Despite a comment that Darryl F. Zanuck refused Tyrone Power's pleas to make "Prince of Foxes" in color because he was angry with his star, this is not true. The film was probably made with Italian funds that the studio couldn't get out of the country, and there just wasn't enough money to do this richly-produced film in color. Zanuck was too much of a businessman to let anger ruin a good opportunity. And why would he have been angry? Power was doing another swashbuckler like the big man ordered, wasn't he?

Despite not being in color, "Prince of Foxes" is a glorious-looking film, made on location in Italy. It's based on the Shellabarger novel about Andrea Orsini, a peasant with a fake royal name, who is sent by Cesare Borgia to infiltrate the court of Count Verrano, seduce his wife, and get rid of him so that Borgia's troops can take over his province. Orsini, however, double-crosses his boss.

The acting is marvelous - Tyrone Power is wonderful as the turncoat Orsini, and manages to hold his own against the flashier roles of Cesare Borgia (Orson Welles) and Belli (Everett Sloane). Though I doubt that Welles was terribly into his part, as usual he's excellent. When doing a role strictly for money, he had the habit of arching his eyebrow and intoning that glorious voice to make the audience believe he was doing something. It's only when one sees him as Citizen Kane or in a film like "Tomorrow is Forever" that one realizes these later supporting roles are phoned in. But who better to make the call than master technician Welles. Sloane does a fantastic job as a man who just can't stay loyal to one side and pulls one of the film's big surprises. The part is cut down from the book, which is a pity.

The music, the scenery - amazing. The great halls are like nothing you've ever seen. For once, Tyrone Power has competition for beauty! By the time of Prince of Foxes, he was totally sick of these roles, but he had a few years left before Zanuck turned him loose. It's said that he was too old to be a swashbuckler by 1949 - he was 35, which today is nothing, though he often had to play parts that were intended for someone 10 or even 15 years younger. As a result, he sometimes looked tired out. But not here. Perhaps this film was more tolerable for him because of his impending marriage to Linda Christian, his second wife. In any event, he comes off very well.

One thing I never understood is why Zanuck insisted on casting the post-war Power opposite these vapid starlets - Wanda Hendrix in this, Cecile Aubry in "The Black Rose," Jean Peters in "Captain from Castile" etc. - of these, the only "find" was the wonderful Peters. Hendrix is okay in "Prince of Foxes" but that's about it. The role called for a little more depth than she was able to give.

All in all, beautiful to watch, an intriguing story, excellent acting. Recommended, and, by the way, soon to be released in DVD as part of the Tyrone Power Collection.

This is a highly unusual movie simply because of the subject matter--the Borgias and the consolidation of power in the Italian states during the 15th and 16th centuries. I've gotta admit that this earns an extra point or two just for originality. Power plays a soldier of fortune--a role he is well suited for, as in many ways, it's almost like his pirate movies or Zorro! So, the transition is smooth. Also, the story and supporting actors are excellent. I recommend this film especially to lovers of old films and adventure movies. I think some teens and kids would also enjoy it, but considering the short attention-spans of most kids these days, you might think twice before having them watch this movie (or just force them to watch because it's good entertainment by gum!).

Saw 'Prince of Foxes' for a number of reasons. Have always loved period costume romantic-adventure epics, whether film or television. Do like some of Henry King's other films, 'Song of Bernadette' is a favourite of mine and 'The Black Swan' is great fun too. Alfred Newman was one of the greatest film composers at the time. The period setting is an interesting one. And there's a good deal of talent in the cast, Tyrone Power and Orson Welles being the most famous names.

'Prince of Foxes' to me, and many others it seems, turned out to be very, very good and nearly great. Let down primarily by one distractingly bad casting choice and it has been said strongly that the film was crying out for colour. 'Prince of Foxes' is yet another film where any failings are far outweighed by the good things, which are numerous and are actually nothing short of excellent. For any fans of the genre(s) the film fits under, it is pretty much a must watch.

First and foremost, 'Prince of Foxes' looks splendid. It has been said that it was crying out for colour, and admittedly to me it would have been even better if it was in Technicolor. That doesn't stop 'Prince of Foxes' from still being exquisitely photographed, probably one of the best shot romantic-adventure film epics at this point of film history. Cinematography that complements so beautifully the lavish costumes and settings, that are really brought to vivid life. Newman's score is a rousing and relaxing listen, with his distinctive style shining while also being true to period. King directs the film at a lively and well judged pace, makes the adventure exciting and doesn't slow the drama down too much that it becomes static.

The script is literate yet not too talk heavy and never awkward, some nice wit here and there. The story always involves, with lots of intrigue and fun. The action is excitingly staged and there is both tension and charm. Most of the cast are on great form, with Power being loyal, dashing and far from charisma deprived and Welles clearly enjoying every single second of his screen time. Felix Aylmer and Everett Sloane steal their scenes and understate beautifully, Sloane's conflicted emotions help make the character fascinating.

Only Wanda Hendrix is weak, she is completely vacuous and looks completely out of place. Found her character dull and one-dimensional as well.

Her romance with Power also never ignites and where the film stumbles at times pace-wise.

In summary though, very, very good. 8/10