Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Jonah Abbott There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

dbrayshaw Here it is, sixty-five years after the filming of Scaramouche and I have just completed my first viewing of this gem. It was born the year of my birth.I had no clue, convincing swordfighing could last as long as seven minutes in any film. Having never met a fencer, I grew to consider the sport lacking in swordsmen. After all, this is 2017, not 1952. The genre of swashbuckling, obviously, was more in step with former viewers. At least, that's what I thought.After some reading, my view has changed.I discovered, to my surprise, the sport has returned to the U.S. and is being labeled an exercise to relieve stress, tone up the body and mind, and to give a great workout.This motion picture is certainly the one to watch if one needs that extra push to learn fencing. I enjoyed the fighting scenes immensely, especially the offense and defense that moved André Moreau (Stewart Granger)and Marquis De Maynes (Mel Ferrer) from every inch of the theater balcony, down the stairs, into the fully seated auditorium, to the rear props storage rooms, then onto the stage, to finish with a surprising end.I also discovered Jean Heremans, a European fencing champion, was hired by MGM in 1948 to supervise the swordfighting on The Three Musketeers. I feel all the swordplay sequences in Scaramouche were superbly staged by Heremans.Not knowing anything about pre-French revolution attire, I found the costumes, although elaborate and layered, well able to accentuate the best of one's body. The young women certainly liked to show off their thin waists and cleavage, although I wonder just what was under those dresses to cause their waists to be as thinly attractive and convincing.How most of the cast managed not to sweat profusely amazes me.Both actresses, Aline (Janet Leigh) and Lenore (Elaine Parker) were dressed to stand out in every scene.The storyline is realistic enough and believable to a point. Escapes seemed contrived, a bit deus ex machina, especially the trapdoor scene. Still, I felt satisfied at close of the film.It was two hours well spent.

bobkris8 I first saw this movie when it first came out and commented to my friends of the beautiful music that was composed for it by Victor Young. The music is what attracted me, but I enjoyed the story and actors in it. I even recorded the sound track at a movie theater with permission of the management to listen to, and went to see it every time it was shown. Eventually, I bought the VHS recording of it, and I estimate I have watched it 20 or more times. I still marvel at the beauty of it. I have also read the novel twice. It is very unlike the movie, but that doesn't bother me at all. Both stories are appealing. I heard the music on a classical music radio station several years ago, and found out that I could purchase the recording. It is on my Ipod now, so I can hear it again and again at a touch. Victor Young was a musical genius. He gets little credit for the great music he composed for that and many other movies that he wrote music for.

carlbargh I won't go into details of the plot, largely because others have done so before me.I will say that I am a huge fan of movies made in Technicolor - they seem so much more vibrant than today's pictures - and this doesn't disappoint.It's a well shot film, with a star studded cast; 'eye candy' for both guys AND gals - in the forms of Eleanor Parker, Janet Leigh and Stewart Granger.There's action a-plenty, a love story (of sorts) and humour. What more could one ask for...?If you love old, swashbuckling action movies, this is a must.10/10

ferdinand1932 It's almost bad manners to criticize a much loved old film. Like seeing something for what it really is rather than view it with a keen eye. It might cynically remove the pleasure. Well, so be it: Scaramouche is ridiculous and oh so obvious movie. Below are some of the major flaws:Flat lighting where everything is lit in equal scale. Bad sets where plaster dues not look like stone. Cavalry chases in open countryside that looked like far ways on golf courses. Eucalyptus trees in the outdoor scenes. Costumes and a color map look borrowed from an operetta: Der Rosenkavalier seems to have been a reference. Incorrect uniforms for the time. Incorrect French throughout – use of pronouns and articles, names appropriate for geographical region and grammar. An infinitive cannot be 'split' in French. Timeline of the French Revolution and Convention is nonsensical.While the list may seem pedantic it also says much about how Hollywood treated history and its audience. It is sloppy, sentimental, like a La Vegas show on ice, with wigs and big dresses and syrupy music. And well, the story and the plot that makes it work, is hackneyed and predictable.The theatrical scenes are, however, good and there the color and costumes work as does the ever reliable Eleanor Parker whose character has a touch of humor but the irrepressible and optimistic Scaramouche is like Candide, just over stays his time.