Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

When I was just 12, back in 1961, we had a Cornell University student from Kenya who often stayed at our home for a couple of years; he was actually the first Kenyan long distance runner to make his mark in the U.S. I was too young to join in the conversation, but I remember Stephen talking about the political situation in Kenya and mentioning the Mau Mau crisis of several years before. I wish I could go back now and be a part of that discussion.I thought this was a good film. Not perfect. I'm sure liberties were taken in the writing of the script that probably compromised historical accuracy. But it still, I think, gives you a sense of the time and the tensions, and shows us once again how futile -- and just plain wrong -- the earlier white domination of Africa was. Rock Hudson is very good here...except for one scene which stuck out because he was smiling in a situation where that was not appropriate. Dana Wynter is excellent as Hudson's young wife; not sure why she wasn't a more popular actress. Sidney Poitier has any number of films with a stronger performance, but he's good here. I always enjoy the actress Wendy Hiller, here as a mother.This film is worthwhile watching because it covers a part of history unknown now to most Americans.

It's the age-old "children are color-blind, adults are racist" theme in Something of Value. Rock Hudson and Sidney Poitier grew up together as children, and now in their young adulthood, they're still incredibly close. They laugh, play, hunt, and talk together, even though Rock's family doesn't really think it's right. One day, while hunting for sport, Sidney gets a little miffed that he's not allowed to shoot the gun. Rock tries to explain that it's just the way things are, but Robert Beatty, the mean brother-in-law, intervenes. He slaps Sidney's face and orders him to never argue with his superiors again. Rock is heartbroken and Sidney bursts into tears—I actually turned the movie off during that scene, I was so upset.After having a glass of water, taking a walk outside, and giving myself a talking-to, I decided to turn the movie back on and continue watching it. After all, the actors' heart-wrenching performances were benefits of the film, right? If I was so shaken up by that horrible scene, that meant the film was well written and crafted, right? So, I dried my tears and pressed play.The rest of the film follows Sidney as he runs away from home and joins a rebellious group who fight back against their British captors. Rock just wants his friend back, but Sidney is too far gone, and has become angry and full of hate. It's a pretty violent, upsetting film, showing both the creation and sustention of deep-seeded racism on both sides. If that's the type of movie you like, go ahead and watch this, but I wish I'd never given it a second chance. I don't like movies like this; my heart is far too sensitive.Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to racially upsetting scenes and violence, I wouldn't let my kids watch it.

Sidney Poitier and Rock Hudson portray two Kenyans, raised as near brothers, who find their paths in life diverging wildly as they enter young manhood. After suffering indignity at the hands of white men and seeing his father imprisoned by the colonial authorities, Poitier's Kimani becomes a freedom fighter/terrorist within the "Mau Mau" insurgency. The film concerns the efforts of Peter (Hudson) to reach a peaceful agreement with Kimani, and with Kimani's own inner struggle with the violence of revolution.It's a solid film, though perhaps not a "great" film for whatever reasons..... one of which is a boring and largely unnecessary romantic subplot with Hudson and the dull Dana Wynter, looking and feeling for all the world like a second-rate Liz Taylor. I thought Hudson's acting was quite powerful for the most part, especially in the scene when he first arrives home from the war. Poitier blows him off the screen, of course, and we wish that the film gave them equal time (where was the romance between Kimani and his wife?), but Hudson isn't the total loss that some of the reviewers here have made him out to be. Indeed, he could have attempted an accent, but that would have been dangerous; surely Poitier mastered his Kenyan accent because he had much more to lose, and to gain, from a film concerning political turmoil in Africa.The film struggles to maintain some kind of balance; it depicts the Mau Mau as thoroughly "savage", yet also reveals the torture and lies of the British colonialists. There are moments of really breathtaking stylized violence that could still shock audiences. It's a difficult line to walk, and a view emerges in which basically no one, except perhaps the next generation, is the winner. It's a respectable viewpoint, considering that the conflict was still ongoing at the time of the film's production. Some parallels between the "equal rights" demanded by Kimani and the situation in America at the time must have made some distributors and audiences nervous, but the film does not try to push these parallels in any obvious way.Before closing, mention should be made of Miklos Rozsa's extraordinary score; indeed, extraordinary even for Rozsa, as it combines the whine of the electronic theramin with "tribal" rhythms and chanting.

Sidney Poitier is excellent in this study of Kenya's fight for independence and backlash against their former oppressors. William Marshall, Michael Pate and Wendy Hiller are superb in poignant supporting performances. But, Rock Hudson is terribly miscast, and his character too good, even beyond sainthood. And the focus on his character ultimately throws the movie off-balance. Still worth watching though, but it's a bit of a shame since the elements of greatness are all here, but the result is thought-provoking but unsatisfying. 7/10.