The Magic Sword

source: The Magic Sword

Archive.Org, the movie buff's very recommended friend, offers nowadays several Rathbone movies—the Holmes franchise of course, a Sci—Fi Soviet flick from the '60s (with added Rathbone scenes to make it more American), a '30s British mystery, and this sword and sorcery movie for children—THE MAGIC SWORD—very exciting, amazingly scored, dashingly colored, very eventful, sensational, dynamic and adventurous, suspenseful and lively. I would dare labeling it the most exciting and enjoyable children's movie I ever saw. I liked the effects, the exploits of the knights, the atmosphere, the excitement and liveliness, the wonderful pace, the eeriness and the scale, the scope, the range. Aside from the pleasure, THE MAGIC SWORD is as well a chance to improve your knowledge of Ratbone's roles and of the fantasy/ children's/ sword and sorcery movies. Rathbone seems to have enjoyed his role, he was seemingly well—disposed.

Basil Rathbone is lucky. He'll be remembered for his portrayal of Sherlock Holmes, but he won't be remembered for this corny disaster of a film. I didn't see the whole thing, because I had to turn off the TV in the middle of it. There's more corn in this film than in the state of Iowa. Avoid this one altogether.

When I saw this film in Nottingham in 1964, little did I realize that I was one of the privileged few British cinema-goers who would ever get the chance to view it. The film ran into some truly puzzling censorship and distribution problems. United Artists were apparently hoping for a mainly juvenile audience, but when it went before the British Board of Film Censors on 16 July 1963 it was saddled with an "X" certificate for adults only, unlike Jason and the Argonauts which was granted a "U" for general exhibition. UA changed the British release title to St. George and the 7 Curses, but the distributor seemed to manufacture hardly any prints and the film was unseen in most towns and cities. Unusually, there was no premiere, no press showing and no newspaper reviews. Even more unusual, given that the film was being shown to the public in cinemas, was the fact that it was not announced in either the Monthly Film Bulletin or Kinematograph Weekly. The Rank Organization gave the movie a couple of test showings, running it for a week at their Mechanics cinema in Nottingham from 24 May 1964 (just a fortnight before closing it down). A Midlands television crew, reporting on the controversy, asked people coming out if they found it scary. Although Vampira's transformation into a withered old hag was mildly horrific, and the ogre looked a bit of a beast, nobody admitted to being the slightest bit frightened. Indeed, Jason and the Argonauts was judged more frightening because the special effects were better. The only possible explanation for the British censor's categories was that he based his decisions on mood rather than content. Whereas Jason came across as straight mythological adventure, St. George seemed to be trying to mix together the slapstick (Sybil brewing potions with her conjoined stooges) and the gruesome (two knights wandering into the desert and having their faces burned off). St. George and the 7 Curses later had a week's run at the Bradford Gaumont from 13 December 1964, but really the vast majority of British film-goers had no idea it even existed. 2017 UPDATE – Since this article first appeared in 2007, I have been indebted to movie fans, film societies, librarians and even retired projectionists for throwing more light on United Artists' erratic release of St George and the 7 Curses. Whilst it is true that the original 1964 release on the Rank circuit was tiny (week-long engagements in random places like Aberdeen, Bradford, Brighton, Nottingham, Portsmouth and York), the film did enjoy a humble afterlife when it was made available to suburban independents. Unfortunately, it regularly seemed to finish up in end-of-the-road cinemas that were earmarked for demolition. The distribution had a curious regional bias with some counties not seeing the film at all, whilst Yorkshire had showings everywhere, even in the small mining villages of Thurnscoe and Woodlands. Often the film was used as a programme filler to support UA's newer releases, notably A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS in Atherstone and Tamworth, THE Satan BUG in Coventry and Kenilworth, I'LL TAKE Sweden in Coalville, Doncaster and Selby, TOM JONES in three Leicester suburbs, WHAT'S NEW PUSSYCAT in Fenton, RETURN FROM THE ASHES in Cannock, Filey, Ibstock and Uttoxeter, BILLION DOLLAR BRAIN in Earl Shilton, and KISS ME STUPID at London's Biograph. With effect from mid-1967 and into the 1970s, United Artists delivered the final humiliation by relegating St George to the Sunday circuits where he played one night stands in suburbs of Birmingham, Bristol, Glasgow, Leeds and Stoke, as well as desert outposts such as Alfreton, Eccles, Heanor, Irvine, Kilmarnock, Melton Mowbray, Oakham, Retford, Ripley, Rugeley, Skegness, Sleaford, Swadlincote and Tadcaster. United Artists clearly had very little respect for the patron saint of England, but at least we now know that this wasn't quite the Smallest British Release of All Time!

I like so many of commentators here saw this film as a child on TV and loved it. I couldn't remember the name of it and scoured the movie books when I grew up until I found it. When I saw it on video I bought it and showed it to my preschooler who watched and watched it until the video started to wear out. I had a friend come over and when he saw it on the shelf he was delighted as he too had the same memories , his preschooler now has it as his favourite movie. You can't judge this film as an adult because it wasn't aimed at adults , if you want to pick holes in it you can but if a kid can use his imagination to smooth over the poor effects and acting why can't adults? Let yourself go into the fantasy, relive a little of your childhood and let your kids get wrapped up in it as well . Great kids adventure .

I saw this film at a matinée in 1962 when I was seven. I remembered it over the years as 70 minutes of pure excitement. I watched it again on DVD with my kids. Yes, it is low budget. Yes, it has cheesy special effects by today's standards. Yes, it has a corny plot and weak acting from some of the characters. Yet, I found it to have charm and my kids were just as enthralled as I was 43 years ago when I suspended my disbelief in the dark of the Saturday matinée. This film is, in its genre, a minor classic. Further, Basil Rathbone as the heavy is very good in the waning years of his life and career--much better than Torin Thatcher who played similar "heavy" roles in similar adventure movies.

Why a re people so unkind to this very funny fantasy. Any adult can tell it is not meant to be taken as some sort of 'magnificent spectacle'. Yes it is low budget but it knows it, and Basil and Estelle seemed to be having a very sly old time brewing potent hammy acting to fling at each other and the hopeful cast. Kids love this film even today; it has the sort of 'crummy but fascinating' manginess cheap color fantasies have. Does anyone remember those equally hilarious and ghastly 'storybook productions' like Mother Goose or Jack and the Beanstalk? Terrible but lovably hopeless and thoroughly entertaining. THE MAGIC SWORD even has a pre 2001 Gary Lockwood; boy I bet he's glad Kubrick saw something in him after this. Kubrick would have seen this, you know, I am sure he saw everything Gary Lockwood made before casting him in 2001. And he still hired him. Besides, MAGIC SWORD has the unforgettable Estelle Winwood. She is like Edward Everett Horton in a dress. Pantomime? Sure. Hilarious? Yes. Enjoyable? Thoroughly in its mangy matinée way. Can you believe I saw this on a double feature with SINK THE BISMARK! Such were kids matinées in Australia in 1962. The next week we saw CAPTAIN SINBAD which almost looks like the out takes of THE MAGIC SWORD.

THE MAGIC SWORD (1962) is a fantasy film that enthralled me as a child when I sat in a Bronx theater with a packed house of kids on a summer afternoon. We talked about it for days afterwards and acted it out in our street games. As a grown-up, when I returned to it on TV, I may have found some of the effects less than convincing, particularly the dragon, but I still found the film quite engaging and consistently memorable. The images have a bold graphic quality reminiscent of the best comic book art. Each shot cuts right to its essential information and uses whatever low-budget means at the filmmaker's disposal--make-up, costumes, color, lighting, simple optical effects--to make the image stand out. In addition, there are strong performers on hand who have a kind of comic book/fairy tale aspect to them, e.g. Estelle Winwood, as the hero's spell-casting guardian; Basil Rathbone, as the sorcerer villain; and Vampira as a beautiful woman the knights meet on the road, who turns monstrous at a moment's notice. The film is not afraid of grotesque imagery and doles it out in small, effective portions. As an adult I was struck by the horrific nature of some of the images, e.g. the withered old hag that Vampira turns into; the acid pool that yields up the skeleton of a victim who'd fallen into it just moments earlier; the burned, reddened skins of two of the knights as they're caught in some kind of intense sun ray. But as a child, I wasn't frightened by these images; they helped make the story more believable and more involving. Filmmaker Bert I. Gordon (THE AMAZING COLOSSAL MAN) was not afraid to show us the dark, gruesome side of this mythical tale. He wasn't trying to shield the kids in the audience the way bigger-budgeted Hollywood films of this stripe would have at the time (e.g., Harryhausen films like SEVENTH VOYAGE OF SINBAD and THREE WORLDS OF GULLIVER). There was an honesty to Gordon's approach that I think we, as kids, even without being able to articulate it, appreciated and respected. As an adult, I can't get this film out of my mind, while more recent spectacles like the overstuffed LORD OF THE RINGS are but a dim memory.

It will take some magic to finish the entire film. It's goofy from start to finish. A good film for children in the 1960s, but shouldn't be viewed by anyone over seven years of age. Unless, you're watching it as a comedy. The script stinks , along with the acting. Special effects are satisfactory for that decade, but still lack the seriousness that attracts most to fantasy films. A certain amount of maturity is required to produce a descent fantasy flick. This film leaves the realm of fantasy and lands knee-deep in stupidity. Don't compare it with other fantasy films, just accept for what it is.........sad!!!

I saw THE MAGIC SWORD when I was a kid and loved it, caught it again on a cheap VHS tape many years later and thought it was only passable, then watched the excellent MGM DVD recently and was won over by it all over again. It's much better made than I remember (many posters complain about the low budget, but I'd be curious to know just what it actually cost --- it seems to have been money carefully spent). Much of the acting could best be described as adequate but Basil Rathbone is wonderful (I especially loved the scene where he and the princess watch two other girls being sacrificed to the dragon --- you see nothing but the fiery glow on their faces but Rathbone's delivery drips with gleeful malevolence). And the production was actually quite well mounted --- those who carp at the "cardboard sets" simply don't know what they're talking about. The special effects are variable but for the most part adequate and some of the images are striking. Kids spoiled by multi-gazillion dollar epics like the Harry Potter series doubtless won't appreciate THE MAGIC SWORD. To appreciate a movie like this, forty four years after it was made, takes more sophistication than most contemporary viewers can manage.