The Lighthorsemen (1987) User Reviews

Worth every cent just to see the final battle.

[innocuous · 8/10 · 12 January 2005]

I have watched this movie at least five times. Initially, I was a little disappointed by the tedium of the first half of the movie. I began to realize, however, that the first half of the movie is a pretty good reflection of military life prior to the second half of the 20th century: long periods of boredom and routine punctuated by major confrontations.

I've noticed that a few reviewers have remarked on the final "cavalry charge," which suggests to me that they really weren't paying much attention to the movie. The final charge on the Turkish positions is so much more awe-inspiring given the usual tactics of the Lighthorsemen. One of the most thrilling moments is when the Aussies prepare to meet the enemy on horseback and, instead of pulling out the classic cavalrymen's sabers, draw their bayonets for the charge. You almost want to laugh at the sight of 16" knives against the well-emplaced Turks.

This is one of the few war movies based on actual events that is fairly accurate, too. Take a look at some of the sites dedicated to the 4th Light Horse Briagde and you will see what I mean. A letter from one of the actual participants to his brother is an almost perfect description of the events as shown in the movie.

**** out of ***** if only for the charge

RKO Pictures presents a new 1987 movie!

[ptb-8 · 8/10 · 17 January 2006]

This colossal 1987 production - believe it or not - from RKO PICTURES is an Australian film closely resembling LAWRENCE OF ARABIA in its intent and rightly compared to ZULU. With a huge cast of Oz actors and directed by PHAR LAP (look it up) warhorse Simon Wincer it is basically about the last massive charge in the Middle East desert during World War One....an event still on the yearly Australian military forces roster of "Anzac" celebrations. Many other comments on this site will give you details of the history of the event and rightly applaud this lavish spectacular film. RKO Pictures had reformed with some co financing in the 80s and this is one of their few productions. BEST LITTLE WHOREHOUSE and THE BORDER are two others that spring to mind produced with Universal Pictures. With a $7 million budget and all of it on screen THE LIGHTHORSE became the last of the truly international films from Australia in the 80s. Others of this time are GALLIPOLI and CAREFUL HE MIGHT HEAR YOU and THE MAN FROM SNOWY RIVER and WE OF THE NEVER NEVER...each are films made with a lavish widescreen cinema release in mind and each huge Oz successes. THE LIGHTHORSEMEN is well worth the 140 minutes or so of carefully paced storytelling, all laced with Aussie humor and superb design and photography. The charge in the last two reels is truly breathtaking and on a cinema screen was particularly overwhelming, rivaling the battle charge in LAWRENCE OF ARABIA for sheer thrilling visuals. No CGI in this film... it is all real and scary and played and filmed for keeps. One thrill for cinema owners of the day was to have the film commence with the original cinema scope RKO logo...beeping away from the tower on top of the world. Wonderful!

Rousing

[Varlaam · 7/10 · 11 August 1999]

A First World War Australian cavalry -- sorry, mounted infantry -- film set in the Holy Land, that's not something one tends to see every day. So, for me, the fact that, yes, the characters and situations can be a little clichéd at times is far outweighed by the novelty of the whole scenario. Quibbles are easy to put to one side.

The cavalry distinction is important. Cavalry would be armed with carbines and sabres. Mounted infantry have rifles and dismount in order to fight. This subtlety plays a part in the outcome.

A series of small skirmishes heightens tension within the film until the exciting finale, when there is a fantastic, large scale, cav ... mounted infantry charge which got my pulse racing. You'll recall something similar in David Lean's "Lawrence of Arabia". This set piece is bigger. Johnny Turk was the villain that time too.

This being an Australian Imperial Force meets the British Army sort of film, there is bound to be a little Pommy-bashing going 'round. When I lived briefly in Australia a decade ago, I found Pommy-bashing to be the single unattractive facet to the Australian national character. (The Kiwis don't do it. We like Poms here too. Pity the Dominions can't agree on that one.) So while some of the Poms in this film might be a few sheep short of a paddock, still there *is* balance, with one Pom who is much cleverer than the average. Bashing even works its way into the plot, a nice touch that.

The film does not use an excessive amount of Strine lingo -- billy, tucker -- so very little acclimatization is necessary for the uninitiated.

I can't vouch for the overall authenticity of this film. But I did notice that campaign map in the Turkish commander's office. It's labelled in Arabic only. Egypt is identified as "Misr". Geez, that is the correct Arabic name. And the Ottomans were still using the Arabic alphabet at the time. (It's Atatürk after the war who switched Turkish over to the Roman alphabet.) The thing's fair dinkum, mate. If they cared enough to get details like that right, then I'm sure that says a lot about the effort put into the film as a whole.

There is an earlier Australian film about the Light Horse I'd like to see, "Forty Thousand Horsemen" from 1940 or '41 (sources differ). Finding a copy of that film in this hemisphere though would be extraordinary, a bit like finding a North American who likes Vegemite.

Incredible Effects

[suessis · 19 September 2000]

Despite the ubiquitous appearance by Sigrid Thorton, and my having to eat crow over my previous comments on Anthony Andrew's acting ability (no scenery chewing or hamming it up here), I very much enjoyed this outstanding Aussie film.

Simon Wincer has directed a wide variety of films, some bad (like the Cheryl Ladd waste of celluloid "Bluegrass" and the turkey "Pharlap") and some very good (like the intense "Harlequin" and the great A&E mini "PT Barnum"). I find this one to be particularly special due to it containing one of the best war sequences on film.

Wincer and his crew have excellently interwoven a beautifully done drama with incredible special effects. The battle sequence at the end if the film is so powerful that even seen on video on an average size home TV it is astounding. Not only is the Lighthorsemen's assault wonderfully choreographed, but the reaction shots of the cast are well performed. You can see the private struggles going on in the face of the big one.

This is not a movie for the faint of heart nor should it be dismissed as just another war movie by those a little leery of the genre.

Spectacular Australian film about the men of a World War I light horse unit involved in the 1917 Battle of Beersheeba.

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 11 August 2012]

This impressive flick is based on a true story and most of the characters in the film were based on real people and dealing with the continued coming of age of the Australian nation and its soldiers . The film follows Four Australians, Frank (Gary Sweet), Scotty (Jon Blake who was injured in a car accident and he suffered permanent paralysis and brain damage until his recent death) an Irish-Australian, Chiller (Tim McKenzie) and Tas (John Walton) in Palestine in 1917, part of the 4th Light Horse Brigade of the British and Commonwealth Dominion forces. When Frank is wounded and dies of his wounds, he is replaced by Dave (Peter Phelps). Dave finds himself unable to fire his weapon in combat and is transferred to the Medical Corps, where he will not need to carry a weapon, but where he will still be exposed to the fighting . After the Second Battle of Gaza ended in complete failure, General Archibald Murray (Tony Bonner) , the commander in chief of the British forces in Egypt and Palestine, was replaced by the distinguished cavalry commander, General Edmund Allenby (Anthony Hawkins) , formerly the commander of the British Third Army on the Western Front to carry out the British plan the capture of Beersheba. During an attack by Turkish cavalry, Major Richard Meinertzhagen (Anthony Andrews) deliberately leaves behind documents indicating that the attack on Beersheba will only be a diversion. At the ending there takes place the Battle of Beersheba (Turkish: Birüssebi Savaşı) that was one critical element of a wider British offensive, known as the Third Battle of Gaza, aimed at breaking the Ottoman defensive line that stretched from Gaza on the Mediterranean shore to Beersheba ; it took place on 31 October 1917, as part of the Sinai and Palestine campaign during World War I . Notable was the charge of the Australian 4th Light Horse Brigade, which covered some 6 kilometres (3.7 mi) to overrun and capture the last remaining Ottoman trenches, and secure the surviving wells at Birüssebi . The total losses incurred by the Desert Mounted Corps was 53 men killed and 144 wounded. The heaviest Allied losses were suffered by the British infantry of XX Corps, which lost 116 killed in action, although the total number of men killed during the battle from the British force was far greater, totalling 171 men.

It follows in the wake of other Australian New Wave war movies such as Breaker Morant (1980), Gallipoli (1981), and the 5-part TV series Anzacs (1985). Recurring issues of these films include the Australian identity , such as mateship and friendship , ANZAC spirit , the loss of innocence in war, and breathtaking battles spectacularly filmed . Acceptable acting from main and support cast including prestigious Aussie/English actors such as Anthony Andrews , Shane Bryant , Sigrid Thornton , Tony Bonner , Gary Tweed , Bill Kerr , though none of the performances are really bad, but none are very good . Gorgeous outdoors are well photographed by cameraman Dan Cundey . Despite being set in Palestine and Egypt, the film was shot entirely on location in Victoria and Hawker, South Australia . Rousing and emotive musical score was composed by Mario Millo. It was nominated for Best Achievement in Cinematography and won an Australian Film Institute award in 1988 for Best Original Music Score and another for Best Achievement in Sound. It grossed a lot of money at the box office in Australia . Sensational directorial by the notorious filmmaker Simon Wincer, a Western expert, as he emigrated Hollywood and subsequently directed to Tom Selleck in ¨Monte Walsh¨ , ¨Crossfire trail¨ and ¨Quigley Down Under¨ to Paul Hogan in ¨Relampago Jack¨ and ¨Cocodrile Dundee in L.A.¨ and usually directs episodes for TV mini-series, such as ¨Into the West¨, ¨The Ponderosa¨ , ¨Lonesome Dove¨ and ¨The adventures of young Indiana Jones¨ , among others . Rating: good for the sensitive direction and proficient film-making ; the result is a sort of pacifist-aggressive war adventure . Worthwhile watching .

Better than "Gallipoli"

[Voitcus · 7/10 · 7 August 2006]

This is a story about some episode British-Turk campaign in Palestine in 1917. Very important role in this campaign was played by Australian forces. The key to conquer the Holy Land is city of Gaza. British general wants however to throw his forces to bypass the city and capture another one - Beersheba. To take them both it is necessary to keep his plan secret.

As a person who is interested in all WWI history I was waiting for this movie. I find it very good. All equipment seems to be very accurate, however, I've never heard about use of tanks in this front. There is a nice scene of air attack by German biplane, cars from that times, uniforms, and so on -- it all seems to be historical correct. The final charge is worth waiting for. I think that anyone who is interested in this campaign would be satisfied.

Because of Australian point of view the role of British army seems to be a little underrated. I especially mean British commander -- general Allenby. I think it would be good to say at the very end that after capturing Beersheba, Gaza fell as well a week later, and the road to Jerusalem was opened. This was what was lacking for me.

Excellent portrayal of Australian soldiers in WWI

[TED-26 · 10/10 · 6 August 1999]

Following the bloody debacle at Galipoli, an Aussie lighthorse brigade was given another "Mission Impossible;" they were to move across the waterless desert and attack a heavily armed Turkish post at Beersheba. These were infantry mounted on horseback and getting water was dependent on their success. Their adoption of cavalry tactics was an unexpected stroke. The final attack on Beersheba is worth the time spent watching the whole thing.

Light Horse opera

[tomsview · 7/10 · 17 September 2013]

The "Lighthorseman" works best when the troopers are in the saddle; when they dismount and start talking, the problems begin. No detail of equipment was overlooked in recreating the look of the Light Horse of the Great War, nor were any time-worn clichés from the previous fifty years of war movies.

Few cinematic cavalry charges are better than the one at the end of this movie, but if you were hoping for history brought to life with the same depth and sensitivity as Peter Weir's "Gallipoli", this isn't that movie.

The story focuses on a section of Light Horsemen: Dave, Scotty, Chiller and Tas played by Peter Phelps, Jon Blake, Tim McKenzie and John Walton. Tony Bonner as their commanding officer, Colonel Bourchier, gives one of the film's best performances as a no-nonsense officer who has earned the respect of his men.

When the script deals with the by-play between the troopers the movie has a believable tone, but when it tries to set the scene in historical terms, it gets trickier.

Everybody from stiff-backed German officers to stiff upper-lipped British ones, deliver chunks of laborious exposition, much of it speculation about whether the Light Horse will charge or just dismount and crawl through the sand under intense fire. A German officer, who makes the German officers in Errol Flynn's war movies appear as models of subtlety, comments on the Australians, "They are formidable soldiers but the British don't know how to use them". Forced dialogue such as this makes you appreciate how good Weir's "Gallipoli" really is.

Dave Mitchell is the central character who finds he is unable to shoot the enemy. After being wounded, he meets Anne, a nurse played by Sigrid Thornton, who helps him come to terms with his problem. Although this is apparently based on a true story, the cinematic déjà vu is overwhelming.

The shots of the Light Horse on the move are impressive and the final charge is exciting, but there could be a little too much use of the zoom lens in "The Lighthorsemen".

Our visual knowledge of historic events is shaped by images such as the black and white photography from the last half of the 19th Century followed by film of varying quality through the first half of the 20th Century. Although the zoom lens had been around for about fifty years, it didn't come into it's own until the early 1960's when the problem of focus was solved. You don't see much use of the zoom in movies and documentaries up until then.

Although filmmakers could claim they are bringing history to life in a modern and immediate way, I feel that a period film that uses the zoom extensively tends to distance itself from the look and feel of the times in which it is set. There is no noticeable use of the zoom in John Ford's cavalry trilogy; films that effortlessly capture the period in which they are set.

In World War 1, The Australian Light Horse and the New Zealand Mounted Rifles comprised the British Army's main mobile strike arm in the Sinai and Palestine Campaign. Before tanks, these mounted troops were the British army's equivalent of the next war's Panzers, and Beersheba was their most spectacular Blitzkrieg.

Despite the brashness, "The Lighthorsemen" goes some way towards giving these men, arguably Australia's greatest generation, some belated homage.

The ultimate legend of the ANZACs

[lctorana · 10/10 · 28 October 2001]

The "Charge of the Light Horse" has gone down in the annals of legend, as indeed of history. This, the definitive film of the event so far, is based on the true story of one couple's involvement in the events of the 1917 desert campaign. Like the earlier "Forty Thousand Horsemen" (1940), a very similar film in many respects, it leads up to the momentous charge on Beersheeba with style, tension and humour.

It was partly a starring vehicle for the wonderfully charismatic action hero Jon Blake, whose sad incapacitation has robbed Australian cinema of one of its shining lights.

The scene of the charge is superbly choreographed and filmed, and deserves to be right up there with the chariot race scene from Ben Hur.

I cannot conceive of anything more scary than being on the wrong end of a cavalry charge, and this will have you out of your seat.

I personally rate this as the best film (of any genre) I have ever seen.

Half A League Onward!

[rmax304823 · 7/10 · 25 September 2016]

Nineteen seventeen. Imagine a full-blown 20th-century war fought on horseback. I don't know exactly why this wasn't a more popular movie because it's pretty good. It's made for mature audiences in the sense that so many emotions and attitudes are left unspoken, just as they are in real life, their presence betrayed only by a glance or an expression.

I have no idea what the budget looked like but the movie has characteristics associated with fully fledged feature films, not made-for-TV quickies. The camera catches the sweep of the desert, the impressive arched architecture of the Middle East, the isolation of the units, and the gradual integration of newcomers into sometimes hostile elite groups. I guess the wardrobe is accurate. A casual shot of someone's brown riding boots shows the extra patch of leather across the upper arch to protect against abrasion from the stirrups. Myriad extras.

There's little in the way of back story except what emerges in everyday conversation, and there were times when I was lost while trying to keep the flow chart of command in mind. Perhaps it wouldn't be a problem for an Australian audience. At least at first, it was also difficult to keep the actors straight. It's an ensemble movie and a handful of characters are kept in focus while many others come and go. The identical uniforms are a kind of identity mask and the actors (who are all quite professional) are all handsome and fit young men with similar Aussie personalities -- cheerful, witty, somewhat embarrassed by sentiment, responsible, kinetic, and eager for a challenge, as if it were a sporting contest -- a horse race or a cricket match. I love the Aussies, having lived among them for a while. But this movie is one of those where some familiar Australian faces would be welcome, like Mel Gibson, Eric Bana, Russell Crowe, or -- especially -- Nicole Kidman or Naomi Watts, preferably out of uniform. Not to mention the immortal Chips Rafferty.

When wounded during an air attack one of the men winds up in hospital, attended by a toothsome young nurse. My nurses never look like that. They all remind me of Miss Pavor de Grunt, my fifth grade algebra teacher. There are some amusing scenes. General Allenby arrives to take command. (Jack Hawkins was Allenby in "Lawrence of Arabia.") He and his staff are British. The Australians are subordinates. And the "Pommy bastards" strut around impeccably uniformed even at the rest camp. A British officer registers a complaint that the Aussies are wearing shorts. He knows this is a rest camp but after all. Moments later he's astonished to see men riding their horses bareback -- both man and horse -- through the gentle surf.

There are scenes of combat scattered throughout the plot and a final heroic cavalry charge. The Turks, whom we tend to think of as indecisive warriors, give a good account of themselves and make the Allies pay dearly, although of course there is never any doubt about who are the good guys and the bad guys.

The scenes on horseback are striking. There's nothing like horse in full stride, going like hell, while the horseman stands slightly in the stirrups and doesn't bounce an inch. Staying on a galloping horse requires experience. I once applied for a job as an extra in a cavalry charge in a movie dealing with the pursuit of Pancho Villa in Mexico. They turned me down when they learned how few horses could be seen in Newark, New Jersey.

When You Want To Introduce War Movies To Your Kids?

[damianphelps · 4/10 · 25 March 2021]

I watched this movie initially around its time of release and then again a cpl of days ago.

This second viewing was a bit of a revelation for me. Maybe its the fog of time but I don't remember feeling this way about the movie then as I do now.

This movie is pretty awful, sanitised and bland. It starts of by stealing an opening sequence straight out of The Man From Snowy River, then it hits us with some ole fashioned Aussie banter (cringeworthy) then becomes a bit of a war/romance novel. ALL the characters are clichés.

This is the essence of a good story about real events, that I feel have been done a disservice by this film. This needs to be remade and put some meat on its bones.

Very scenic but nothing else!

A quickly-paced war tale with a breathtaking charge scene.

[ditkomaniac · 9/10 · 14 June 2001]

The Lighthorsemen is a true delight of a movie. It is unpretentious, well-shot, fast-paced, entertaining and interesting from the start.

The movie is slow when it needs to be as in when the Lighthorsemen have to take their horses to the brink of exhaustion in order to surprise the German/Turk occupants of Jacob's Well.

The characters are mostly very well-defined and you feel for them as the movie moves on.

The charge scene is the highlight of the film. You feel as though you are on one of the horses racing into the sights of the entrenched Turks. As the bombs explode and the bullets fly, you can't help but feel the urge to keep your head down. The sight of several hundred charging horses is awe-inspiring.

This movie can be hard to find, but if you do, you have a winner.

Average Acting

[zaphodb1 · 6/10 · 3 March 2013]

The WW1 victory by the British in the 3rd Battle of Gaza in late 1917 led to a retreat by the Ottoman Army to Jerusalem. After further battles in Jerusalem, the British were able to establish a strong front line until September 1918, when the final offensive took place.

The battle of Beersheba took place on the first day of the Battle of Gaza and consisted of a successful infantry attack on the outskirts of the town by the British XX Corps and a mounted attack on outposts to the east. The latter attacks were held up and due to concerns about water, it appeared unlikely that a combined infantry and mounted attack on Beersheba was possible that day. The Australian Chauvel, commander of the ANZAC Mounted Division, wanted to break off to water the horses, but was ordered to attack. The 4th and 12th Regiments of the 4th Light Horse attacked in 3 waves across 4 miles of open desert. The defenders in trenches, with machine gun and artillery support were caught by surprise when the Light Horse continued and failed to dismount. In addition, the attack was so swift, incorrect sighting information was given, and the Light Horse was able to successfully attack 'under the guns', and experienced very light casualties. In turn they killed or captured 2000 enemy as well as several artillery pieces and also captured 15 out of the 17 wells.

The light horse battle at Beersheba was worthy of a film and the battle scenes focusing on the light horse charge was a highlight of the film. The film also focused on intelligence that led to the Turks believing that an attack on Beersheba would only be a diversion.

The film incorrectly had Chauvel offer to attack Beersheba, when the British were faced with withdrawal due to critical water supplies.

The film tried to be realistic and portray the spirit of the Australian troops, especially as the film followed the successful ANZACS miniseries and many of the same actors were present. This was largely unsuccessful however as the acting was poor. Of note was Gerard Kennedy's now politically incorrect portrayal of 'tanned' Turkish commander Ismet Bey and a close up of Gary Sweet firing the 'recoil-less' Lee-Enfield rifle. Dean Semmler (Cinematography) was OK. Also of note was Jon Blake, who was critically injured in a car accident on the last day of filming. The accident ended his acting career.

Stunningly Boring, Disappointingly Boring and Ham Handed

[shoobe01-1 · 5/10 · 15 April 2017]

A shockingly poorly made movie. And I mean shocking because any number of scenes are amazingly beautifully filmed, or blocked. The opening few minutes really get you excited, but the middle 5 hours (it seems like that) are an interminable length of poor acting, emphasized by a hell of a lot of sitting around talking about their feelings poorly, with a lot of poorly written dialog, then they go out and do something to no obvious end and occasionally shoot at someone.

By the end, I didn't care what they were doing, I just wanted it to end.

The few times I saw them, I preferred the Germans. Better actors, great lines the few times they had one.

And I want to emphasize again: Really well filmed when anything except the horsemen in camp, some amazing equipment (where do you get that many WW1 tanks?!?!) and of course if you like watching horses run around, man is this your cup of tea. Go for it. Enjoy.

Recommended viewing.

[redstone-3 · 18 January 2000]

Historically accurate and meticulously researched, this is one of the genre of "federation-era" war productions in the 1980's by the Australian film industry. The high-quality movies and mini-series of this collection included such titles as "Breaker Morant", "Gallipoli" and "ANZACS", and one can see obvious similarities in the techniques and methodology used in their production. This, however, does not detract from their appeal or their entertainment value; quite the reverse, in fact. The formula for this genre was to take an historically-documented campaign and translate it as faithfully as possible to the big screen, with emphasis on characterisation, accuracy of detail and background.

The formula works, because the characters are believable, and the situations, events and settings have been faithfully re-created. Much of the background and information for this genre came from personal diaries and military archives preserved over the years, which adds credence to the plots, the action and the stories.

"The Lighthorsemen" highlights the campaign of the Australian mounted rifles in the North Africa battleground of the Great War, and culminates with the last successful action of horse-riding troops in combat. Without giving away the story too much, the taking of Beersheba in the closing days of 1918 was a decisive event in military history, and the screen portrayal of this action will have you on the edge of your seat.

Masterful performances by Jon Blake, Shane Briant and Bill Kerr (all veterans of this movie formula,) the attention to detail, the drama, and the occasional humour make for a very entertaining movie. It's recommended viewing.

Missing Something

[ArchStanton1862 · 7/10 · 3 July 2012]

This wasn't a great film. Clearly it was trying to be, but somewhere along the way they forgot to figure out what they were trying to say. Is it an anti-war film? Is it pro-war? Is it about man's inhumanity to man? Is it just supposed to be good fun? Having the answer to all that be ambiguous might make it seem like this film is taking a more realistic approach but it doesn't feel realistic, just lazy. I honestly don't think they ever thought about what kind of message they were trying to convey. And that's why despite having a few decent battle scenes and an interesting setting it never really seems to catch your attention.

The plot of the film is pretty basic. The Aussie light horse is in Palestine fighting the Turks. Sooner or later there's going to be a major cavalry charge, but there's no real anticipation for it. Most of the film is the soldiers dealing with each other, engaging in minor skirmishes, and other stereotypical soldier stuff. There's also the painfully stereotypical nurse love interest, who falls for the hero instantly despite not knowing him and having hundreds of other soldiers to choose from. Most of the rest of the incidents, while generic war film tropes, work significantly better. There's a soldier who isn't able to kill people who's crisis is generally handled well. The new guy introduced into the tried and tested unit is another. The film is taken up with these and there are more hits than misses in this regard. The big battle at the end of the film is the battle of Beersheba, the last successful cavalry charge. A subject like this seems perfect for a gung-ho war film about the high point of the ANZAC cavalry forces to counter the anti-war approach of Gallipoli, but as I said before the film never really settles on what it wants to say.

One nice thing about it is the relatively low amount of Pommy-bashing. There is a bit of conflict with the obligatory stiff-necked and humorless British officer, but they also feature a scene where the British soldiers cheer the Aussies on to the embarrassment of the men who are looking for a fight. Furthermore my favorite character in the film is a British intelligence officer. He's every bit the cold and aloof officer you'd expect, but he's smarter than the rest and actually plays up the Aussie perceptions of him to good effect in one hilarious scene. The rest of the characters are somewhat hard to distinguish so this man stands out the more.

A few more minor problems with this film: the scenery which is supposed to be in Israel is really obviously southern Australia. All deserts do not look alike, and Beersheba isn't nearly as deserty looking as they seem to think. The other minor problem that occasionally becomes a major problem is the choice of how to portray the enemy. Both the Turks and the Germans speak perfect English. Since this is World War I and the uniforms aren't as distinctive or imprinted in common memory this occasionally makes it difficult to tell which guys are the good guys. Especially when they're not facing the camera. They don't have many scenes, but that just makes it harder to tell when the film has switched focus to the villains. Also, the final charge goes on forever. I was reminded of Monty Python and the Holy Grail when Lancelot keeps running up the hill never getting closer.

Overall not a bad film. I know I've gone on about the negative points, but that's just because they are the most notable things about this movie and some of them would be so easy to fix. Most of the film is decent enough. Certainly it's worth watching if you're interested in the time or just like war films or Aussie movies in general. I certainly can't think of another film that spends so long with the cavalry. Just don't go in expecting a masterpiece.

A contender for one of the most beautifully photographed films of the 1980's.

[mark.waltz · 7/10 · 15 July 2022]

While minor on the epic scale, this certainly merits credit for the beautiful production design and opulent photography, a different view of World War I that hasn't been dealt with on the screen. It deals with the Australian involvement in the war and in particular, a major battle in Palestine that is reconstructed in a way that is quite believable and gives a true human interest to those involved. The Australians, outside of their own film community, rarely get credit for their place in history, and in watching this film, I developed a new respect for their participation in this historical event. By participation, I mean they were this historical event.

As the film begins, the camera sweeps over the majestic lands it's filming on and from there in the next two hours, the viewer is on a thrilling ride in a journey to the past, and it's one I won't forget. It's also a very personal film with these troops proving themselves to not only be quite heroic but very spiritual, thoughtful people whose own fears are wiped away by the importance of the mission. There are many big scenes, suddenly followed by intimate moments of commiserating between the men, and it brings a really thick slice of life to the events and makes it much more touching. There's romance, subtle humor and thrilling drama, and a production that if you get a chance to see this on a big screen it's worth taking the ride even if you've seen it before.

One of the best charges (horse) seen.

[Harry-18 · 9/10 · 24 July 2000]

I have done horse charges for films before, this one is great. The intensity, apprehension, and desperation is well portrayed in the charge. The horsemanship was excellent. The relationship between the riders and their horses appears authentic. In prior researches that I have done about cavalry and mounted infantry, this kind of relationship truly existed. The love story is somewhat weak, however, this may be cultural.

This movie was recommended viewing from a fellow "cavalryman" and I can appreciate why he recommended it.

Movie magic !!! See it, now !!!

[keeper275 · 9/10 · 20 February 2010]

"Australia will be there" that song made for one of many,many fine scenes in an excellent film. I loved Anthony Andrews character : The British Intel Officer with a German name and his scene out birdwatching with the Aussie Sgt where he deliberately drops the satchel containing a forged "loveletter". I,also, loved the the previous scene where the nurse helped him in "creating" the letter.

The look of satisfaction on the Intel officers faces when they knew they'd fooled the Turks was great.The ending charge was highlighted (for me) when the Brit General said " Their under the Guns". Pure movie magic !!!

Lastly, as a former infantry soldier (US Army 11-H), it looked and felt believable...to me.Can someone please tell me the origon and meaning of "Pommy" .

Fantastic film but poorly served on video

[penguin-60 · 10/10 · 18 August 2009]

I just love this film, everything about it carries one forward to its inevitable last battle. The casting, acting and filming is very Australian in its personality and universally excellent. The real stars to me however were the large number of wonderful horses and their individual riders, who together with the South Australian scenery, where it was shot, and which does wonderfully to replicate the Middle East bring this epic battle back to life. Sadly it has been very poorly served on video. The best release was a laser disc in the US and later a crappy DVD was released in Australia but this had the aspect ratio cut from 2.35 to 1.78 and is an insult to this great film. I have both and still watch my LD, one of my few remaining LDs that have yet to get a decent legal DVD transfer. If you can get and play the LD release do not hesitate otherwise just wait and hope.

Cheering Anzac Fare

[Philby-3 · 25 April 2000]

I saw only the last half of this one, appropriately enough on Anzac Day, tuning in just as the delicious Nurse Siggy Thornton is writing a love letter that intelligence Major Anthony Andrews is going to mislead Johnny Turk with. So I missed the alleged tedium of the first hour. The film is no doubt best viewed on a big screen, but what I did see in the last hour was the Australian Light Horse attack on Beersheba, brilliantly staged and filmed, with hundreds of horses and extras and tonnes of dramatic tension.

The actual battle was an Aussie military success, due in large part to their opponents, especially the Germans, underestimating them. It was a change from Gallipoli, where some of the horsemen had fought a couple of years earlier. It was terribly thoughtful of the Australian commanders to order the attack an hour before sunset when the light is best, and Dean Semler the cinemaphotographer takes full advantage of it. The close camera shots in the battle really give you the feeling you're right in it - there is nothing particularly original about "Saving Private Ryan" made 10 years later.

Yes, it's a cliché-ridden and chauvinistic script. The real villains are the Germans, all from Central Casting's Nazi division, despite this being a movie about the FIRST World War, but the British officers are also portrayed as pretty perfidious - the guys who made snobbery an art form to cover their incompetence. The Turks, though, are shown as brave and worthy opponents, if a little under the Germans' thumb. No doubt John Ford would have done it differently (I'm not sure he would have handled the horses any better) but this is the Australian point of view. A Turkish version would be interesting.

Anyway, worth it for the final battle.

Great Actioner, Finale one of best!

[richrhea5 · 8/10 · 23 March 2021]

Great period piece; well-produced and historically accurate. The horses are the stars and why not? Throughly enjoyable on many levels. The final charge is well directed and exciting. I love it when a film highlights a bit of history I've never heard of - apparently a battle of legend in Australia.

Where Does Pommy Come from?

[bill-894 · 10/10 · 14 April 2010]

"keeper275 from United States". Pommy is what Australians call the English. It isn't really a term of endearment, rather a bit of an insult. Where is comes from is open to argument. Some say it's an Acronym for "Prisoners Of Mother England" while other say it's because the poms are so lily white that when exposed to sun they turn the colour of a Pomeranian (red)! Either way, you don't ever want to be confused with a Pom!

Not enough lines so here goes "I love a sunburnt country, A land of sweeping plains. Of rugged mountain ranges, of drought and flooding rains. I love her far horizons, I love her jewel sea. Her beauty and her terror, the wide brown land for me". My Country by Dorothea Mackellar

Classic WW1 war movie

[aldebaran68 · 10/10 · 24 May 2015]

Where should I begin? I've been watching war movies all my life. I don't go for 'pro-war' 'anti-war' etc. My generation was obsessed with denigrating WW2 at every turn. Quite shameful. This film does just the opposite. It celebrates a truly great and remarkable victory by Aussies over the German/Turkish enemy in Palestine in 1917. Simple and straightforward. IMHO it does this brilliantly. I think the acting is superb. It is slow at the beginning, because war before 'the action' is often slow to the point of utter boredom. Ask anyone from WW2 to Iraq/Afghan 2003-13. They say war is 90% boredom and 10% intense terrifying action. About right. The language of the soldiers is humorous and enjoyable. Though use of certain expletives is none existent. This doesn't spoil the movie. The 'mateyness' is well depicted. It feels right. Given that these actors in 1987 are re-enacting soldiers of 2 generations before I think they do a damn good job of it. The build up to the Beersheba action is very well handled. Very plausible. I loved Anthony Andrews as Meinerzhagen the Intel officer. I like him anyhow. He has a very personable eccentricity while doing well as an intelligent actor. But the cream on the cake is without any doubt that cavalry charge. I've seen a few in my time; 'Charge of the Light Brigade' comes to mind. The difference here is that these guys charge like they mean it. Its easily one of the finest if not THE finest cavalry charge I've ever seen on film. It had me almost in tears from the emotion of it. Abs beautifully done. The charge by itself would have been worth the price of the movie. There is very little regret at war expressed in this film, and rightly so. They regarded it as a just war. The officer at the end on hearing about the 'miracle of only 30 killed' remarks 'its not a miracle for them' or something like that. I'm not sure if he would have said that in 1917...who knows? Its emphatically NOT an anti-war film as some commentators seem to want to make out. There is no suggestion underlying the movie of any 'futility of war' etc. This tendency is a product of the post war (WW2/Vietnam) anti-war gen. It wasn't around in 1917 except as a generalised 'fed-upness' which all soldiers experience during long wars (and civilians too). So that's it. In my opinion a superb war movie in every way.

Slow at first, incredibly intense at the end.

[cannibalchuck · 6 August 2004]

This movie also has to go on my "desert island" list. What most people will say is that the first hour is about as exciting as watching paint dry, which is true to a point. But wars are often played like chess, and if you don't know the board you'll never understand the game. It's therefore necessary, though somewhat tedious, to show the situation, terrain, weather, and overall political climate to get to the historical charge. The Germans are played perhaps a little too stiffly, and the one Aussie who couldn't shoot a human and became a medic was perhaps given a little too much screen time. As for the charge itself, you can hear your heart beating faster as you literally smell the sweat from the horses. The two-mile charge against an entrenched enemy supported with machine gun, razor wire, and cannon is intense beyond words, and stands as some of the most awesome cinematography I've ever seen. Actual casualty stats are listed, which are surprisingly low. As for how the horses were handled, not one was injured-a feat you'll scarcely believe after having seen the charge. The Lighthorsemen, unlike Gallipoli, is well worth a look. -Chuck