Legend of the Lost (1957) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
59 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Wayne, Loren, and Brazzi; Lost in the Desert
ejgreen7729 August 2006
Legend of the Lost is a film that could have been pretty good, but was destroyed because of the lack of chemistry between the leads, John Wayne and Sophia Loren. They don't relate or react to each other at all, and every "intimate" scene between them seems forced.

On the bright side, you have cinematographer Jack Cardiff's gorgeous on-location Technirama cinematography. The deserts of Libya never looked so good. And the script by Ben Hecht was actually quite good.

But Legend of the Lost is a member of an entire genre (or sub-genre) of films that might best be called "Two-person Films." That is, the entire film centers on two or three characters that are somehow isolated from society and exist on their own in some desolate or deserted place. John Huston was a master of this genre, and his films The African Queen and Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison may very well be the best examples of the genre. Unfortunately for Legend of the Lost, this type of film mandates that there be great chemistry between the leads, or the whole film breaks down. Look at the great chemistry between Bogart and Hepburn in The African Queen and the great chemistry between Robert Mitchum and Deborah Kerr in Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison. This is where Legend of the Lost begins to come apart. Wayne was an actor who was legendary for his ability to relate to his leading ladies on screen. Throughout his six decade long career, he played opposite a wide variety of actresses (from Jean Arthur to Marlene Dietrich to Lauren Bacall to Katharine Hepburn) and was able to light up the screen with just about all of them. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the chemistry between him and Loren just wasn't there. In hindsight, of course, its easy enough to clamor for Maureen O'Hara (who had done similar roles in the many "Arabian Knights" type adventure films she had spent most of the 40's doing), but I do give Wayne credit for taking a chance on the then almost unknown Loren. Unfortunately, things just didn't work out.

Veteran director Henry Hathaway directed Legend of the Lost, and after its failure placed most of the blame on Loren, saying something to the effect that she was gorgeous to look at, but wasn't a very good actress. Although he might have had a point, Hathaway was also likely trying to deflect blame away from himself for the failure. The fact remains that he failed to overcome the casting problems that beset the film. And this is why Hathaway is remembered as a good, but not great director (and I say this as Hathaway's biggest fan). The great directors have the ability to elevate a film above script and casting problems, and Hathaway failed to do that here. Of course, Hathaway would say that given the material and genre it would have been very hard, if not impossible to do that here. And he may very well be right. In hindsight it might have been better to get John Huston himself to direct the film, though considering Wayne and Huston's equally disastrous joint project The Barbarian and the Geisha was still waiting in the future, perhaps its better Huston wasn't involved here.

I've always felt that Legend of the Lost was Batjac's attempt at a "prestige picture." I think that Wayne was trying to impress the critics by producing an "artsy" film that would appeal to them, and when it failed, he went back to the familiar places and faces that he had found success with earlier in his career. It was probably a very wise decision on his part.

Legend of the Lost is not for everyone. With different casting the film could have become a classic. As it is, it survives best as a remembrance of "what might have been."
59 out of 77 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I'll wait until he's awake, to give him the bad news
thinker169112 June 2008
Henry Hathaway had something in his hands few director's would ever dream of having. A winning combination, to include the screen strength of John Wayne (Joe January) the sexual allure of beautiful Italian goddess, Sophia Loren (Dita) and dashing leading man, Rossano Brazzi (Paul Bonnard,) all in the same film. The Legend of the lost is one of those particular film which should have become a superb adventure/drama, which in turn should have evolved into a classic. But like a Formula One Car which should win the international Gran Prix, unfortunately run short of fuel. The story is that of three people all searching for something which it seems lies beyond them. January seeks enough money to break free of the monotonous cycle of drunken nights in jails, Dita hoping to find someone who appreciates her for herself and not just one night stands and Bonnard, hoping to find a desert treasure left to him by his father. All three struggle against themselves and their weaknesses and then at the temptations which cause them to remember why they failed the first time. Against them is the limitless Shahara which is unforgiving and more than a challenge to lesser adventurers. Expected steamy scenes between the story characters in the novel are abandoned and disappointed viewers are resigned to the "Romance-Lite" they are given. A good film if you don't expect too much from such international greats. ***
22 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A Desert Character Study from John Wayne (SPOILERS)
oldmovieman25 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Wayne is a desert guide in Timbuktu and anxious to get out of town for good. Loren is a local lady of questionable morality. Brazzi is a pious visitor seeking a guide to lead him into the deep reaches of the Sahara; he's searching for a lost treasure, the location of which was disclosed to him in a letter from his beloved, saintly father who, he believes, probably died at the site. Brazzi wants the treasure to help the poor and sick, i.e., to carry on the work of his father. Early on, Wayne makes it clear he has no respect for Loren and she returns the feeling, but Brazzi treats her in a kindly way and tries to save her soul. Wayne regards Brazzi as a hollow do-gooder. A very long trek through the Sahara eventually leads them to the treasure site which turns out to be a Roman settlement. There they find the treasure but they also find the body of Brazzi's father entwined with the remains of a woman, a lower-class (or worse) woman judging by the cheap jewelry that remains on the body. Brazzi's father had been stabbed in the back. There's also a love letter in the woman's effects that makes it clear Brazzi's father and she were having an affair. For reasons that are not entirely clear to me, Brazzi's image of his father (and, derivatively, of himself) collapses and he loses his mind. His father is transformed from saint to sinner and everything about him is revealed as a lie. He no longer wants to save Loren's soul, now he wants her body and he's willing to bribe her with the vast wealth he's discovered. But she wants to stay saved -- she rejects Brazzi's advances. Brazzi decides Loren's really in love with Wayne so he tries to shoot him. In the ensuing confusion, Brazzi steals off with the pack animals, the jewels and the water. Wayne and Loren set off on foot and catch up eventually. I reiterate the plot at some length to clarify two issues raised by other reviewers. First, Brazzi's mental breakdown is dissimilar from that of Fred C. Dobbs in Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Dobbs was motivated by greed and it was his essential paranoia that ultimately worked its way to the surface. Brazzi's character broke down because the core of his personality, i.e., the self-image of the faithful son longing to live the life of his beloved father, disintegrated when he learned the truth of his father's affair. Second, Brazzi and Wayne are not rivals for Loren's love. For most of the movie, Brazzi is protecting Loren from Wayne's ill treatment because he respects her soul; he isn't in love with her. When, later, Brazzi lusts for Loren, he's out of his mind and Loren knows it (she says he's drunk). Legends of the Lost turns out to be a really interesting character study with a fairly clever storyline, good acting by all, and, as many have noted, some gorgeous Technicolor photography. One strange note -- the music sounds like a 50s sci-fi or "chiller theater" score. It's not bad but, at least to me, it sounds out of place.
23 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of My Favorite All Time Films
inoldhollywood4 August 2004
I first saw this film on television as a kid in the 1960s and loved it. I have seen it many times since, and am now blessed to watch it on DVD in wide screen on an LCD display, and I continue to enjoy it. Okay, it has some corny lines, and Sophia is just too beautiful... but more than that, this film tells a wonderful story of broken promises, hidden agendas, and betrayal from others we believed were above reproach... and there is some terrific character development in the dialog, I feel I know these people. For me, it is one of the most atmospheric films I have come to know. I feel the hot Sahara sun in that Lybian desert, the wind blowing sand in my face, the coolness of the water in the oasis, and the quiet beauty of a desert twilight. This film is haunting to me... and it is one of my very favorites.
59 out of 71 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
underrated
KyleFurr219 September 2005
This is a really underrated movie and i stayed away from it for so long because of all the bad reviews i've seen of it, like Leonard Maltin giving it only two stars. This was directed by Henry Hathaway and this was the first time John Wayne and Hathaway worked together and they would go on to make four more movies, including True Grit. The movie starts out with Rossano Brazzi looking for a guide to take him through the Sahara desert to find a lost city. Brazzi hires Wayne as his guide and Sophia Loren is a women who tags along, against Wayne's wishes. Wayne finds out Brazzi is looking for a lost city full of gold and thinks he is crazy and wants to turn back. It's a underrated movie and one of Wayne's better films.
38 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
John Wayne and Sophia Loren are magnificent in search for a lost treasure at dangerous desert
ma-cortes11 June 2010
Timbuktu is the background of this mostly entertaining tale about three characters , an adventurer scout named Joe January (John Wayne) , an archaeologist (Rossano Brazzi) and a gorgeous girl (Sophia Loren ) in search for a lost city in the desert called Ophir and a fabulous treasure hidden.

John Wayne leaves his Stetson and horse for a camel in this exotic adventure set in Sahara desert plenty of Tuaregs , sandstorms , mirages and amazing dangers . This exciting picture is packed with adventures, action , thrills , a loving triangle and is quite amusing . Interesting screenplay by Ben Hetch , Billy Wilder's usual writer. Breathtaking cinematography with luminous and bright colors by Jack Cardiff . Atmospheric and evocative musical score by the Italian Angelo Francesco Lavagnino . The motion picture is professionally directed by Henry Hathaway. He had a reputation as being difficult on stars, but some actors such as Cary Cooper , Marilyn Monroe -Niagara- and especially John Wayne , The Duke , benefited under his direction . Big John played for Hathaway various films as ¨The sons of Katie Elder (65), ¨Circus World (64) ¨ certainly not one of his memorable movies , ¨How the west was won (62) ¨, ¨ North to Alaska (60)¨ , but his greatest hit smash was ¨True grit (69)¨ in which Wayne won his only Academy Award . Although Hathaway was a highly successful and reliable director film-making within the Hollywood studio system , his work has received little consideration from reviewers . Rating : Acceptable and passable , well worth watching . The film will appeal to adventure buffs and John Wayne and Sophia Loren fans .
19 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Ambitions may kill you
esteban17479 December 2007
It is a good combination to have strong John Wayne together with attractive Sophia Loren in a film, which was complemented with the acting of the Italian Rossano Brazzi. The film in fact is just an invention, everything starts in Timbuctu, an area populated by Touaregs and today part of Mali in West Africa, which at the time of the film plot was under the French domination. Here you have an American (Wayne)trying to celebrate 4th July there, then a white prostitute (Loren) and a French "Lord" (Brazzi). Wonder how a white prostitute and an American were able to reach that far area as Timbuctu. At present a plane flies daily from Bamako to Timbuctu, and to go by road is not advisable. Another fiction is to find a river in the Sahara. In any case, the best is to forget the origin of the subjects and its fictions in the film and to follow the plot, which is of value. Love may be developed after continuous talks between people, poor and non educated ones may like to be rich, but in several cases their sense of solidarity prevails over the ambitions, and this is what we find in the film, a good example of cruel egoism and also human solidarity. The best is that the egoist does not win finally.
16 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
"The Sahara Desert, straight ahead and turn to your left."
classicsoncall31 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
He may not be battling the entire Apache Nation, or winning World War II single handedly, but John Wayne has his hands full with co-star Sophia Loren in this desert adventure. Wayne's character is Joe January, a guide hired by Paul Bonnard (Rosanno Brazzi) to help him locate his missing father and a lost treasure in the Sahara Desert. Loren's character Dita is a reforming prostitute, who shanghais herself onto the expedition, and creates an unnerving romantic tussle between the two male leads, who manage to have two fist fights on her behalf before it's all over.

That said, the premise sounds more interesting than the actual presentation. The film moves along rather slowly, and offers little in the way of excitement or interest in support of the story. The one sit up and take notice scene occurs when January attempts to pull the plug on the expedition when their water runs down to an eight hour supply, and Dita obliges by dumping the canteens in support of Bonnard's legend. Fortunately the lost city suddenly appears, and sets the stage for some intrigue as Bonnard slowly loses his mind after discovering the remains of his father's party. Jealous of January's interest in Dita, he leaves both stranded at the ruins, taking all the water, supplies and pack animals with him.

Offsetting the pace of the story is the excellent cinematography of the Libyan Sahara, rich with vibrant color. You felt the searing heat and the wretchedness of being stranded without hope for survival, yet knowing things would always work out for hero and heroine. At least Wayne's character had one true friend in the film, his donkey (mule?) Janet remained true blue to the end.

This is not one of John Wayne's more charismatic adventures, and among his lesser known starring roles. I'll recommend it though for at least one offbeat scene - Wayne does a mean jackass impersonation!
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Rain In The Desert
bkoganbing1 March 2007
Legend of the Lost paired John Wayne and Sophia Loren for their one and only teaming on the silver screen. Too bad it wasn't in a much better film than this barely disguised rip off of Rain.

The setting for this film is French West Africa as it was then known in 1957 before it became several new African countries in a few years. The Duke is Joe January, a freebooting American expatriate who hires out as a guide on the desert.

Rossano Brazzi wants to hire Wayne as a guide to take him to a fabled lost city that he swears his father found out in the middle of the Sahara. The father disappeared on a return trip and Brazzi is also looking to find out what happened to him.

In Timbucktu both of them encounter Sophia Loren who's a working girl. She's got the both men going, but it's Brazzi she really loves. Brazzi's a spiritual sort of fellow, talking about doing some good for the native population. When they go out in the desert, she trails after them.

They find the ruins of what was an old Roman city, bet you didn't know the Romans got that far south. Brazzi also learns what happened to his father with a letter found on his remains and two other human remains and some forensic conclusions. For the rest of the story if you've seen any adaption of Somerset Maugham's Rain you know what's going to happen.

I have to say that on the plus side Jack Cardiff's color cinematography of the Libyan desert because that's where the film was shot is breathtakingly beautiful. The rest of it is kind of silly. Forgetting the fact that Sophia with two men on the desert is going to lead to obvious complications, I cannot believe that Wayne was taking booze on the trip. In his role here and in real life Wayne was a prodigious drinker. But alcohol except some small amount for medicinal emergencies is an outright hazard on the desert. The sun will dehydrate you that much quicker if you keep drinking alcohol as well as water. Not to mention traveling by day instead of by night.

My conclusion is that since this was a Batjac production, John Wayne wanted to do something that could be classified as arty. Since he had already done well in The Long Voyage Home, I'm not sure what he felt he had to prove.

I do wonder what Somerset Maugham must have thought when he saw this film though.
31 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Very enjoyable piece of nonsense
MOscarbradley26 October 2018
Considering that for most of this film there are only three characters on screen and two of them are very badly played by John Wayne and Rossano Brazzi, (the third is a sultry looking Sophia Loren and she's very good in an underwritten role), Henry Hathaway's "Legend of the Lost" is a surprisingly entertaining piece of nonsense, complete with lost treasure and some gorgeously photographed desert locations courtesy of Jack Cardiff. There isn't much else yet Hathaway manages to keep us watching, maybe with a promise that something is going to happen even if in the end, it hardly ever does. It's success probably had a lot to do with the Westener's love of deserts and exotic locations, (maybe there's a touch of the T. E. Lawrence in all of us). It's hardly the best of Hathaway but there's no denying it's very enjoyable.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
One gets to imagine strange things in the desert.
hitchcockthelegend21 June 2009
Scallywag desert veteran Joe January is bailed out of prison to act as a guide for Paul Bonnard. Bonnard is in Timbuktu to search for treasure in the Sahara, something his now missing father set off to do some time before. Along for the journey is Dita, a low moral woman who caught Bonnard's good will during a set-too in the town earlier. So January sets off with his suspicions on full alert, women and treasure!, has to be a recipe for trouble...surely?

I can't dress it up, Legend Of The Lost is just about watchable for a few comic moments and it's decent enough production values. John Wayne {Jones}, Sophia Loren {Dita} and Rossano Brazzi {Bonnard} star in what on paper looked to be a real good thing. Three actors who can arguably lay claim to having a volume of fans to rival those of the Hollywood heavy weights past and present. Yet it doesn't quite come together, it lacks an adventure spark that the story clearly hints should be there. It's not helped by Brazzi and his inability to act, he is someone who continues to baffle me in how he managed to get mainstream cash work in the first place. Loren as usual, pouts and teases the men on screen and the boys in the audience, but do we care? Actually no. During her moments of peril, one can't help hoping that Duke Wayne will shoot her to ease all the suffering of the viewers.

Ah, bless The Duke, for he be the one bright acting spot in the picture. In fine physical shape and clearly knowing that tongue in cheek is the best way to play this one, Duke enjoys himself and hopefully his fans can get a modicum of enjoyment from this badly casted piece. The location work in Libya is real nice {Jack Cardiff once again delivering fine photography}, with the desert sequences enhanced by the always pleasant Technicolor. But don't be kidded that this is a character study worth venturing into, for if it didn't have the star names attached to it, they would have burned the negative long before release. 3.5/10
17 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Through the cracks and forgotten
kols25 January 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Yet Wayne, Loren, Brazzi all together and at the top of their form and status as stars!

And not just Wayne, Loren and Brazzi but a script by Hecht and Presnell and cinematography by Cardiff. Should have been a blockbuster.

Instead a studio-like programmer focused on a Saharan adventure and getting everything wrong. For example, making Timbuktu a part of French Morocco, complete with belly-dancers and corrupt Prefect. And a hackneyed plot, recycled from everything from She to King Salomon's Mines.

Apart from Wayne, Loren, Hecht and Cardiff, this movie has absolutely nothing going for it.

Except for Wayne, Loren, Hecht and Cardiff.

As ridiculous as it is, Legend of the Lost is very much a vehicle highlighting all of the principles at their best. Wayne as Joe January (are you serious?) pulls off Hecht's tongue-in-check dialogue effortlessly as well as his character's jovial lechery, with Loren doing the same as a sexy-as-hell bad girl, flashing a lot of leg and coming just short of repeating her Boy on a Dolphin wardrobe malfunction. All the while projecting a serious intelligence as well as sex. Even Brazzi makes his character dramatically believable. Add to all of that the energetic extras and you've got the makings of a great Graphic Comic.

Which, I think, is the standard Legend of the Lost should be judged by. Especially when you add Cardiff's cinematography, which even many of the negative reviews praise. The visuals, editing and production values are outstanding.

Before its time or, more likely, a happy accident, Legend of the Lost seems to have suffered more from audience expectation than its success at doing exactly what it set out to do. I don't think it was ever meant to be anything except a fun romp through a territory already well trod and familiar, as such, to its audience. What we would call today a 'Little' movie.

And that's where, I believe, all of the negative reviews come from. When you've got Superstars as principles, especially in the 50's, you're going to expect The Ten Commandments or Gone with the Wind, not Harold and Maude. Reacting according.

So, in my opinion, Legend of the Lost is a small gem worthy of serious reconsideration. Suspend your disbelief, dump the Big Stars expectations and just watch the visuals (the score's pretty good too) and you might be rewarded.

A final note: the movie begins with the Prefect marching down a street followed by his entourage, each element of which is separated, given 2-3 seconds to drive home the point, as the Prefect inspects his territory (which includes its own little intriguing snippets) and finally meets up with the Important Foreigner (Brazzi). As a tone setter, I thought it was brilliant.

Correction and blame the lame Web algorithms: I tried French Timbuktu and French Mali, coming up goose eggs on both. Turns out the French mistook Mali for the Sudan (not a big surprise) soooo .... The French were in charge of Mali, Timbuktu and a lot of other West African territories in 1957. Even so, Timbuktu still never looked like Morocco, French or no French.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Sophia Loren gets attacked by tarantulas!
Aussie Stud25 June 2001
Is just one of the many silly scenes contained in this fun and laid back adventure movie.

John Wayne plays a drifter seeking a 'lost city of gold' in the middle of the desert. Sophia Loren plays one of the town whores and Rossano Brazzi is the adventurer seeking treasure based on the map left by his late father.

The three team up together as a result of comical circumstances. Sophia falls in love with Rossano and follows him, who teams up with John Wayne as they go in search of the lost city of gold. This almost sounds like one of Bob Hope's "Road To..." movies. It certainly has the same appeal.

The best scene is seeing Sophia Loren swatting at tarantulas that appear out of nowhere in a cavern she decides to take a nap in. Both Rossano and Sophia do their best impressions of 'insanity' as they both get a shot at being dehydrated and wandering the sands of time. John Wayne as usual keeps his cool and acts as savior to both, but only one of the two will survive.

Watching this movie wasn't so bad. It was a break from seeing John Wayne battling it out with Indians and cowboys or shooting at soldiers in a war. Think of this as the laid-back version of "Indiana Jones" for the late 50's.

6/10
10 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Three stars hungry for treasure, thirsty for water, and dying for a decent script...
moonspinner5517 November 2007
Colorless title for a dishwater-dull adventure saga starring John Wayne, Sophia Loren, and Rossano Brazzi, three disparate characters crossing the Sahara desert in the same direction as Brazzi's ill-fated father, who went missing ten years prior after finding a lost city stocked with rubies and emeralds. Wayne, playing a desert guide/troublemaker down on his luck in Timbuktu, drawls like he's still back on the range, while Loren has little to do but tease the two men unconsciously; apparently she isn't aware of her amply carnal charms--and though she's playing a streetwise prostitute, whenever the two men get randy around her, she pulls away screaming, "No! Don't touch me!" Brazzi has it the worst however, initially preaching enlightenment to Sophia in a brotherly way, later forcing himself upon her, but just as quickly turning on both his companions like a dirty dog. It's a hopeless role, and indicative of the patchy, puzzling screenplay. This movie has enough peaks and valleys to redesign any desert, and the final crawl isn't dramatic or gripping or emotional--just wasted time on the clock. ** from ****
14 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Superb cinematography, Sophia at her most gorgeous.
jwardww31 May 2005
This film is invaluable for its exquisite production values. It should not be missed for '50s costuming and make-up conventions, however improbable for a desert expedition. In addition, the no-show direction left all three principals to their own devices; and their natural strengths and weaknesses as performers are exposed. John Wayne fares best here, as he has never been more charismatic...or done more with less of a script. Brazzi fares worst, being unconvincing as a rival to John Wayne and as a romantic match for Sophia Loren. Pay close attention to the fist fight among the three adventurers. You will see each punch miss by at least a foot and a half.
27 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not bad, rare offering from The Duke & Sofia
freemanpatrick724 June 2014
I must have seen this one before because there were a couple scenes that seemed familiar. But going into it I would have sworn it was new to me.

This rare gem is not one that usually comes to mind when one thinks of John Wayne movies and it's unfortunate because it's a good one.

There were parts, to be sure, that just didn't work. For example, there's just no way I'm going to buy any red blooded man being such an asshole to the likes of Sofia Loren, as Joe January was throughout most of the film.

Also, Paul Bonnard's character arc was just too quick and sudden.

But over all I enjoyed the film. Fans of either John Wayne or Sofia Loren will probably like it also.

I do think it was pointless to shoot on location in Lybia, of all places, since all the exterior shots could just as effectively been done in the deserts of the South West, like Glamis, or Death Valley.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
rosanno brazzi was an ass
sandcrab27731 January 2020
I can;t believe any man that says his face is prettier than any woman, quote from brazzi.... and here he is with sophia loren, one of the world's beauties ... brazzi is ineffectual in stirring loren to fever pitch but watne really gets her juices flowing and she comes alive when she realizes that only joe can get her home
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Almost a Classic Tragedy
midgy-784346 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Three main characters - Joe January (Wayne) a rough, hard-drinking ne'er-do-well guide (antagonist); Dita (Loren) - a beautiful prostitute/pickpocket; and 3) Paul Bonnard (Brazzi), a Frenchman searching for treasure of a lost city in order to do good for mankind (protagonist). Joe, who initially sneers at Bonnard, eventually comes to admire him. Bonnard treats Dita as human. But Bonnard has a tragic flaw - he has modeled himself on his father, and when he finds his father had feet of clay, he self-destructs. Antagonist and protagonist change places in the X (chi) formula of Greek tragedy roughly halfway through the movie.

Decent script and good acting, although as another reviewer mentions, Wayne and Loren lack chemistry.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A tired film
jromanbaker14 August 2020
I have little to say about this film. The dialogue is pitiful. Sophia Loren screeches, and Rossano Brazzi is going through the motions of a tired role: a man in search of treasure. As for John Wayne he is at his most intolerable and almost as loud in his own way as Loren. It is a pity because this cast, popular in the 1950's could manage better in less cliched films. Brazzi in ' Summer Madness ', Loren almost believable as a Greek in the entertaining ' Boy on a Dolphin ' and Wayne wonderfully subdued in ' The High and the Mighty '. These were all immensely popular mainstream films of the 50's. This film is a turkey in that good year of cinema, 1957. But if it is cold and raining and you are trapped indoors the scenery is watchable and if you are not too discerning it could appeal, but please close off your brain before watching. Henry Hathaway directed and his slapdash approach to his subject matter is lethargic to say the least, and even the lost city is in the wrong place. The soundtrack music is mediocre.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Wayne Rides Off Into.....the Desert
iquine9 February 2019
Warning: Spoilers
(Flash Review)

John Wayne gets hired as a guide for a paper man who goes in search of his father in the vast Sahara Desert whom he doesn't expect to find alive and also gold which the man believes he can find from some ancient texts his father had. Joined also by a troubled woman (Loren) who Wayne ridicules but the other man tries to warmly council. During the journey mistrust and people's true colors shine through with the pressures of a long desert journey and sparklingly treasure. What troubles will this bring? Will everyone make it out of the desert? This was another fine John Wayne picture that had a competent story, neat adventure and picturesque locals.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Insipid lost-treasure yarn has a striking backdrop
shakercoola16 May 2019
An Italian-American adventure; A story about an idealistic treasure-seeker and a prostitute and thief, who enlist an experience guide and soldier of fortune, who set out on a trek into the Sahara to search for buried treasure left in the ruins of ancient Timgad. This film moves ponderously and stretches credulity with its contrivance thanks to a thinly plotted script. Themes of lust, greed and paranoia comes over as superficial. When John Wayne and Sophia Loren are together their scenes aiming for passion lack spark. The Libyan locations and exotic locales provide striking scenerywhich is captured well by Jack Cardiff in high colour and the capturing of life among the Tuareg adds interest.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
John Wayne and Rossano Brazzi at the mercy of Sophia Loren and their passions out in the desert
clanciai4 August 2015
An amazing film, totally out of the ordinary, almost unknown today, deserves refreshing, very much reminding of the classic silent "Greed" by Erich von Stroheim - it's the same atmosphere, the same desperate passion, the same hopelessness, the same drama intensity in a totally outcast state as far from reality and civilization as possible, only, this is in colour, this is exotic, this is flesh and meat, and here is Sophia Loren.

She actually makes the film. From her first scene you catch yourself watching only her, and her character is the most complex and fascinating. John Wayne is as he always has been, he could only play himself, while Rossano Brazzi more credibly matches Sophia. His tragedy touches on the absurd, but on closer scrutiny his development into psychosis is perfectly logical. The script (Ben Hecht screwing it up as always) is perfectly watertight in its complex turnings and sudden surprises in the winding labyrinths of the relationships, constantly taking the audience aback, and to this comes the fascinating story of the quest for a lost city in the middle of the Sahara - this also brings "The English Patient" into mind.

But above all it's a passion play, three is never good company if one of them is a woman and she is beautiful and irresistible at that for both the men, and the passion is played out efficiently in the ruins of the failed archaeological enterprise with the ecstasy and agony of Rossano Brazzi as the heart of the matter at the mercy of hopeless love and delusion. No matter how much he falls out you tend to like him better than John Wayne, who is so hopelessly crude in his simplicity.

There are even some hints at "Mackenna's Gold" in this in part even rather mystical drama, as the omens of the skeletons add an extra touch of marvel.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Eh, Sophia, make up your mind
vincentlynch-moonoi19 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I thought I had watched this before and didn't like it. But, I decided to at least start watching it again, and overall I liked it. Must have been confusing it with some other film.

When I was a kid I thought Sophia Loren was the most beautiful woman in the world. After watching this film I can see that while she may have been the most beautiful woman in the world, it took a little work to make her that way. She looks a little ratty here...but that does go along with her character. But still very entertaining.

The biggest problem with this film is that there is so much time trudging across the Sahara. It's part of the plot, of course, and had to be done, but those parts get just a bit tedious.

Otherwise, this is a pretty enjoyable film, and the ending provides real surprises...including that, for once, John Wayne doesn't save the day.

The plot involves Rossano Brazzi whose father may have discovered treasure in a lost city in the Sahara Desert, and Rossano is out to reclaim the treasure, possibly find his father, and -- with religious fervor -- save Sophia Loren from life as a prostitute. He hires John Wayne as his guide, and Sophia Loren tags along because she wants to the "saved" by both Brazzo, but at various times falls in love with both Brazzo and Wayne. They do find the treasure, which turns Roassano into...well, we'll let you find out that for yourself.

John Wayne, who I enjoy...or not...depending on the film, is pretty good here; it's sorta classic John Wayne, just a different desert. The messy Sophia Loren is good here, also, although I think the writers and directors didn't develop a particularly deep character. Rossano Brazzi is excellent...at least in the earlier parts of the film, but I though his character changed a bit too much later in the film, but again, that would be the fault of the writers and director, not Brazzi. Kurt Kasznar is decent early in the film as a local official.

This won't end up on my DVD shelf, but I did like it. Give it a try.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A couple of holes
dearsteve-6041218 June 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I'm surprised that others have referred to the script, by Ben Hecht, as being good. Ben was having an off day when he wrote this one. The adventurers run into a hostile group of Bedouins, who have a medical problem with one of their number. Rossano heads into their camp with his medical kit, and we're expecting to see him pull a chicken bone out of the guy's throat and save his life. But no! All of a sudden it's morning and the three adventurers go on their way.

But the one I love is when they're in the ancient lost city of Timgad, and Rossano steals the water, the donkey, and the supplies and sneaks off into the night, while the Duke is sleeping off his nightly booze-out. So in the morning, Sophia and the Duke follow him on foot, with no water. And you would never in a million years guess what happens next! They catch up with him! By this time, without Joe January's desert know-how, Rossano is staggering around aimlessly. Then, a friendly caravan happens along and saves them. And then, movie's over!

It's a gorgeous movie, especially with Sophia to look at, and the photography is terrific. But you know right away when the main character has a phony name like "Joe January," they were running out of ideas. The cast does the best they can. Worth watching once for John Wayne completists, and I'm one.
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Raiders of the lost city,definitely not.
dbdumonteil3 September 2003
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILERS It will not appeal to Spielberg's fans:in a nutshell it's an adult adventure movie,which rather recalls John Huston and even Von Stroheim's "greed".

Three years before,Hathaway had made "garden of evil" a western which dealt with almost the same subject;in spite of the general opinion,I think that "legend of the lost" surpasses the former work.

The audience must be disturbed by the slow pace and by the fact that there are only three characters .Like in "garden of evil" ,danger does not come from the outside ,it's already here ,in man's heart.And what's really puzzling is the psychological evolution of these characters:Paul is the most interesting;it's very unusual that the "good " hero,with whom we side during the first half of the movie,should turn into the "villain".

Hathaway makes a wonderful use of the location ,as he did some years before with his masterpiece "Niagara" :he works wonders with the infinite desert and its mirages and the old lost Roman city.The part in these ruins climaxes the movie:as Dita says ,there are ghosts in this place ,and some ghost do not come from a remote time.The discovery by the raiders of the three skeletons is a good example of "the plot repeats itself" ,a trick that many directors have tackled (see for instance Branagh's "dead again" ,1991):Joe 's sinister "archeology" -trying to piece together the drama which happened some twenty years before- will trigger Paul's lunacy:little by little,he who was a virtuous man will become more and more threatening.He who was raised on Bible ,will adorn Dita with jewels,like a pagan idol.

I say it again,Spielberg's aficionados won't be satisfied:action takes a back seat to psychology and to the splendor of the settings.But it will reward people who like offbeat works.Too bad Hathaway should have ruled out any ambiguity of his ending;had he allowed some doubt,we would have had a Dino Buzzati (Il deserto dei tartari) style conclusion.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed