I have been a Flashy fan since the first novel, and have read them all. So back when the movie came out, i was exited. It sounded so well. GMF doing the script, Lester directing and featuring a great cast. Reed, Bates, Macdowell and Ekland. It all sounded good. After all, Fraser and Lester had made the best musketeer adaption ever. Unfortunately they picked the weakest of the Flashman books. (To be fair it's a very enjoyable read, but compared to the others it comes out not quite up to standard). I guess they picked it because it could be made within a certain budget. No large battle scenes and it could be made in European locations. One can always debate whether MacDowell was the right choice. He certainly lacked the stature, but on the other hand he did project that natural insolence one would expect from Flashy. But they made it too silly in my opinion. Flashman may be a coward, but he is a trained soldier and should have shown more skill in sword fights. Parts of the movie works well though, just don't expect too much.

Plot: A cowardly Englishman is kidnapped by Otto Bismarck and forced to impersonate the king of a small country.This is the third of four collaborations between director Richard Lester and screen writer George MacDonald-Fraser, combining the former's manic energy and ad-libbed humour with the latter's skill at weaving an adventure tale. The story is essentially a re-mix of 'The Prisoner of Zenda', with the addition of a historical background (the 1848 Revolutions and Otto Bismarck's attempts to unify Germany). The genius of the Flashman protagonist (this is adapted from a terrific series of books) is that in public he is a war hero but in private he is a lecherous coward. Cue instant entertainment (with a uniquely reluctant hero) as he is dragged into the dangerous plot. Fans of the novels have quite rightly complained that Malcolm McDowell isn't dark or beefy enough for the character - but it doesn't much matter as he turns in a terrific performance anyway. The film is full of good actors (David Jason, Bob Hoskins, Oliver Reed) who are uniformly excellent, with even Britt Ekland doing a stand-up job. This ability extends to every other part of the production. The locations and costume are stunning and unusual - Victorian Mitteleurope looking beautiful and strangely exotic (to this Englishman). The key however is the plot, which is stuffed with intrigue, love-affairs, pursuits, assassinations, humour and darn good characters. Also look out for much period-authentic slang and all sorts of odd historically accurate details. The 1970s was also a perfect time for such a film, with social rebellion breaking down the stuffiness of many prior historical films, yet without the stultifying political correctness present in so many modern historical films. It zips along with pace, making best use of the historical background to magnify the drama (zip-wiring down a telegraph line) until it's thoroughly satisfying conclusion.Worth two or more viewings.

As an avid fan of the Flashman books by George McDonald Fraser, I looked forward immensely to seeing Flashy on the big screen when this film was first released. Sadly it was a huge disappointment then - so I left it alone for 20 years before going back to watch it again, but it was no better the second time. Mr Fraser is a tremendously skillful writer, but I am not a fan of his film screenplay work with Richard Lester. The penchant for slapstick spoilt 'The Three Musketeers' for me and the same applies here. To me, the whole tone and feel of the film is wrong. The Flashman books are uproariously funny in parts, but they are adventure novels. There is much seriousness in the way the adventures that Flashman has - after all, he is involved in dangerous situations. This is conveyed in the novels, but not conveyed at all on film due to the its comedic style. It is a tremendous shame as it could have a great film had it been a more faithful adaptation of the style of the book. When I first read that the book was to be filmed, the article said that the film was to star Oliver Reed. I rejoiced, as Reed to me was the epitome of Flashman. How I would have loved to see him in the role. Malcolm McDowell is a good actor, but does not fit the visual image of Flashman created by the books (too scrawny looking! Flashman is supposed to be a big strapping fellow). Neverheless Reed was excellent as Bismarck. What kills the film is that it is made as a comedy. The only scene in which it creates the true atmosphere of the book is the scene in which Flashman kills de Gautet (Tom Bell). A great shame, as the production values, costumes, sets etc are superb and the casting is generally excellent - just about everybody in the film is well cast apart from Malcolm McDowell. Possibly the directorship of Richard Lester was responsible for the way the film is, as a recent radio adaptation of 'Flash For Freedom', adapted by Mr Fraser, worked quite well. Perhaps one day we may see Flashman done justice on screen.

If you haven't read any of the Flashman series, go out and find one. Rollicking good read, with the protagonist being an absolutely selfish, cowardly, mean-spirited ass of a man who nonetheless finds himself considered a dashing hero by the public at large. Fraser does a good job of converting his book to the screen (writing Three Musketeers was probably good practice), re-teaming with Richard Lester. MacDowall is good as ol' Flashy, glossing over the fact that Harry is supposed to a large, strapping Brit, and not a skinny little guy like Malcolm. :)Enjoyable on its own merit, but I'd say read one of the other Flashy books and then see this.