Average Customer Review:
 ( 149 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
75 of 82 found the following review helpful:
 Appreciate this film for what it is supposed to be!Jan 13, 2003
By Don Graeter
"dgraeter"
I am very surprised at the number of negative comments about this film. My wife and I both loved it. We found the action scenes and cinematography to both be exceptional. I agree with the criticism that the retreat of the British troops to "form a square" seemed a bit out of kilter in that they seemed almost hopelessly surrounded but somehow escaped. To us, however, this was a small blemish on very believeable action sequences and a very entertaining story. I have seen the 1939 version several times and enjoyed it, but this was much better to me. Those who seem to have a problem with this movie seem to have standards few historical action films would meet. Perhaps they just don't enjoy the genre. I happen to enjoy films such as the Daniel Day-Lewis version of The Last of the Mohicans, The Patriot, etc. If you enjoy those type films, you will almost certainly enjoy this one. If you don't, you won't. This film is not totally true to the book. So what? It's a darn good movie! Just relax, be transported back to the heyday of the British Empire and enjoy a good historical action film with a love story and beautiful action scenes and suspense.
22 of 23 found the following review helpful:
a filmDec 05, 2005
By Rory B.
As a novel, the Four Feathers is an extremely introspective and psychological work, which obviously poses significant problems for whoever intends to adapt it. In reality there is very little action in the book, apart from a very quick knife fight, which again poses problems. I would hazard a guess that the Four Feathers' reputation as a "Victorian epic" is based more in the earlier renditions of the film, rather than in the novel. This new version departs from the novel in a number of ways, but I would argue that this is its' strength, rather than weakness. The filmmakers obviously saw potential in the setting and basic plot of the story, but decided to take it in their own direction. Some would call that blasphemy, but a film is not a book. Maybe the filmmakers looked at the Four Feathers, and didn't WANT to make a movie that was as close to the book as humanly possible. It's their prerogative- because they aren't rewriting the novel-they're making the movie.
Adapting a novel into a film is always tricky, especially when the novel was written a century ago. A lot can change in a hundred years. Still, enough can remain the same, that many fans of the original will nail you to the wall for every inaccuracy and alteration. In the case of "the Four Feathers" there are so many ways you can criticize the new film, that it's almost laughable. Read one or two of the negative reviews below, and you'll see complaints about plot holes, deflated characters, anti-imperialism, and failing to pay homage to the original 4 or 3 or 11 other versions that exist(I've lost count, because I obviously don't care). I'm not going to talk about what "the Four Feathers" isn't, but rather what it IS.
It is a film with breathtaking cinematography, which displays the haunting and forbidding landscape of the Sudan, from the rolling dunes of sand, to the blasted wastes. The film offers a look at a cross section of Imperialism, through the eyes of those affected- from the soldiers enforcing the rule to the people under it. I would disagree with those reviewers who see it as a dig against British tradition alone, but more against the traditions and beliefs that fuelled and supported Imperialism as a whole.
In closing, I'd just like to mention one of the many departures from the book that I felt strengthened the film, was the portrayal of Harry's reasons for refusing to fight. In the book, Harry has already done a tour of duty in India, and it is clear his reasons for refusing, is the thought of leaving Ethne. In the film, he makes some comment about "What does the Queen have to do with Africa" but in reality, that is a ploy, I feel. I think that Harry really is a coward, at least in the Victorian sense. He does not want to fight in war, because he is afraid. But when it comes down to protecting and proving himself to his friends, Harry is able to overcome his fears. Not bad. Not bad at all.
41 of 53 found the following review helpful:
 Harry of the SudanOct 05, 2002
By MICHAEL ACUNA
Shekhar Kapur's "Elizabeth" was a marvel: incisive, ultra-dramatic, personal, romantic, intimate yet realized on a grand, epic scale. So it was with a great amount of expectation that I approached Kapur's new film, "The Four Feathers."
"The Four Feathers tells the story of one Leftenant Harry Haversham who, upon learning that his regiment is going to fight a war in Sudan, resigns his commission. In 1880 England this is an extreme act of Cowardice and a white feather is the physical manifestation of this cowardice. He is sent four: three from his fellow soldiers and one from Ethne Eustace (Kate Hudson), his fiancé.
The very weak link in this film is Harry's reason for resigning: "I am scared," he says. But not too scared to take it upon himself to go to the Sudan and pose as a Muslim warrior to protect his friends; one in particular, his best friend Jack (Wes Bentley). Huh?
Kapur has directed this film with a firm grasp of all the physical elements: the physical production is flawless and the desert has not looked this beautiful since "Lawrence of Arabia."
The acting is first rate with Heath Ledger, Kate Hudson (a big departure from her role in "Almost Famous"), Wes Bentley and Djimon Hounsou all very effective.
The is a film told on a grand scale with sweeping panoramas, huge, bloody, violent battle scenes and thousands of extras milling about. What it lacks is a personal point of view that would elevate all the physical elements into something that would touch us emotionally: "Four Feather's" is like a big, beautifully wrapped gift with nothing inside. It's emotionally empty and tragically vacant.
11 of 13 found the following review helpful:
From Cowardice to Redemption.Apr 07, 2005
By Maximiliano F Yofre
"Maxi"
When I was at my early teens, every Wednesday's afternoon, I and my school mates had an unavoidable rendezvous: going to the Theater to see "Action Matinee Show".
During those unforgettable sessions I enjoyed "The Lives of a Bengal Lancer" (1935), "The Charge of the Light Brigade" (1936), "Gunga Din" (1939) and "The Four Feathers" (1939) amongst other action classics.
The story that impresses me more was that of the "coward" Harry Feversham, possibly because at that age kids are unsure of themselves and are afraid to be afraid.
I've never seen the original version again. So when this remake was announced I was eager to see it.
Notwithstanding all the negative reviews, I really enjoy this movie.
Why? Well here are my points:
First there stands the story. Young Harry entering the military under family tradition pressure. He enjoys comradeship but he is not willing to go to war and shed blood (his or others).
When his regiment goes to war he resigned his commission. He is stigmatized by his friends and fiancée as coward and four white feathers sent to him.
His engagement is broken, his father despises him. In other words his world explodes. When he most needed a kind word or a loving caress he founds rejection.
It comes to my mind the scene from "Band of Brothers" when a private is suffering form hysterical blindness and a well meaning word from his Lieutenant works the miracle: he regain sight and courage.
Harry overcomes his fears and rushes to Sudan to help his friends. From this point onwards, adventures flow unceasingly.
Second the very good photography in charge of the experienced and always effective Robert Richardson, who has authored amongst other: "Platoon" (1986), "The Horse Whisperer" (1998) and after the present movie "Kid Bill" 1 & 2 (2003-4). All his skill is shown in the battle scenes.
Third, actors & actress perform solidly: Heath Ledger as Harry Feversham, Djimon Hounsou outstanding as Abou Fatma, Kate Hudson as the fiancé and the rest of the cast in supporting roles.
Lastly, director Shekar Kapur has done a correct job. Unfortunately general public was expecting more from him due to his very successful previous film "Elizabeth", but honestly he can't be blamed of incompetence, just of not being outstanding always.
It is a very good film for action, adventure or past wars fan. If you enter any of these categories you'll not be disappointed!
Reviewed by Max Yofre.
11 of 13 found the following review helpful:
 Very disappointingApr 22, 2003
By Machiavelli
"Machiavelli"
Oh dear! I bought this on the back of Kapur's fabulous "Elizabeth" which, although it also presented a revisionist view of history, was well-acted, well-scripted and fun to watch. This is a "politically-correct" version of the story: the hero is not the white, Anglo-Saxon protestant Harry Faversham (as in the book) but the black Muslim who finds him in the desert (not in the book) who saves Harry on a monotonously regular basis. The film fails on all levels: the accents are dodgy (Heath Ledger and Wes Bentley fail to convince), there is no real explanation of Harry's initial cowardice, and real men don't blub (at least, not in the Victorian era): Harry blubs a lot. Kate Hudson looks pretty but is not a well-rounded character: it is difficult to see why all the young men fall for her, still less explicable is her complete volte-face in her view of war and Harry's "cowardice". One moment she gives him a white feather, the next she is into bouts of "why didn't I stand by him" self-flagellation. Harry's father also - suddenly and inexplicably - switches from military martinet to cuddly daddy. The film is bitty and unsatisfying: it is, however, beautifully shot. That alone, however, does not justify buying the DVD or even (to be brutally frank) two hours of your time - not even on a wet Sunday afternoon.
See all 149 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
based on 149 reviews
![The Forbidden Kingdom (Two-Disc Special Edition) [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51JC%2BFhQYOL._SL75_.jpg "The Forbidden Kingdom (Two-Disc Special Edition) [Blu-ray]")
