ROYAL FLASH

UK, 1975, 118 minutes, Colour.
Malcolm Mc Dowell, Alan Bates, Florinda Bolkan, Britt Ekland, Oliver Reed, Michael Hordern, Joss Ackland.
Directed by Richard Lester.

The Flashman novels are highly enjoyable, irreverent satires on 19th Century Empire embodied in the cad of cowardly, exploitive cads, Harry Flashman. He is involved in so many of the big events of the century that ironic comment can be made on historical characters and movements. This film portrays Volume 2, presents the characters and plots (eg. Bismarck, Lola Montez) with the style indicating to audiences the irony of it all. Director Richard Lester adds goon-comic touches and highlights the parody of the "Prisoner of Zenda". It is enjoyable but could have been vastly more so. It could have been less flashy - with more Flash.

1. The interest and appeal of this film? The 19th Century? Britain, satire, costume spectacular? Its qualities as entertainment?

2. The importance of style, for example, the detail of the London club, the London Bath, the Bavarian Court, Bismarck and his background? The effect of audience on this detailed 19th Century reconstruction?

3. The importance of the film being mock-heroic? The effect of this on the audience, the detailed impact of satire, the nature of parody? The portrayal of good and bad? moralizing via mock-heroic? The parody of "The Prisoner of Zenda" etc.?

4. Flashman as a mock-heroic character? Malcolm McDowell's interpretation? His style? The contrast with Rudi as a mock-heroic character? Alan Bates' style of portrayal?

5. The characterization of Flashman in terms of mock-heroic? His opening speech to the boys at Rugby from which he was expelled (the satire on Patton): the satire on his heroism at Afghanistan? His life at the club, his push with Lola, his antagonism of Bismarck, his popularity amongst the English? His goading of Bismarck to boxing? His way of life in England? His going to Bavaria for money? His shooting, tricked in the sexuality? The hold of Bismarck and Rudi over him? Their vengeance and diplomacy? The plot and his participation by fear? His attempts to escape? His training as the prince and the humour? The meeting of Irma and the parody of royal occasions? The wedding ceremony. the honeymoon? The death threat and the fall from the bridge? His life with the rebels? Encounter with the real Karl Magnus? The sword fighting and the final escape?

6. The picaresque view of a hero? A hero and coward? The momentum of the events and audience involvement?

7. Rudi as an opportunist? His background, his working for Bismarck, his flair for the theatrical, especially for the rescue from the castration? His coaching of Flashman,, his standing in the background, the final swordfight,' the Hungarian Roulette at the end? What was being communicated by this characterization?

8. The contrast with Bismarck? The Teutonic attitude? How serious a portrait of Bismarck? The boxing, the plot, the ambitions for Germany, the fencing with Flashman, wounding him, the details of his plans to destroy him? Drawing a map for thirty years? (The use of Wagner's music?)

9. The portrayal of Lola Montez? The historical reference, the encounter with Flashman? Her life in London, sexuality and Flashman? Her hold in Bavaria? Entertaining Ludwig? Her final escape and robbing of Flashman?

10. The Princess Irma and her frigidity? The convincing portrayal of Teutonic frigidity? The change with the honeymoon? The comic jibes at the Germans2

11. The portrayal of the rebels, their attitude towards Bismarck? Their sieging of the castle.. the mock-heroism of the swim and the fight?

12. Rudi's attendants, the sinister man who fell from the bridge, the man with the iron fist? The comedy and melodrama? For example, dancing the polka, the final fight?

13. The contribution of such minor characters as the headmaster, the lawyer, Lola Montez's duel, Flashman appearing on the stage etc.?

14. How enjoyable was the set pieces of London, the siege of the club, the shooting in Bavaria, the training and the marriage?

15. The entertainment value of the film? The comment on the 19th Century? A 20th Century look at the 19th Century?