The Man Who Would Be King (Widescreen Edition)

The rest is pure adventure as Connery and Caine search for a lost city of jewels across land never traveled by any "outsider" since Alexander the Great (hint hint). This is a must see if you ever wish to see Micahel Caine and Sean Connery teamed with John Huston's wonderful film.


Warning   January 18, 2004
J. T White (London, Ontario, Canada)
7 out of 7 found this review helpful

The film itself deserves a 5 star rating. It's great and deserves to be everyone's collection. However, be warned. This is an early DVD release (1997) and although the movie is only 129 minutes in length, at approximately the 73 minute mark the disc stops and you must eject the disc and manually flip it over to see the second half. If any movie deserves a re-release, "The Man Who Would Be King" does. A double layered, newly remastered edition with a few extras would be wonderful. (Almost all of the extras on this edition are script only, and the print is difficult to read.)


KIPLING+CONNERY+CAINE=PERFECTION   August 8, 2004
Annabelle Lee Adriano (The Philippines)
7 out of 7 found this review helpful

By a stroke of genuis and a bit of serendipity, John Huston managed to get hold of the only two actors in the world who can portray lovable rogues Peachy and Dan in Michael Caine and Sean Connery. Both obviously relish their roles here, and their spontaneous chemistry works perfectly. Like Rudyard Kipling's short story, the film is sheer delight from start to finish!


The Raj and The Craft   March 2, 2005
P. M Simon (New Mexico)
7 out of 7 found this review helpful

You can't get any better than this: Director-John Huston, from the nvoella by Rudyard Kipling. Starring Sean Connery and Michael Caine, with support from Christopher Plummer, Shakira Caine, and the gifted Saheed Jaffrey! Take that talent and set a ripping adventure yarn in the British Raj. Throw in a good soundtrack and passable location shots from Morocco and the Alps.

Could it get better? It does. A great Masonic theme from Kipling, who was himself a Mason and loved the craft as much as he loved the Raj and his cigars! Now spice it up with a clever script and wonderful chemistry between the stars.

Forget The Jewel in the Crown, Gunga Din, The Four Feathers, and even A Passage to India. This is the best film set in 19th century India.

The plot? Well, go buy the film and watch it! Let's say that Kipling's own words from The Ballad of the East and West ring true. And as for this movie, if we may paraphrase Rudyard, "A woman is only a woman, but if she marries a god, she smokes!"


Bittersweet Adventure With Loads of Atmosphere   June 19, 2005
Lily Bart (The House of Mirth)
7 out of 8 found this review helpful

So many people love this movie, and rightly so. As rugged adventurers who are also the best of friends, Sean Connery and Michael Caine reached their career peak as Daniel Dravot and Peachy Carnehan, respectively. But I think it's a mistake to call it an "action movie" or an "epic." For all the laughs and glamor, and the feel-good friendship of the two buddies, this movie is really a tragedy in the classical sense.

Don't watch this movie expecting RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, where the good guys win and everybody leaves the story happy and alive. It's terribly important to remember that though this movie came out just one year before STAR WARS, John Huston is miles away from the infantile zap-zap action of children like George Lucas and Steven Spielberg.

The movie charts the downfall of two men who try to rise too high, just like Icarus in Greek myth. Rudyard Kipling felt that men who serve in the ranks should not get "above themselves" and wrote this story to show what happens when such people get out of their place. At the same time, Kipling was trying to warn the English people that the British Empire would only last as long as the purpose was justice rather than greed.

Watching the movie, it's hard not to be torn. The two heroes fail in terms of empire building and politics, because they break faith with their native subjects one time too many. But at the same time, they never break faith with each other. The movie asks the question, can any person really be a failure if he/she has sacrificed everything for friendship? The final "defeat" of the pair is also final victory in that they maintain the one thing in their lives that was always above corruption -- their friendship. The bittersweet ending is complex and ambiguous, and signals that this is truly a masterpiece by giants of a nobler age.

John Huston is gone now, replace by pygmies like Spielberg and Lucas. They don't make movies like THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING.