Rating: 
Summary: A gripping drama about a black-market operator within a POW
Review: "King Rat" is the tale of a black-market operator who, in Machiavellian character, betrays his fellow countrymen-prisoners and cooperates with his Japanese captors in order to gain favors. The story contrasts the other prisoner's steadfast adherence to their code of ethics, and the Rat's close circle of hangers-on whom he continually manipulates to fulfill his needs. Eventually this tension comes to a head and the story ends with a surprising but moving finish.
Rating:
Summary: Thought provoking and entertaining at the same time.
Review: A great study in human nature. Something new to be had with each viewing. Wish it was on dvd.
Rating:
Summary: A Story of Humanity and Survival - Don't Miss It!
Review: Based on a novel by James Clavell, King Rat tells the story of life in a Japanese prisoner of war camp during World War II. This was Clavell's first international success and it draws on the author's personal experience as a prisoner of war. Beautifully rendered, the film presents the humanity and inhumanity of people placed in extaordinary circumstances, and the spirit of survival inherent in us all.
You simply don't want to miss all the insights into human nature the film gives us. The script is brilliant, the direction sure and deft, and the acting superb. I highly recommend this film for anyone who enjoys intelligent film making at its best.
Rating: 
Summary: Does not reach expectation
Review: I am a big fan of James Clavell and read all his books - some of them twice. Without a doubt, my ultimative favorit is Clavell's earliest piece: "King Rat".
I was very excited to finally have the chance to watch the movie, which I purchased here on VHS.
After having it watched, I am now aware of what they mean by
the saying "that a great book does not necessarily guarantee a great movie."
In fact I was rather disapointed.
Despite the fact that James Fox shows quite a solid performance as young Peter Marlowe, the script does not allow him to give Marlowe the character and profil he has in the novell. He appears as an easy-going, always-cheered-up english chap.
There is hardly any sign of the thoughtfull, young guy as he was described in the novell; struggeling with the conflict of his morality; having doubts whether it is right or wrong being involved in the Kings enterprises.
I also missed some about the unique, and in way fragile friendship between the King and Marlowe.
It was disapointing too, that the part with the visit to the malay-village was not used for the script. (I was looking forward to seeing "Sulina" appear...)
They 'd better cut out the scene, when the men had "Rover" for lunch.
Marlowe's best mates, Larkin and Mac, stayed nearly faceless, and never reached the profile and significance as in the novell.
So was the deal with diamond. A key issue in the novell, got sized down to a short scene of no importance that somehow did not fit.
I am aware that James Clavell personally wrote the script; so
I do hope that he was pleased with result of the film.
I was not.
However, there is still "Shogun" and "The Noble House",
both of them - to put it in Marlowe's words - "not bad"
as a novell and as a movie.
Montgomery West
Rating:
Summary: Gripping true story
Review: I didn't realize that the author actually lived this movie, but
should have. The acting, in my opinion, is what makes this a moving
experience, with no performances that I would consider "light weight". My personal favorite is Fox here; a touch of class in a real hell hole. These men for the most part are each heroic in maintaining their manhood and dignity. The film is stark alright, but is endowed with a cinematography that is an asset all around. Segal may have anticlimactically gone out as a corporal, but is the
"king". This is one of the few flicks that I can honestly say haven't become numbed by Hollywood after repeated viewings.
Rating:
Summary: Why is this movie so underrated?
Review: I do not understand why this movie isn't better known and more respected. It is an excellent film, as are several of Bryan Forbes' British films, all of which I recommend. When I first saw this film, I was almost outraged that I'd never heard anything about it, and I see I'm in good company. Why is Stalag 17 considered a classic of American cinema while King Rat (a much better and more complex film, in my opinion) languishes in semi-obscurity? I've never seen any significant criticism on it, which is particularly unusual for a war film (and, in some sense, anti-war film.) At least they've finally put it on DVD, and the transfer here is excellent, even if there aren't really any extras. Interestingly, the company that produced this DVD seems to be pushing George Segal's presence as the selling point of King Rat, and the back of the box doesn't even mention James Fox's character(!) (Perhaps the macho POW film audience would be put off by the relationship between Segal's and Fox's characters? I don't know.) Segal's performance is indeed great, but it isn't the only reason to watch this film, which is excellent in every major respect: technically, dramatically, and thematically. (I'm usually nearly in tears by the end, too-- I don't know whether that's true for everyone, though.) One more thing: I have not read the novel, but you should bear in mind that they ARE separate works of art, even if the film is adapted, and therefore needn't be judged against each other. I think King Rat succeeds marvellously in its own right.
Rating:
Summary: the movie is a lot different from the book
Review: if you want the real experience...read the novel by james clavell. this movie is nothing like the novel...from reading other customers comments, it sounds like they just saw the movie and didnt read it. everything they are writing about is off-balance. read the book and dont make yourself an ***.
Rating: 
Summary: Extraordinary Film Essential Viewing
Review: King Rat appeared around the same time as "The Train". While both attempt an unsentimentalized view of war and it's heroes, "The Train" (an excellent film) is ultimately an action piece about victory. "King Rat" on the other hand, is about survival.Over the last twenty-five years I've read the book twice and seen the movie at least five times. I don't care what the differences are anymore - both book and film are exceptional works. Different, but definitely equal. Experiencing either will be a harrowing, heart-breaking, but ultimately rewarding experience. Set in Changi prison camp (and based on Clavel's real-life experiences there) King Rat is the story of a young British officer (James Fox) who finds himself working for the camp hustler (George Segal). Together they are harassed by camp Provost Martial Tom Courtney determined to catch Segal (Corporal King) breaking regulations. The adaptation and direction by Bryan Forbes (who had to make allowances for the conservative sensibilities of a sixties audience) is simply amazing: King Rat is about the heat, disease, suffering, and madness. These aren't the stiff-upper-lip-discipline-or-die men of "Bridge On The River Kwai". The soldiers in King Rat are wretched, pathetic, and despairing. There is no sentimentality here, neither in front of, or behind the camera. Forbes' lens is unflinching -- it's the audience who has to look away. The cast alone makes this film worthwhile: George Segal (for the uninitiated, Segal was once a rising star), Tom Courtenay, James Fox, Patrick O'Neal, Denholm Elliot, James Donald, Tod Armstrong, John Mills, Gerald Sim, and Leonard Rossiter to name a few. They are all at their best. There are no disappointments here. In fact, I think it is the cast that makes me prefer the film to the book. Tom Courtney is much better at realizing his character than Clavel can write him. While Clavel (who lived this harrowing experience) may have known these people, it's the cast who have personalized and personified them. And so, while Forbes may have cut significant material from the book, I think the soul of the work is stronger. This is most apparent in the last line of dialog: in the book it is delivered by Tom Courtney's character, but in the film it is given to James Fox. But what is most amazing is that, after thirty-five years and the likes of "Patton", "Full Metal Jacket", "Platoon", "The Odd Angry Shot", and "Saving Private Ryan", "King Rat" still holds it's own. IF you are a connoisseur of films (war or otherwise) this is a must see.
Rating:
Summary: Extraordinary Film Essential Viewing
Review: King Rat appeared around the same time as "The Train". While both attempt an unsentimentalized view of war and it's heroes, "The Train" (an excellent film) is ultimately an action piece about victory. "King Rat" on the other hand, is about survival. Over the last twenty-five years I've read the book twice and seen the movie at least five times. I don't care what the differences are anymore - both book and film are exceptional works. Different, but definitely equal. Experiencing either will be a harrowing, heart-breaking, but ultimately rewarding experience. Set in Changi prison camp (and based on Clavel's real-life experiences there) King Rat is the story of a young British officer (James Fox) who finds himself working for the camp hustler (George Segal). Together they are harassed by camp Provost Martial Tom Courtney determined to catch Segal (Corporal King) breaking regulations. The adaptation and direction by Bryan Forbes (who had to make allowances for the conservative sensibilities of a sixties audience) is simply amazing: King Rat is about the heat, disease, suffering, and madness. These aren't the stiff-upper-lip-discipline-or-die men of "Bridge On The River Kwai". The soldiers in King Rat are wretched, pathetic, and despairing. There is no sentimentality here, neither in front of, or behind the camera. Forbes' lens is unflinching -- it's the audience who has to look away. The cast alone makes this film worthwhile: George Segal (for the uninitiated, Segal was once a rising star), Tom Courtenay, James Fox, Patrick O'Neal, Denholm Elliot, James Donald, Tod Armstrong, John Mills, Gerald Sim, and Leonard Rossiter to name a few. They are all at their best. There are no disappointments here. In fact, I think it is the cast that makes me prefer the film to the book. Tom Courtney is much better at realizing his character than Clavel can write him. While Clavel (who lived this harrowing experience) may have known these people, it's the cast who have personalized and personified them. And so, while Forbes may have cut significant material from the book, I think the soul of the work is stronger. This is most apparent in the last line of dialog: in the book it is delivered by Tom Courtney's character, but in the film it is given to James Fox. But what is most amazing is that, after thirty-five years and the likes of "Patton", "Full Metal Jacket", "Platoon", "The Odd Angry Shot", and "Saving Private Ryan", "King Rat" still holds it's own. IF you are a connoisseur of films (war or otherwise) this is a must see.
Rating:
Summary: Extraordinary Film Essential Viewing
Review: King Rat appeared around the same time as "The Train". While both attempt an unsentimentalized view of war and it's heroes, "The Train" (an excellent film) is ultimately an action piece about victory. "King Rat" on the other hand, is about survival. Over the last twenty-five years I've read the book twice and seen the movie at least five times. I don't care what the differences are anymore - both book and film are exceptional works. Different, but definitely equal. Experiencing either will be a harrowing, heart-breaking, but ultimately rewarding experience. Set in Changi prison camp (and based on Clavel's real-life experiences there) King Rat is the story of a young British officer (James Fox) who finds himself working for the camp hustler (George Segal). Together they are harassed by camp Provost Martial Tom Courtney determined to catch Segal (Corporal King) breaking regulations. The adaptation and direction by Bryan Forbes (who had to make allowances for the conservative sensibilities of a sixties audience) is simply amazing: King Rat is about the heat, disease, suffering, and madness. These aren't the stiff-upper-lip-discipline-or-die men of "Bridge On The River Kwai". The soldiers in King Rat are wretched, pathetic, and despairing. There is no sentimentality here, neither in front of, or behind the camera. Forbes' lens is unflinching -- it's the audience who has to look away. The cast alone makes this film worthwhile: George Segal (for the uninitiated, Segal was once a rising star), Tom Courtenay, James Fox, Patrick O'Neal, Denholm Elliot, James Donald, Tod Armstrong, John Mills, Gerald Sim, and Leonard Rossiter to name a few. They are all at their best. There are no disappointments here. In fact, I think it is the cast that makes me prefer the film to the book. Tom Courtney is much better at realizing his character than Clavel can write him. While Clavel (who lived this harrowing experience) may have known these people, it's the cast who have personalized and personified them. And so, while Forbes may have cut significant material from the book, I think the soul of the work is stronger. This is most apparent in the last line of dialog: in the book it is delivered by Tom Courtney's character, but in the film it is given to James Fox. But what is most amazing is that, after thirty-five years and the likes of "Patton", "Full Metal Jacket", "Platoon", "The Odd Angry Shot", and "Saving Private Ryan", "King Rat" still holds it's own. IF you are a connoisseur of films (war or otherwise) this is a must see.
|
