years younger. Their female co-star (Joanne Dru) was barely in the movie and her female role was completely eclipsed by a girl-in-a-bar cameo from Yvonne Furneaux. You got the feeling that if Errol had been the one to choose, Yvonne would have been his girl. Anyhow, girls in this movie are entirely incidental. So was Errol's man-at-arms, who had barely two lines to rub together, but he expressed himself manfully with stern expressions nonetheless. He passed, and received, items from the lead actor with all the aplomb due from any nervous young actor, whose first big movie role put him cheek by jowl with the legend that was Errol Flynn. Patrick McGoohan was the black and white chequered knight, with the yellow plume, and shoulder-length, honey-blonde hair. Patrick McGoohan was no spring chicken himself, at 26 or 27, but he had been a late starter, not acting professionally until he was 22. Within five years he had graduated from a small theatre in Sheffield, England, to the technicolor company of the biggest movie-star in the world. He must have been proud.
Movie-goers got full value for their box-office shilling in this film. Errol is in almost every scene. The film opens with the ending of a war between England and France. A truce has been reached and peace is meant to reign. I won't go into the politics, but in this movie, the French Nobles are unhappy that the son of Edward III is a fair-minded fellow who tells the French peasantry that they no longer have to pay unreasonable taxes and perform other onerous duties for their aristocracy. The Nobles decide to rebel, and break the truce. Leading this treachery is Peter Finch's 'Count d' Evil'..... Viewers are left in no doubt as to which side to be on! Any doubts are settled when d'Evil sends men under-cover to try and assassinate the English prince. The plot is foiled, with the help of sturdy man-at-arms, McGoohan, who clashes steel with the bad guys as he defends his principal man. As the plot is averted, Flynn rides out with an expeditionary force, seeking revenge and to bring the evil one to justice.
The conflict goes badly for Flynn at first. He appears to only have about twenty knights so how he thought he could win, is a bit of a puzzle. Presumably the Mirisch knight-budget was a little thin. Soundly thrashed by an equally colourful, but more numerous French force, Errol Flynn is forced to go under cover. McGoohan's faithful manservant is assumed dead. Errol finds a touch of romance in a French country pub with Yvonne, but more importantly lays his hands on a spare set of armour, hanging above the fireplace. Blackened from long exposure to the sooty smoke, we discover how Edward's son became The Black Prince! In purloining the armour Flynn unfortunately awakes Christopher Lee, who appears to have a slight Norfolk accent. I have read Mr. Lee suffered a broken finger in the ensuing swordfight. He should feel fortunate not to have died, because his character does.
The Black Prince ingratiates himself into the evil one's French force by the simple expedient of remaining unrecognised by: 1) shaving off his moustache; 2) keeping his helmet down as much as possible and calling himself Edouard, rather than Edward. Once in the enemy castle the prince has a number of nocturnal adventures which finally result in his rescuing the damsel Dru, who has been taken hostage. He has finally been rumbled however. The evil one's superior, the French Constable, knows Edward personally and the francophile name-tweak fools him not for an instant. In a desperate chase The Black prince gets the damsel back to his castle and a mighty siege ensues.
The English seem hopelessly outnumbered (again) but finally come up trumps by setting a fire-trap for the invading French army, who blunder to a burning barrage of straw bales. Victory is achieved and the girl gets a big Flynn kiss.
Best of all though, one of the cheering knights is none other than Patrick McGoohan, in his black and white chequerboard outfit. He didn't die after all! -
Kingum234111 February 2007But I think it's one of Flynn's best older films.
Plot is good, solid medieval action. Edward Prince has won a battle over the French, now he stays in France to rule it. French Knights don't want English lords lording over them. So they first try to assassinate him, then kidnap his lady, Joan of Kent. Edward tries to rescue her, fails, has a sword fight, joins the enemy to learn their plans, tries to rescue her again, etc, until the final big battle where the good guys have to win if it's going to make sense.
I do want to say that Errol is 46 in this film. That is not too old an age to fight as a knight. In the medieval times, the aged warrior was the most qualified to lead younger knights. He had the experience that was vital, for there was no professional Arny as we know it in those day. A man with experience in battle was more important than youthful energy. Nobles in those days would go into battle, on horseback in the front line, well past their 70th year. So Errol running around in armor at his age is not an error. In fact, The real Black Prince Edward was still fighting wars at Errol's age, albeit he died of illness when he was 7 days short of his 46 birthday. And Errol was a heavy drinker so maybe thats why he doesn't look the part. But I thought it was OK.
The love story has stuff added in such as the kidnapping, but the love between Errol and Joanna is not contrived, as history tells us Prince Edward and Joan of Kent loved each other very much. Prince Edward had a crush on her since boyhood as they grew up together. but when he grew up he decided after he to marry her off to a lordly friend of his. But after he told Joan his intention, she professed her deep love for Edward, perhaps in a similar scene as the movie shows it. Edward decided Joan was better off as his wife, not his friend. They were first cousins so that was frowned upon, but the Pope gave his permission so they were married in England and THEN went to France to rule.
In the movie Joanna Dru is too young compared to Errols age. The real Joan of Kent was two years the elder of Edward. So she should be 48 years old in the movie.
Peter Finch is a great French Knight, not a demon rebel. You can feel sorry for him, how he hates seeing France under the thumb of Edward. But in the end, you don't shed a tear at his death. But you say, there were brave men on both sides and this movie jolly well shows that bravely.
Watch it for a good time. -
ma-cortes12 April 2017It is set during the 14th century, in the Hundred-Year War . Edward IV (the pudgy Errol Flynn) served as the king's representative in Aquitaine , where he and his cousin Joan of Kent kept a court which was considered among the most fashionable of the time . It was the resort of exiled kings such as James IV of Majorca and Peter of Castile . Prince Edward of Wales is the son of King Edward III (Michael Hordern) of England and he also is the heir to the English throne . This moving film deals with the rebel French knights led by the nasty Count De Ville (Peter Finch) who resent his power in French Aquitain and scheme to kill Edward IV . Then , there takes place the Prince Edward's brave rescue of the widow Lady Joan (Joanne Dru) and his children from the clutches of the villainous count and his hoodlums .
Swashbuckling/historic movie with the old hero Errol Flynn who proves still some his feats , as fighting , batting , and sword-play against the evil enemies , but he buckles his way gallantly through this stirring actioner . Also the last Errol Flynn to see along with ¨Against all flags¨, ¨Master of Balantry¨ and ¨Crossed swords¨.
The picture is partially based on real events ; the true facts were the followings : The English army occupies French Aquitaine , but rebel French knights vow to continue the war and oust Prince Edward of Wales, English ruler of French Aquitaine . He served as the king's representative in Aquitaine, where he and Joan kept a court which was considered among the most fashionable of the time. It was the resort of exiled kings such as James IV of Majorca and Peter of Castile . Peter of Castile, thrust from his throne by his illegitimate brother Henry of Trastámara , offered Edward the lordship of Biscay in 1367, in return for the Black Prince's aid in recovering his throne. Edward was successful in the Battle of Nájera , in which he soundly defeated the combined French and Castilian forces led by Bertrand Du Guesclin. However Peter did not pay fully and refused to yield Vizcaya , alleging lack of consent of its states . Edward retreated to Guienne by July . Edward lived in a century of decline for the knightly ideal of chivalry . On one hand, after capturing John the Good, king of France, and Philip the Bold, his youngest son, at the Battle of Poitiers, he treated them with great respect — at one point he gave John permission to return home, and reportedly prayed with John at Canterbury Cathedral. Notably, he also allowed a day for preparations before the Battle of Poitiers so that the two sides could discuss the coming battle with one another, and so that the Cardinal Périgord could plead for peace. However, some argue "he may have been playing for time to complete preparation of his archers' positions . The Black Prince returned to England in January 1371 and died on 8 June 1376 , at 46th years old , after a long-lasting illness that was probably amoebic dysentery contracted ten years earlier while campaigning in Spain .
The motion picture shot in England was professionally directed by Henry Levin , though has some flaws and gaps . Levin began working as director assistant and dialogue expert and subsequently graduated to direction features , and turned out movies in just about every genre over the next decades ; shooting entertaining pictures but more and less completely familiar and derivative stories . His heyday was in the 1960s , when he turned out several bright , fun and frothy sex comedies , notably : Come fly with me (1963) and Honeymoon hotel (1964) . He made several adventure movies as Genghis Khan , The wonderful world of Grimm Brothers , The bandit of Sherwood forest , The return of Montecristo and his greatest success : Journey to center of earth . Although Levin's forte was light comedies , one of his most interesting films were two dark , brooding westerns The Lonely Man (1957) and Desperados , both of of them played by Jack Palance . He also made two hit thrillers : Matt Helm and The Ambushers . He finished his career piloting made-for-television movies, and died on the final day of shooting Scout's Honor (1980). -
CinemaScope historical adventure from Allied Artists and director Henry Levin. In mid-14th century France, the English under King Edward III (Michael Hordern) have proven victorious in Aquitaine. Edward leaves the surviving French noblemen in possession of their estates as long as they remain loyal subjects, but the vengeful Comte De Ville (Peter Finch) vows to continue resisting the English presence. Edward leaves his son Edward the Black Prince (Errol Flynn) as the Duke of Aquitaine, and soon enough he finds himself at arms against De Ville and his army. The Black Prince must defeat De Ville once and for all, while also rescuing the fair Lady Joan (Joanne Dru) from the French.
This was the most expensive movie ever made by Allied Artists up to that time, and the production values nearly match any of the historical action pictures of the "A" studios. Flynn is looking haggard, and many of his action scenes are done behind a convenient helmet, allowing a more energetic stunt man to take his place. Flynn was reportedly often in his cups during filming, forgetting lines and drifting off. That's not too noticeable in the final product, although he does have a certain gleam in his eye during a few scenes. Peter Finch is good as the chief villain, although he makes no attempt to sound French. Future TV star Patrick McGoohan is clearly visible in an uncredited role as an English soldier, while Christopher Lee, also uncredited, plays a French knight who gets to sword fight with Flynn, an experience that Lee claims left him with a permanent injury. -
JLRMovieReviews22 August 2013Errol Flynn stars in what would be one of his last adventures, in this movie called The Dark Avenger AKA The Warriors. The story starts with the facts concerning the Hundred Years' War, which was between England and France for control of the French throne. As the film starts, we see a battle between the British and the French (on whose soil I'm not quite sure) just ending with French prisoners being taken, one of them being Peter Finch, who is not very acquiescent to the rule of the British and doesn't mind rebelling against them and inciting a revolt among the prisoners. In order to kill Prince Edward (Errol Flynn) and overcome their imprisonment, they devise a plan to kidnap a lady, whom they know Edward has taken a fondness for, and her two younger brothers. The rest of the film concerns her rescue. Such is the plot of this pretty understandable film. Some may say, and even I, after seeing the film for the first time, that it is rather simple and not terribly exciting. And, what adds to its awkwardness is the fact that Peter Finch is not too convincing as a Frenchman, considering the fact he was British. But it does have its good points, with Errol Flynn in his well-known genre of film, the lovely Joanne Dru (game-show host Peter Marshall's sister) and a plot you can follow. With good production values, including an unusually moving score, which I liked from the opening scene, this is one of Errol Flynn's turkeys that may not be that bad, if you'll only give it half a chance.
-
elo-equipamentos15 May 2020At School I'd learned about the legendary Hundred Years's war between England and France, probable the most hated enemies ever seen in the whole history, The Warrior starts when this war is over, at Aquitaine territory when the King Edward (Michael Horden) left his brave son Prince Edward A.K.A. Black Prince (Errol Flynn) as Duke of Aquitaine, henceforth the French nobles didn't agree with the term of surrender sign by his arrested King, mainly the powerful land's owner Comte De Ville (Peter Finch) who gathering force to expelled the English from their lands, Errol Flynn already is blatant aged by excessive abuse of booze and drugs, a pale shape of the glorious days, clearly perceived on sword fighting, the plot seemingly a bit bizarre and odd, therefore is great to see again the iconic Errol Flynn where he were most successful as the best swashbuckler on cinema industry, palatable at least, the DVD presentation on widescreen format, ensuring the quality!!
Resume:
First watch: 2020 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7 -
bkoganbing28 November 2004Years ago I read a book on the Hundred Years War by an English historian named Desmond Siward. The author's premise was that there is indeed an English and a French interpretation of the conflict. The English see it as a great period of glory and conquest in their history. The French look on it as a century of agony for their people. Professor Siward came down pretty hard on his fellow countrymen and said the French version is far closer to the mark.
Case in point is Edward, Prince of Wales, eldest son of Edward III of England and military genius bar none. He was in fact the architect and inspiration of their military victories at Crecy and Poitiers. Edward was also a pretty bloodthirsty guy who led a massacre at Limoges and also negotiated an alliance with the Castilian Ruler Pedro the Cruel. I'll let his name speak for itself.
The movie here has the English as liberators as Edward comes to the continent to enforce his father's claim on Aquitaine. In fact that had been part of the English crown through their descent from Eleanor of Aquitaine. In point of fact the Black Prince was there trying to enforce Dad's claim on the throne of France itself through his mother who was a daughter of the French king Philip IV the Fair. That was what the whole Hundred Years War was about, the English trying to conquer France, pure and simple.
An aged Errol Flynn who's dissipation is plainly showing is the Black Prince. He looks older than Michael Hordern who appears briefly as Edward III. I think Flynn may very well have been older than his "dad."
Joanne Dru plays Joan of Kent, widow of Sir John Holland and beloved of the Black Prince. The love story is one of the great medieval legends of Merrie Old England and maybe they should have made a film on just that. But Ms. Dru looks bored throughout. She was soooo much better in Red River, She Wore A Yellow Ribbon, and All the King's Men.
Peter Finch plays the "villain" Count Robert DeVille, deputy of the Constable of France, DuGuesclin who waged a successful guerrilla war against the English although it wasn't called that then. Finch is a villain because he and other nobles won't accept a peace treaty with England that their King John has signed in captivity. How rude of them. Finch is the best one in this film and he could easily have been written as the hero.
This was the last of Errol Flynn's swashbucklers and he was clearly getting too old for believable swordplay. -
Penfold-1326 September 1999Errol Flynn is Edward, the Black Prince, appointed Duke of Aquitaine to protect the English gains in the 100 Years War.
The Count of Aquitaine doesn't accept English rule, and so we need to have a lot of scenes of knights in armour battling it out to decide who wins, and who gets the girl. (No prizes for guessing who.)
It's colourful enough, and the swashes get vigorously buckled at regular intervals, but you've probably seen it all before. -
utgard1417 October 2016Errol Flynn stars as the Duke of Aqualung (or something like that) in this boring costumer about the English protecting the French from the other French. Errol's seen better days and at this point Technicolor was not his friend. Joanne Dru plays Errol's love interest. The two don't have particularly strong chemistry but the lifeless script could douse the raging fire in anyone's loins. Peter Finch plays the heavy and does fine. He's very British and movies like this are best suited for Brits. It was a chore to get through for me but I'm trying to be fair and see what others might be seeing. I just don't think it's much fun. Even the action scenes are dull.
-
bushrod5610 August 2005The reviewers here are full of semi-dismissive 'average, seen it before' type criticisms. Well now, I think if you take a good look at this thing you'll find a good amount of bone jarring, armor clanking broadsiding. Even the talk is entertaining- I guess I have a weakness for truculent knights shouting at each other about their 'rights' and 'honor' and so forth. Good stalwart English cast adds to the authenticity. Yeah, I know Joanne Dru is the boring weak link, but this is a guy flick and unless the ladies actually get naked the guys aren't going to care about them that much. And Errol sure did look every one of his 46 years; but Errol's still Errol to me, no matter. The VHS print is very crummy, too. If they could find a clean, widescreen print of this film and put it out on DVD, I'd snap it up in a minute!
-
malcolmgsw10 April 2020Whilst the film is entertaining it is sad to see Errol Flynn in such a dissipated condition.It is quite apparent that Flynn is not really involved in his fight scened.He wears a helmet most of the time so we can't see his double.As for ending up with Joanna Did he would go for someone much younger.
-
filipemanuelneto18 October 2022Who would have thought that the last swashbuckling film starring Errol Flynn, an actor who has excelled in countless fictional heroes, would be a film loosely based on the life of a real historical character? Yes, this film, now completely forgotten, brings us an obviously invented situation, but created around the figure, totally real, of the Black Prince. I, as a historian, will try to explain some of this...
As I think we all know that England and France fought a succession of wars during part of the Middle Ages, commonly called the Hundred Years' War. The focal point was sovereignty over a series of territories in present-day France and the right of English kings to the French throne. In 1066, centuries before, Duke William of Normandy, vassal of the French kings, conquered the English crown by arms, becoming king of a country without ceasing to be, as a French duke, vassal of the neighboring kingdom and lord of many lands there. In the following centuries, through the marriages of subsequent kings, more lands were added in Brittany, Anjou, Loire, Aquitaine, etc. When, in 1328, the French king dies without a direct heir, his sister claims the throne for her son, who is Edward III of England, nephew and closest male relative of the deceased... The French nobles, invoking a law that excluded succession by female line - called the Salic Law - refused to accept it and enthroned a cousin of the late king, the Count of Valois. The war that followed had great battles, mostly won by the English, which were led by Edward himself and his son, who is the Black Prince, so called because of the color with which he painted his armor. The prince's military brilliance, moreover, made him one of the main figures in the Hundred Years' War.
The script starts from the historical basis to create an appealing and attractive, romantic fiction, with its ideas of courtly love, chivalry, adventure. The fact is that the film works, but it is evident from the beginning that we are dealing with the modern vision of what the time and the conflict would have been like. There are glaring anachronisms, especially in the behavior of the characters, which were stranger to me than anything related to the actors' accents. It is not understandable how the English Crown Prince could simply think of pretending to be a mercenary in the pay of a noble infinitely less important than himself, and all because of a woman. It is something inconceivable to the medieval mentality.
Errol Flynn is a long way from his glory days here. The actor looks very tired, very worn out, and it is evident that his habitual alcoholism consumed him daily. Also, he just didn't have the vitality and youth left to play the character he was given. He knew this all too well, and it seems he only accepted the role for the money involved. Peter Finch is nice but has little to do really, and Joanne Dru was effective as a love interest, but she's not there for anything other than being saved.
Technically, the film has its merits, mainly because the production, in order to cut costs, knew how to make good use of the sets and costumes from other productions made shortly before, and which were of great quality. The cinematography also does not disappoint and is very beautiful, with its color, light and pleasant movement. The fight scenes look very artificial, naturally they are choreographed to the millimeter, but they manage to have the minimal effect they seek to achieve. -
BruceUllm30 November 2004Once you survive the numbing and typical pageantry which marks the beginning of the picture, the intrigue gets rather interesting. The lousy dub on this commercially purchased VHS tape is another obstacle. Alas, no DVD is available (though there are some crumby DVD dubs out there, too!).
However, once I adjusted the contrast, brightness and beefed up the color level (a lot), it was a viewable tale the got very slowly more interesting as time went slowly on. This picture marks Finch's rise and Flynn's decline (no more to swash and buckle after this). Compare his "Captain Blood" twenty years previous and you can see what time and booze did to poor Errol.
Joanne Dru certainly DID look bored throughout, as was mentioned earlier. Perhaps the whole thing was just a costume romp for her.
It's such a shame when a decent copy of the film is apparently unavailable from which to make copies. I find the same problem with the 1940 version of "Our Town." -
pmtelefon29 January 2023"The Warriors" (that's the title under which I saw this movie) is a pretty fun watch. It's kind of goofy in a "they don't make them like this anymore" kind of way and it's still a pretty easy time killer. Errol Flynn does a nice job (as always) but Peter Finch shines as the villain. Finch gives a very nice performance in this movie. Michael Hordern also does a very nice job. I wish Hordern was in more of the movie. There is a ton of action in this movie. With all of the knights in armor stuff going on I often got confused with who was who. The sets are big and the locations look good. The costumes also look good as does Joanne Dru. Despite its short running time (85 minutes), "The Warriors" overstays its welcome a little bit. All in all, I'm glad I watched this movie.
-
pixrox111 December 2021. . . the domestic release of THE DARK AVENGER (aka, THE WARRIORS) as the worst fate ever to befall our U. S. Homeland on a Sept. 11th. This film is not remembered Today as one of Mr. Flynn's best. It is no ROBIN HOOD, or even a CAPTAIN BLOOD. Errol does not play an avuncular father figure, as he did during his twilight decade in KIM. Instead, he is cast as the rich scion of a Fat Cat mob of self-proclaimed "overlords," more likely to steal from the Poor and give to the Rich than ROBIN HOOD was prone to do the opposite. Allied Artists' miscasting forced Mr. Flynn to try to make amends by filming and leading THE CUBAN REBEL GIRLS in Real Life a few years later, prompting a federal government Black Ops which assassinated him, under the cover story that he already had one foot and four more toes in his grave during the production of THE WARRIORS.
-
planktonrules14 October 2016For many viewers, perhaps a history lesson is due in order to understand this picture better. When William of Normandy felt he had a claim to the English throne, he crossed the English Channel from his lands in modern day France and defeated the English king, Harold. From 1066 up through much of the 15th century, the English Kings controlled not just England but much of their ancestral land in France. By the 14th century, the kingdom of France was small and weak...and the English king was not making a claim that he also had a right to the rest of France! And so, over the next century the French and English fought a series of wars collectively termed The Hundred Years War. The English were the early winners and it looked as if they'd take all of France but eventually the French not only regained lost territory but all of France....huzzah!
This picture picks up partway through the Hundred Years War--when the English were clearly doing very well. After all, they'd captured the French king and forced him to cede them even more land. And, apparently, the theater audiences are supposed to root for the English and against the French--which is odd for two reasons. Folks in America had no stake in all this, so I can't see why American audiences would have cared for one side versus the other. Second, telling everyone apart is very difficult as EVERYONE has either an English accent or, with Errol Flynn in the lead, an Aussie/American accent. Because I had no dog in the battle, so to speak, I really didn't root for anyone though I know Errol (playing Prince Edward) was supposed to be the hero. And, rooting for no one makes the film tough to care about one way or the other.
As far as the plot goes, Compte De Ville (Cruella's brother) is fighting on despite a truce ordered by the captured French King. Having the very English Peter Finch play De Ville was a bit odd and I would have preferred Jacques Tati or Marcel Marceau (at least they were French). Errol Flynn is Prince Edward (also called The Black Prince) and he spends much of the film posing as a mercenary in the hire of De Ville. However, instead of trying to save his life or England, he seems to spend all his energy trying to save a dumb Englishwoman who walked into a trap. You know that eventually the woman will be rescued...but it's a long and circuitous route until they get there.
The film looks decent since they re-used costumes from "Ivanhoe", but the story itself was a bit dull despite the costumes and castles. Not a terrible film but one that really had me longing for Flynn's earlier (and better) movies...ones where he did more of the stunts and fighting instead of having him wear a helmet and having a stuntman do most everything. Of interest mostly to completists who insist on seeing all of the star's films (like me, actually)...or English folks. Otherwise easy to skip. My advice is to see "Ivanhoe", "The Adventures of Robin Hood" or "The Vikings"--all much more enjoyable and interesting sword epics. -
HotToastyRag11 June 2020You know those jokes they made about Errol Flynn when he got older? If you watch Adventures of Don Juan, you'll think those people were mean to say he couldn't get over playing Robin Hood. If you watch The Warriors, you'll still think they were mean, but you'll understand why Flynn got that reputation. So, don't watch The Warriors.
Unlike the other swashbucklers he made when he had a few miles on him, like Don Juan and Crossed Swords, this one isn't tongue-in-cheek. That little bit of sarcasm makes all the difference in the world. If actors prance around obvious sets in cheap costumes reciting lines from a lousy script and try to take themselves seriously, it's a lot different than if they do it with a twinkle in their eyes. This one's pretty sad to watch, so you're better off watching an earlier movie with the dashing swashbuckler. -
coltras358 May 2021Yes he's 46; nothing odd in the 1950's or the 60's or 70's. Most actors playing heroes were at that age - Robert Taylor, Stewart Granger, Burt Lancaster etc - however, I agree that living in the fast Lane has taken a toll on Errol; he looks much wizened and puffy-faced than in Crossed Swords, but he still got the Midas touch, the X factor. A commanding presence. Errol is a natural born star, nothing really eclipses his ability, especially in this medieval adventure where Flynn as Prince of Wales fights against the rebel French forces of the Comte De Ville (Peter Finch) for king and country.
Set during the Hundred Years' War, the Dark Avenger ( or the Warriors) is a western in disguise, and has plenty of Villainous schemes, battles on the field, sword fights.
I first saw it on channel 4 ( UK TV channel) in the mid-90's and I was entertained. It's good not to read too much into this film, and just accept it for what it is - an enjoyable mediaeval romp with Errol Flynn putting the world for rights for one last time. -
mossgrymk6 May 2022If you've eaten a slice of bread two days past the time it has begun to go stale or drunk the last unsatisfying cold dregs of coffee left too long in a styrofoam cup then you will have some idea of what it is like to watch this Errol Flynn swashbuckler that does not swash and buckles under the weariness of being the final installment of a cycle long past its prime. Aside from lovely outdoor English countryside cinematography by Guy Green the film is tired, dull, derivative and pathetic with Flynn looking like the twin brother of the actor playing his dad rather than his son and acting as if he is four years away from a premature death which was indeed the case. Give it a C, for corpse.
-
Panamint5 June 2017There is a DVD of this movie that shows its excellent wide screen color cinematography. Another big plus factor of this movie is its basis in historical fact.
The Black Prince, portrayed by Errol Flynn, was a real person, the Prince of Wales in old England of the 1300's. He really did marry a noblewoman named Joan, here portrayed by Joanne Dru. Many of the characters portrayed in this move were real, such as the King of France who is correctly mentioned as a prisoner of England, and the Dauphin of France who was suddenly forced by circumstance to rule in his father's absence. But the big ultimate winner of all the warfare was French hero Bertrand du Guesclin, Constable of France, who is portrayed in this film. Although depicted here as losing a battle, du Guesclin really did eventually regain almost all of France from the English and other assorted groups. These characters are chronicled more fully in a fine book called "The Distant Mirror" by noted historian Barbara W. Tuchman. The book also documents the constant wars, castle sieges, attacks, counter attacks such as those presented in "The Warriors". Believe it or not, these guys really did run around in a bloody, crazy, messy hundred years of warfare all over France and parts of Italy and the Habsburg Empire. And the English did have a claim on Aquitaine and fought for a long time to retain it.
So the movie is not just swashbuckling for its own sake. For me, understanding that the circumstances and that the major figures presented here are historical adds a new perspective to what you might be tempted to call "just another swashbuckler". The only failing that I perceive to all this is that not much time can be allowed for character development (hence the Tuchman book for reference- its well written but really long).
Errol Flynn's acting is good as it always was throughout his career, but alas he is too dissipated to be able to swash many buckles, although he or his double do participate in some action scenes. Dru is not effective in her part which is only secondary to this film's story, but Peter Finch and others including a young Christopher Lee do a fine job in supporting roles. Yvonne Furneaux steals the movie from all these stars with a lovely fun performance.
So this film has a lot of action in a true historical perspective, is well made and features good wide-screen cinematography. I can't pigeon-hole this as "just a swashbuckler" because it is a historical film at the same time, and you can't just say "its another late Flynn" because in his late films he grew as an actor and still tried to deliver a performance while suffering the severe decline of his health related to alcoholism and heart failure.
"The Warriors" lacks depth but is overall a pretty good action movie. -
Sergiodave1 January 2022This movie was made only a few years before Errol Flynn died at 50, he was well past his best and had lost his good looks.. Peter Finch is definitely the best thing in this movie although that isn't saying much. If you're going to make a movie about one of the most famous knights in the history of England, there are lots of famous battles you could choose which would have been far better.
-
ArtVandelayImporterExporter10 December 2021Errol Flynn has always been my favorite male movie star. He had charisma, athleticism and self-deprecating charm. And as he often showed when cast in movies that got him out of leotards, he was a thoroughly convincing actor.
He also lived 5 lifetimes in 50 years. And here it shows. While still beautiful for a 46-year-old man, he's heavy and slow and sounds out of breath. It's a little sad to see a guy who burst onto the Hollywood scene barely 20 years prior as dynamic Captain Blood lumbering through a dull movie about Late Middle Ages swordplay.
The dialogue is stuffy and dull. The sets look like cheap styrofoam. And the battle in the field about a half-hour into the picture is so clumsily staged it looks like one of those Medieval Days battle recreations put on by the local historical society. Shortly thereafter they even plop in a nightclub/saloon singer scene. I was embarrassed for everyone involved.
It's obvious Flynn could still act. Why wasn't he cast in any mature dramas? Was it Hollywood producers or fickle audiences who refused to accept him in anything other than period costumes?
At any rate, you'd have to be a h@rdcore history buff to care about The Hundred Years War. I seriously doubt this ponderous movie is going to turn anybody into one. -
Hunt25468 October 2014Saw this 59 years ago and some of its images have remained buried in my unconscious, coming out at odd moments over the six tweener decades. Thus, when it hit DVD I had to check it out again. Yes, Flynn is 46 and looks like he just got stung by a jelly fish, and yes, when the swords and lances come out, the visor goes down so a real stud can do the man work, but it's a completely enjoyable romp. Unlike the Warner Bros costume pix, this one was filmed in real castles which add immeasurably to its interest; the English countryside, green and sunlit, also helps, as do first-class costumes, lots of horses and a stout cast of English yeoman actors playing English yeomen. Everyone's a pro and while Flynn hasn't the sparkle and elan of his younger days, he's a solid lad around which to build a medieval oater, even if Alan Hale had been dead five years when this one was before camera. Good music, good (but not great) fight choreography and toward the end a cast of at least a hundred make it a rouser. Plot is piffle, and it asks us to sympathize with English occupiers over French homeboys which isn't easy to do, but Peter Finch, mad as hell and not going to take it any more, makes a convincing Dastardly Villain. I've remembered him (SPOILER) getting a battle ax in the chest off a Flynn right hand pitch for 59 years, just as I've remembered the all the King's knights cheering at the end after they drove the Frenchies off. A nice revisit. One oddity: It was released in US as "The Warriors," which is certainly how it's known, to the extent that it's known at all. So why file it, Dr. IMDb, under the name "The Dark Avenger," since, btw, there's no avenging done anywhere in it, and it's so sunny and costume-crazed there's no dark here either.