Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

MonsterPerfect Good idea lost in the noise

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

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

jacobs-greenwood The story is set during the French Revolutionary period before Napoleon's rise; the monarchy still has its place, but shares some governmental powers with the peasants through an assembly. However, if a strong voice arises from among the peoples' representatives, they are quickly eliminated through a gentleman's duel, most often initiated by the superior swordsmen that support the King and Queen (Nina Foch appears briefly as Marie Antoinette): Mel Ferrer plays the Marquis de Maynes, the best swordsman in France, and Henry Wilcoxon plays his right-hand man Chevalier de Chabrillaine."He was born with a gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad" - Stewart Granger is perfect as Andre Moreau, a quick witted ladies' man with a mysterious parentage and no interest in politics. He has an on-going 'relationship' with the beautiful traveling show actress Lenore (Eleanor Parker was never sexier than as this volatile jealous redhead), but is enchanted as never before when he first meets Aline de Gavrillac (Janet Leigh, looking her Technicolor best as well). She is the comely one that the Queen has pointed out to her cousin the Marquis; she implies he needs to marry for respectability among the noble class.Andre was raised by Georges (Lewis Stone, who played the Marquis in the 1923 silent original) and Isabel (Elisabeth Risdon) de Valmorin with their younger son Philippe (Richard Anderson), but was financially supported by the previously unknown de Gavrillac. When Andre learns of this, his affections for Aline become more brotherly protective, much to her disappointment. When Philippe, who wrote a freedom pamphlet under the pen name Marcus Brutus, is discovered and then out-dueled by de Maynes, Andre - who witnessed the death - vows to avenge it.Escaping from the same fate and the pursuing de Chabrillaine, Andre hides among Binet's (Robert Coote) theater troupe - which employs Lenore - as the iconic masked clown and title character Scaramouche, while secretly training under de Maynes's exclusive fencing instructor Doutreval (John Dehner), a freedom 'brother' himself. When the Marquis discovers this, he nearly kills Andre before escaping again with help from Aline. Andre learns from Doutreval that his instructor Perigore (Richard Hale) still teaches in Paris, where the troupe then travels, earning an extended engagement much to Lenore's delight.While training under Perigore, Andre is recruited by Dr. Dubuque (John Litel) to join the peoples' assembly, where his considerable dueling skills are needed to even the odds. Andre agrees because it should give him another chance at de Maynes. But Aline and Lenore conspire to make sure the Marquis is in the company of the Queen at various other activities in lieu of being at the assembly. Meanwhile, Andre is challenged and subsequently eliminates several of de Chabrillaine's henchmen in sword duels.The two ladies successfully keep their men apart until the night de Maynes and Aline go to see the play Scaramouche. When Andre notices the Marquis in attendance, he takes off his mask and swings up into his box to pursue him in a duel - the longest in movie history - that travels from box-to-box, down a hallway and a stairway, into the audience and across the theater, backstage and then onto the stage itself before Andre has de Maynes defeated, though he can't bring himself to finish it. Andre discards his sword and leaves. Later, he learns from de Valmorin that the Marquis is actually his brother, the reason he couldn't complete his revenge. Listening in the wings is a tearful Lenore, who reminds Andre that he's now free to wed Aline, which he does as the film ends while Lenore is seen in the company of Bonaparte.

ianlouisiana Jimmy Grainger,lovely chap that he was,did not take many of his roles too seriously.Certainly in "Scaramouche"(more erudite pens than mine have gone to a lot of trouble in filling out the historical context) he had a lot of fun and even in his unhappy moments his sense of fun was never too far hidden. A nice line in striped tights did little to hide the fact that his legs were a bit muscular for a fencer,and Mr Mel Ferrer was much better equipped to wield the epee which he does with much aplomb. In the climactic swordfight(which was a devil of a long time coming,I must say)he comprehensively outplays Jimmy but contrives to lose;almost as though he was betting against himself. The French revolution is a fertile ground for film makers with good goodies and horrible baddies although I must say Miss Nina Foch made Marie Antoinette into a far more likable character than is usual. Thousands of innocents went to Madame La Guillotine in a bloodletting that is chilling to contemplate 220 - odd years later. But real life is never allowed to sneak into "Scaramouche",and it is all the better for it. All the same,if I was Mr Mel Ferrer I would be asking to see the judges' cards.......

Maddyclassicfilms If you love seeing dashing leading men running around in tight trousers,with sword fighting left right and centre then Scaramouche is right up your street.There are many scenes that wouldn't seem out of place in a silent comedy act and you actually don't need dialogue in many parts as everything is conveyed in the actors faces and actions.Credited with what is the longest on screen duel between Stewart Granger and Mel Ferrer this is a film filled with boundless energy,action and a mischievous spirit.This 1952 offering is a remake of the 1923 film of the same name.Set during the days of The French Revolution,Scaramouche follows the dashing playboy Andre Moreau(Stewart Granger)who is the illegitimate son of a wealthy nobleman.He is in love with the feisty and beautiful travelling player Lenore(Eleanor Parker)who tired of waiting for him to return to her agrees to marry a wealthy man who showers her with diamonds.On the day of her wedding Andre wins her back and she agrees to marry him instead.He ends up having to leave her when his best friend Phillipe De Valmorin(Richard Anderson)is suspected of writing material supporting the Revolution and writing under the name Marcus Brutus.The two go on the run and come up against the best fencer in all of France(who is also the cousin of Queen Marie Antoinette).The Marquis DeMaynes(Mel Ferrer)who after killing Phillipe makes an enemy in Andre who trains in the art of fencing to avenge the death of his friends.To escape the clutches of the Maquis Andre meets up with Lenore's travelling troupe and assumes the identity of masked comedian Scaramouche.It all leads to a breathtaking showdown in a Paris theatre that's a must for fans of sword fights.Try and see past the illogical and frankly daft plot holes that pop up along the way and just get lost in it's humour and fun.Featuring an enchanting performance from Janet Leigh as Aline De Gavrillac De Bourbon who may be Andre's half sister,who is also engaged to the Maquis.If your a fan of the dashing Stewart Granger and love adventure films filled with romance then this is one you should enjoy.

gpeevers Scaramouche is a reasonably average swashbuckling Technicolor extravaganza with great sword fights, but the story, the characters and the performances just didn't impress me as much as I had hoped.Set in France in the period leading up to the French Revolution we follow the story of André Moreau the bastard son of a nobleman. Initially a carefree young man living off an allowance he is spurred to action by the death of his principled friend. Andre hides out with a theater troupe where he adopts the character of Scaramouche a clown while he contemplates how he can avenge his friend's death. There are a number of intertwined sub plots which are fairly convoluted for a film of this type.When Scaramouche is compared to other swashbuckling epics such as; Robin Hood, Captain Blood or even The Sea Hawk all of which were made 10 or more years earlier, it pales in comparison. Director George Sidney isn't Michael Curtiz, Stewart Granger certainly isn't Errol Flynn and Mel Ferrer isn't Basil Rathbone or Claude Rains. Of all the principles only Vivien Leigh compares adequately to her predecessors.These are not the only deficiencies in the film though, it appears that the story upon which the film was based had considerably more depth and likely could have been adapted better. In all likelihood parts of the story should have been sacrificed to make the story flow better.The production values (costumes, sets, music, etc) are all OK but nothing stands out, perhaps my opinion is affected by my overall opinion of the film but I didn't find anything memorable here.The film despite its deficiencies isn't without its charm and for fans of the era and genre it will likely provide enjoyment. The sword-fights and the rich Technicolor picture just weren't enough for me to see it as anything more than mediocre.The film is based on a novel by Rafael Sabatini who also penned The Sea Hawk and Captain Blood.