Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Disturbing yet enthralling

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

The problem with this movie isn't so much the hokey dialogue, the relatively cheap sets, and the slapdash makeup. The story isn't bad, but it never gets as gripping as Max Steiner's spectacular musical score suggests it should be.There are a few good battle scenes and a good jousting match, but only Rex Harrison (in absurd makeup as Saladin) and George Sanders (as Richard the Lionheart) give the film any substance. Virginia Mayo still looks like Cody Jarrett's wife in WHITE HEAT; this is a substandard performance for her. For that matter, Rex Harrison still looks like 'Enry 'Iggins, despite all the soot they've smeared on his face to make him look like a Kurd.This is a fun film, but I can bring myself to give it five stars, because it was somewhat boring. It's campy, but not campy enough to be enjoyable from start to finish.At least I saw it in a widescreen German print (in English); to my knowledge there has been no video widescreen release of this film in any format.

King Richard and the Crusaders is an entertaining movie, with plenty of action, nice costumes, some good scenery, and a fast-moving plot. Everything you would normally want from an adventure movie.However, the script is horrible, many of the actors are completely miscast, the actual story is pretty poor, and it has next to nothing to do with the Crusades. It is not Crusaders versus Saracens. It is Good Crusaders and Good Saracens versus Bad Crusaders. Also, they most certainly do not have a cast of thousands, looking like it has a very low budget.As a result, if you are looking for a historically accurate epic about the Third Crusade, you will be disappointed. Although it is not a great movie, it is underrated, being far better than a lot of other adventure movies, and is overall entertaining.If you want to enjoy it, simply do not go into the movie looking for an award winning script and brilliant acting.

Hollywood was in the business of producing entertainment and not necessarily historical documentaries. I consider this film to be a very good action-packed movie, the kind we would expect when going to the movies on a Saturday night when we were younger. It's just great sitting through this one.I like George Sanders in this role as he has more scope here as Richard the Lionhearted, and at least he isn't a cad or the usual bad character as in most of the other films he's done, so it's a nice change.Laurence Harvey is just fine as Sir Kenneth, the loyal Scotsman, and portraying a Scot he displays their usual staunch reserve by nature, quite in character I thought.Of course Rex Harrison as Saladin is the master showman here, wily and filled with crafty schemes, at the beginning he manages to work his way into his enemies' camp, in the guise of a physician sent there by Saladin to treat Richard's wound as he has been laid low by a poisoned arrow shot at him. Luckily he survives.Lovely Virginia Mayo lights up the screen in my view with her exquisite beauty and although she doesn't have a really fulfilling role, her portrayal of Lady Edith is well done.It's good entertainment with lots of action and should be appreciated as such. I'm glad to add it to my collection.

Have to admit I didn't read Sir Walter Scott's "The Talisman" in which this film is supposed to be based on. If "King Richard and the Crusaders is a good version of the book I'm glad I didn't.This movie is sort of colorful with some acceptable gowns (I didn't say accurate), Virginia Mayo has some good profile shots (I didn't say scenes), George Sanders renders an acceptable performance as the title character and Robert Douglas plays fine one of his usual costume villains. And that's about all.The medieval extravaganza looks definitely as a low budget one with not much credible situations, lots of full speed horseback riding towards nowhere, standard swordplay and that originally ridiculous undercover doctor (Saladin himself) curing his enemy Richard wounded by an arrow thrown by his own men. Nobody understands either why really Douglas wants to kill his king; I mean they say why, but its not enough reason (too standard). And there's one of the most insipid and dull heroes ever in a medieval film: Laurence Harvey as Kenneth The Leopard with a blonde wig, a wooden acting and ridiculous lines in his romantic scenes with Mayo (it's hard to understand how Harvey went into a reasonable film career if his first roles where like this one).The only explanation for this picture being made could be that the producers tried to take advantage of the ticket box's success of "Ivanhoe" (based on Walter Scott's best novel) and "Knights of the Round Table" both released a short time before. If my guess is right, they failed completely.