This movie might have been relevant in 1943 London but now it's only a colourful postcard from ancient times. Here is the landscape: flamboyant Technicolor, a good old Victorian British soldier (impressive and very credible makeup for the lead who brilliantly sails from 1902 to 1942), down-to-earth British humour (I mean never getting an edge ever on the farcical side or in pure satire), conjunctural sentimentalism and a mishmash of some heavy handed wartime propaganda with a few strong points near the end.
As for me I was bored stiff and about to leave the theater right after the first part (1942 prologue + 1902 establishing vignette). I sat through it and it seems that only the old ladies next to me where enjoying every bit of it. Well sorry but this Candy is a bore, a passive character with picturesque traits who does nothing interesting except aging in an absurd and stoical stance. And the rest is pretty stiff too, even the charming Deborah Kerr is stiffened as the perfect lovable English girl on duty for three different shifts.
So neither the characters nor the story are interesting, the whole movie just spans 40 years. Above all things there's no sense of narrative rhythm. Narrative rhyme? Maybe Bobby, to me it's more tapestry than poetry.
As for me I was bored stiff and about to leave the theater right after the first part (1942 prologue + 1902 establishing vignette). I sat through it and it seems that only the old ladies next to me where enjoying every bit of it. Well sorry but this Candy is a bore, a passive character with picturesque traits who does nothing interesting except aging in an absurd and stoical stance. And the rest is pretty stiff too, even the charming Deborah Kerr is stiffened as the perfect lovable English girl on duty for three different shifts.
So neither the characters nor the story are interesting, the whole movie just spans 40 years. Above all things there's no sense of narrative rhythm. Narrative rhyme? Maybe Bobby, to me it's more tapestry than poetry.