MovieChat Forums > The Wind and the Lion (1975) Discussion > A good,not great film

A good,not great film

posted 14 years ago by Narseshasnone
7 replies | jump to latest

I've always enjoyed "The Wind and the Lion" very much.Sean Connery is one of my all time favorites and John Millius certainly has had his moments.However,
when compared to a truly great film,such as David Leans' magnificent epic
"Lawrence of Arabia",'The Wind and the Lion" just doesn't hold up.In fact,with all due respect to TWATL,I don't think that there is one element of filmmaking;screenwriting,direction,acting,cinematography or any other,is
comparable to "Lawrence of Arabia"

[–] Hancock_the_Superb 14 years ago

I don't think that's an entirely fair comparison. Lawrence is a big sweeping epic with a huge production, all-star cast, and a script bristling with thematic and intellectual material. Wind and the Lion is a pretty straightforward, modestly-budgeted action/adventure movie, albeit a more intelligent and witty one than most. Lawrence is unquestionably a better film, but for me it would be like comparing Saving Private Ryan to Raiders of the Lost Ark.

One thing I definitely prefer in Wind and the Lion to Lawrence is the score. Jarre's score is great but I absolutely adore Goldsmith's work here.

"I am Mr. Shackelford's attorney, Rusty Shackelford, and my client pleads insanity."

[–] Narseshasnone 14 years ago

Yes Hancock,point taken.I really should have been more explanatory in my post.
I was really addressing those on this board who claim greatness for TWATL.I
was attempting to compare TWATL to a standard of"greatness" - a term which,BTW,
I think is way overused - rather than to a specific film.I chose 'Lawrence'
to represent this standard because,to me,there is no greater film.

As to the score,I feel that they each fit their respective movies perfectly.

[–] Hancock_the_Superb 14 years ago

Wind and the Lion is great by its own standards. I think the last half-hour was kind of silly and rushed, but otherwise I don't have any real complaints.

If a movie achieves what it sets out to do, isn't it fair to call it great?

"I am Mr. Shackelford's attorney, Rusty Shackelford, and my client pleads insanity."

[–] Narseshasnone 14 years ago

To be honest,I have to say that I'm not really sure what defines true movie
greatness,but I don't think that a one-size-fits-all definition such as a
movie achieving what it sets out to do is the answer.Perhaps TWATL is a great action/adventure film but truly great films,such as'Lawrence' or'The Godfather', transend any particular genre.So,I'm sticking to my guns,'Wind and the Lion',while one of my favorite movies, just doesn't measure up to "greatness".

[–] vpilutis 13 years ago

'Lawrence' has too many scenes that just drag and are very boring

See some stars here
http://www.vbphoto.biz/

[–] dannieboy20906 10 years ago

"great by its own standards"? For Pete's sake, I'm great by my own standards.

I thing the title of the thread says it all. There are many good films, but if "great" is to have meaning there can be only a relative few "great" films. Fortunately, there can be more than one.

[–] Blueghost 13 years ago

"Lawrence" lacks a romantic interest. I think "Wind and the Lion" has "Lawrence" beat there. The cinematography is more forthright and tells the story in Milius' film, as opposed to being romantic set pieces to accentuate the visuals as is the case in "Lawrence". Strictly speaking the shots in "Lawrence" are superior, but they're almost exceedingly over dramatic. Almost as if Ansel Adams had been hired to shoot the thing.

In this regard "Wind and the Lion" is superior at story telling. I think artistically "Lawrence" is a superior film, but as far as entertaining films go, I think "The Wind and the Lion" has it beat hands down.