The Four Feathers

2002 "Freedom. Country. Honor. Passion. To save his best friend, one man must risk everything he loves."
6.5| 2h12m| PG-13| en| More Info
Released: 20 September 2002 Released
Producted By: Paramount Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

A young British officer resigns his post when he learns of his regiment's plan to ship out to the Sudan for the conflict with the Mahdi. His friends and fiancée send him four white feathers as symbols of what they view as his cowardice. To redeem his honor, he disguises himself as an Arab and secretly saves their lives.

Watch Online

The Four Feathers (2002) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Director

Shekhar Kapur

Production Companies

Paramount Pictures

The Four Feathers Videos and Images
View All
  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew

The Four Feathers Audience Reviews

TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film
Ploydsge just watch it!
Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one
Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;
KineticSeoul This movie is not the flick with those good emotional drama that tugs at you nor does it feel like it has heart to it. In fact I was quite bored with this movie and quickly lost the intention for it. Now I haven't read the novel but after watching this flick I don't really feel like it. But it did sort of caught me off guard since I thought it was gonna go in that "The Count of Monte Cristo" direction but it didn't really. The thing is this movie fails to leave that impact even near the end. The transition from a guy starting out as a coward becoming heroic is done in a manner where there isn't a single gripping moment in the entire movie. Heath Ledger and Wes Bentley seemed to do well, at least with what they were given. But Kate Hudson who plays the love interest between the two male leads is the most dis-likable character in this movie. Despite her not even being in the movie much. This is pretty much a bland and over drawn out movie that becomes very predictable early on.4/10
johnbridger The only people who could think this a good film are those who have never read the book or the good film version. The screenplay is a typically awful Hollywood travesty which only goes to show the absolute dirth of writing talent in modern movie-land.The acting itself isn't nearly as bad as the writing and I do think the cast would not have looked half as dire had they been given a script and an adaptation that was even half decent.I would not recommend wasting your time watching this tripe, get the book and enjoy that instead. Alternatively get one of the other versions which, whilst not perfect are a hundred times better than this nonsense.
Blueghost There's a lot of stunning imagery in this pic, but the director's aim here is to educate the public on the political realities of empire building; foreign and domestic. The director is not sympathetic to the British in any way, and it shows in this film.We have some superb cinematography for an historic epic focusing on four disparate comrades of "Her Majesties Army". But note, we don't come to sympathize with any of them. We don't come to care for any of them. We don't get attached to a single protagonist. One wonders why that is.It's because we're truly looking at a historical drama that asks us to follow the characters from A to B to C, but only from the vantage of a distant viewer, and as audience members engaged in the emotional outcome of the drama, we're left high and dry in this regard. This is a very objectifying work. We see the harsh realities of colonial warfare, but there's no sense of wanting or needing some or any of the characters to live. We're almost looking at an anti-British film. Something that comes near to being pro-Islam, but is more anti-colonial in its stance than a prostelizatizn of some other political thought.But, does that make it a bad film? No, not really. I did like watching it for the visuals, but I did feel somewhat empty. On my first viewing I thought and wondered how anyone could not like this picture, because I thought there was a heartfelt attempt to show the plight of everyone. And that's the irony of it all. Because the film is so thorough in its depiction of hardship, you never get a sense of where to position your own emotional investment as per my previous paragraph.As a stand alone film I think it's okay, but nothing to write home about in terms of being a fully realized drama. The acting is is actually quite good, though overstated at times. The late Heath Ledger tries to infuse the sublime in his thesping as he takes on the dual persona of a young officer who's scared to go to war, but later tears down his cowardice after his trials in the Sudan.Something that might've helped this film would have been for the characters to have realized who and where they were; i.e. what they were doing (to channel a little Yoda here). Yet again, all we see is what one might call the emotional plot. The actions and the reactions of the characters. We never truly get to look into their hearts.Mores the pity.Rent it for a night's viewing. The actual story is pretty decent, and worth seeing because of some very impressive cinematography. But, don't be surprised if you feel a little empty at the end of it.
bkoganbing The popular A.E.W. Mason novel The Four Feathers gets its sixth film version if you count a 1977 one made for television with Beau Bridges. Heath Ledger stars as protagonist Harry Fevasham who resigns his commission on the eve of his regiment being shipped out to the Sudan during the early 1880s to contain an uprising by the Osama Bin Laden of his day, the Mahdi. If you remember that's the fellow who was played by Sir Laurence Olivier in Khartoum.Ledger comes from a family with a military tradition and its just expected he join the army. To placate Dad he does, but he doesn't count on a war, who ever does. His messmates led by Wes Bentley and even his intended bride Kate Hudson think Ledger a coward. He's not so sure they're not right.But he decides to go to the Sudan in any event, he does speak the languages by dint of his military background. Ledger goes to test his own courage and grit. What happens there is the bulk of the story.Most people remember the version of The Four Feathers from Paramount in 1929, one of their last silents that starred Richard Barthelmess and William Powell. The British did their own blockbuster version in 1939 with John Clements and Ralph Richardson, one of their very earliest films in color. This one compares admirably with both of those.What it does do is give a picture of the Sudan very much as it is today, a land of bitter poverty and racial strife. The Moslems versus the Christians versus the Nativist religions. A dose of British Imperialism in full swing at the time didn't help the situation one bit. A lesson to be learned, but probably won't be by the people that should learn it.Still the story of Ledger finding himself in that desert country is still one that has a lot of merit for today. Heath gives a fine account of himself in the lead role and also to be noticed is Djimmon Hounsou who plays the native who pulls Heath's buttocks from the proverbial sling.Heath Ledger's legion of fans will be pleased with The Four Feathers.