As I'll touch more upon later, this film hasn't quite recieved the attention it deserves for being very sophisticated on a level found ahead of its time, among intriguing dramas of today's sensibilites, and yet, as good as that is, it all stands as problematic, because, I don't know about y'all, but good and sophisticated dramas nowadays tend not to be the most exciting films in the world. Well, sure enough, with this film's sophistication comes dryness, and much of it, perhaps not to a terribly intense degree, yet still thoroughly enough to where the film often finds itself limping as it drenches the atmosphere with too much sobering meditation, leaving it to dull down in some spots. That steam loss is further intensified by, well, yeah, you guessed it: repetition. Speaking of repetition, I bring that flaw up a lot, yet justifiably every time, and this time is not exception, for although the film is far from monotonous, it does begin to tread familiar ground, making only so much progress in intrigue for a fair couple of periods in time. Neither the film's slowness or repetition are terribly intense, yet they remain presence enough to leave the final product to run on an ever-diluting amount of juice until it actually reaches a sharp point. Of course, once the film reaches that point, it really strikes at you with surprising force that really keeps you going. Still, although the film boasts certain points that are considerably more engrossing than other, it's not like the film isn't consistently enjoyable, being kept going by quite a bit.
Frank Cordell's score is grand and diverse, capturing the sweep and spirit of the film with grace, while the nifty and dynamic production designs construct the world in a buyable and immersive fashion, made all the more gripping by Edward Scaife's handsome, broadly-scoped cinematography. The film's fine visual and audible touches make the film engaging, especially when they all unite to a single point amidst the action sequences, of which there are only so many, yet each one is grand and intense, with thrills that may not be as sharp as they were for their time, yet remain gripping, even to this day. Still, even with all of the film's fine style, as I said, much of this film is dry and sophisticated, aspects that dull down the film, though not terribly, as the script really is fairly intelligent, boasting no terribly sharp lines or anything, yet much intelligence, as well as depth and intrigue within both the politics and humanity of the story, without feeling forceful in any way, and for that, credit not only goes out to Robert Ardrey's screenplay, but also Basil Dearden's direction, as he is able to draw much depth from this film, though not without the help of some talented performers, particularly the people we're really coming to see. Laurence Olivier is surprisingly rather underused as Muhammad Ahmad, yet for every scene in which he's present, he steals the show, being virtually unrecognizable, not just because they caked him in makeup or because he's putting on a strong accent, but because he gives off such a transformative aura of the strength and humanity that made Ahmad such a strong force as a leader, making him a strikingly complex, yet mysterious antagonist for the limited time he's on. Olivier certainly delivers a strong performance, as expected, while leading man Charlton Heston really catches us off guard. Much of Heston's performances have become dated, and with the role of General Charles Gordon requesting acting challenges from an English accent to subtle yet palpable layers upon presence, I'm sure even some of your less cynical Charlton Heston viewers would expect him to slip up, yet Heston puts that English blood to good use, doing a surprisingly pretty descent job at the accent, complimented by a sparklingly charismatic capturing of that good old fashion English nobility and charm. However, as the depth of Gordon exposes itself, Heston surprises yet again with a subtle, yet, at points, intense aura of vulnerability and reflection that's very sobering and very insightful, giving us a very sobering view of the humanity within the notorious general to break up a very engaging view of the strength within Gordon, making him a powerful lead presence strong enough to carry this ultimately rewarding piece of drama and sophistication.
In conclusion, the film collapses into much slowness, sometimes even dullness, being pulled down by many a point of dryness within the tone, as well as a degree of repetition, yet it's easy to power through these faults, thanks to fine style, as well as Robert Ardrey's fine script script, with intelligence and depth brought to life quite sharply by director Basil Dearden and a strong cast, headed by a predictably transformative and effective Laurence Olivier and a surprisingly deep, heavily layered, when not simply charismatic Charlton Heston, ultimately leaving "Khartoum" a fascinatingly sophisticated and rewardingly compelling mini-epic.
3/5 - Good
A true historical account of Khartoum in the Sudan, there was no holding back of the budget on this grand display of Charlton Heston and Laurence Olivier. Wow, is Laurence Olivier tan.
The sweeping landscapes, cast of thousands, and dramatic sequences make this a very good historical and theatrical watch.
The drama is a little over the top sometimes but everything else is strong.
The biggest setback is Charlton Heston's accent. He's an American putting on a posh English accent, and he sounds it. Just feels so...superficial. Whatever possessed the producers to go with an American in as a 19th century English general is beyond me. At the time, Heston was the go-to actor for heroic roles, so that might explain it.
Laurence Oliver is slightly better, as the Mahdi. Hardly recognisable, his accent is someones quite hilarious, and sometimes quite offensive (I would think). Were there no middle-eastern actors available at the time?
Plot also seems quite padded. Yes, the political intrigues had to be there to show why General Gordon was in the situation he was in, and did what he did. However, there seems to be a lot of pointless scenes in the movie, particularly in the first half.
This said, there are some good battle scenes. Plus, the movie seems fairly true to history (which you can't say about all historical dramas), so is useful as a history lesson.
This is warfare in the grand scale with both sides sporting hundreds to thousands of troops (well I'm sure some extras were used more than once) in a dry and desolate part of the world.
If you are into historical warfare movies, Khartoum is a must watch. So good.