Badmovies.org Forum

(http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/3875/sandokanlospiratasdemal.jpg)
(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/3875/sandokanlospiratasdemal.jpg)

Plot: Malasyan pirate Sandokan (Steve Reeves) accidentally learns that Lord Brook plots to obtain the crown of Malasya by kidnapping the legitimate rajah and his daughter and forcing them to abdict. He quickly gathers his best man and his lieutennant, Yañez, and launches a rescue operation.

Comments: The Sandokan novels by Emilio Salgari are easily among my childhood favorite readings. What they lack in historical background and character development they compensate with thick, sometimes terrifying atmosphere (specially in those books where Sandokan fights the Thugs), dynamic, often bloody, action and outlandish cliffhangers.

So when I heard Steve Reeves and Umberto Lenzi had filmed a series of two films about Sandokan, I was all anxious to see the results. Which are... well, different than I expected.

First thing first, watching the films feels nothing like reading the novels. The characters and the settings are here, as well as the villains, but Lenzi and company basically aim for a traditional pirate / adventure film, forgetting about the colorful characterisation and dynamic action that made Salgari's novels so great. Instead we get lavish settings (both films seem reasonably budgeted, and were filmed in the beautiful landscapes of Sri Lanka and Singapore) and decent, but just that, action.

One of my main issues with these films is that for a series that essentially deals with pirates, there's surprisingly little pirating or naval action to be found. Instead, Reeves and the other actors exchange fire with the British, chase or are chased (it's hard to tell, given how much the characters seem to care) throughout jungles and get in a few mass brawls / firefights.

Still, I feel I'm being too hard on these films. Steve Reeves proves he could remain clothed throughout an entire film and shows he had more talent than he ofen is credited for. Behaving like the strong, silent type and devoid of any visible conflicts, his Sandokan is not exactly the most engaging of heroes. But his charisma shines trough well enough, and Reeves gets to show some physical prowess durinf the brawls.

As for director Umberto Lenzi, later known for his horror films, he gives both adventures the adequate tone (I'll give him that, both films stay away from camp, unlike the later TV series with Kabir Bedi as Sandokan), keeps the action flowing at the right pace (specially in the second film, the most action packed of the two) and frames the countless extras and the beautiful scenarios with undeniable professionality.

But I still miss the passion.

I've seen Sandokan the Great, and liked it well enough, but I never knew it was based on a series of books. I'll have to keep that in mind. And thank-you for that bit of information Neville.

Yep, Sandokan was created by Italian XIX century writer Emilio Salgari. Salgari, together with Jules Verne is one of those authors who, for some reason, have ended up being labelled as "children friendly", and my parents had no problem with me reading their works.

Truth is, I have no idea what kind of audience Salgari had in mind. The characters and their conflicts are extremely simple, as if Salgari still had something of a child in him, but there's a lot of action, and it's both cinematic and bloody. And the stuff in the books where Sandokan fights the thugs makes "Temple of doom" look like a fairy tale.