Very well executed

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Hobbled by low production values and a by-the-numbers story, "Adventure In Sahara" lives up to its generic title despite a game cast and some low-rent intensity.Jim Wilson (Paul Kelly) is a pilot working for a French airline servicing North Africa when he gets a telegram informing him of his brother's death: "You Will Know Details." For Wilson, this means quitting his job and joining the Foreign Legion, where his brother served, requesting the same cruel commandant his brother had, Savatt (C. Henry Gordon). Jim plans on revenge."You can't fight Savatt without fighting the Legion," Wilson is told, the story's dilemma in a nutshell. Does Wilson dare take on the code of discipline that binds men at war in order to take out his personal vendetta on Savatt?Kelly and Gordon deserve credit for doing what they can with underwritten parts. Gordon leaves a positively pungent impression as the hard-as-nails Savatt, dominating every scene he is in. It's no surprise to see he wears his medals to bed. A number of recognizable character actors of the period show up, including Al Bridge from Preston Sturges' stock company, Dwight Frye from "Dracula," and Marc Lawrence, longtime Hollywood tough guy who plays Wilson's closest buddy in the Legion. All do good work.The problem is the dialogue, so on the nail it emphasizes at every turn the generic feeling of the flick."You understand the Legion is no playground...""Come, come, young one, this is the Legion...""I shall make Legionnaires out of you, or crush you in the attempt..."Apparently the idea began in Samuel Fuller's head as a story about a group of Legionnaires who are given medals for bravery in combat, only to be executed for mutiny seconds later. By the time screenwriter Maxwell Shane took over, the film was working the usual "Beau Geste" angle of a cruel commandant with a "Mutiny On The Bounty" twist you see a mile away.The influences are more obvious than are the characters' motivations. Why does Wilson think putting himself under Savatt's authority in such desolate circumstances is a good idea? Why does Savatt drive his soldiers to death when he is 700 miles behind enemy lines? Why does Wilson's girlfriend fly to Savatt's fort by her lonesome after he deserts her without explanation?The production values are in line with this sort of quickie treatment: The cyclorama that passes for a desert sky has visible stains on it. The fort Savatt rules, Agadez, has no apparent dimension, just a gate, a parapet, and a few interior rooms. Like planktonrules notes, the Arabs who attack number little over a dozen unless they are shown in stock footage. I think I recognize the same bearded gent getting shot in three different scenes."Adventure In Sahara" is nonsensical at times, but never dull; in addition to the solid acting you get some mesmerizingly moody shots by director C. Ross Lederman, including a close-up of a sand-caked Savatt of which von Sternberg would have been proud. Lederman had an unremarkable career, but was a pro all the same and knew what he was after here. "Adventure In Sahara" is the sort of undemanding fare made to pass the time and be forgotten soon after.

In this variation of "Mutiny on the Bounty", members of the French Foreign Legion face a brutal commander and take matters into their own hands. The commander is one of the most vile military men on screen, making Captains Blight and Queeg (of the later "The Caine Mutiny") pale in comparison to his evil. You truly want to see this man get exactly what he deserves. An engrossing drama, it sustains interest throughout, although several details of the plot are hard to swallow, especially the fact that the other officers under the commander don't take steps until the end to expose his revolting nefariousness. Paul Kelly plays the legionnaire who leads the rebellion, but it is ironic to see that even after the mutiny takes place, those under him are still dissatisfied and want to mutiny against him as well! A minor subplot concerns the girlfriend of one of the legionaries who manages to crash a plane in the desert while searching for him (sort of like "Lost Horizon") which ends up causing more brutality that leads to the eventual mutiny of commander C. Henry Gordon. Excellent photography, editing and lighting design help this rise above the usual standard of "B" movies, and the presence of one black actor among the men is a nice touch as well, although there is a slight stereotyping of his being constantly cheerful while the others are justifiably angry.

A man joins the French Foreign Legion to confront the cruel officer responsible for his brother's death. Picture Mutiny on the Bounty with bunch of sand and you've got the basic idea. It's a pretty tepid affair, with a ho-hum performance by Paul Kelly, an utterly limp romance, stock situations (and stock footage) and overcooked dialogue. Strictly an assembly line production, watchable mainly due to its very short running time, but without any thrills or interesting angles. C. Henry Gordon as the sadistic captain is the brightest star in an otherwise dull, half-hearted effort.Adventure in Sahara - 5/10

While this film is included in the Sam Fuller DVD set from Sony, he did not direct this film but wrote it instead.The film opens with Kelly receiving a telegram that his brother died. Apparently, the brother was in the Legion and Kelly oddly enlists in order to exact revenge against the evil commander responsible for this death. Odd I say because I could see Kelly killing the guy--but I kept thinking---"What about the revenge plan?! Why is he waiting so long and letting himself be tortured?!". Well, over halfway through the film, Kelly finally acts--taking control of a mutiny and ousting the Commandant. And, speaking of Commandant, C. Henry Gordon was exceptional in this role--menacing and a total jerk! As far as reviewing the film goes, it's all VERY familiar territory. Like many a French Foreign Legion film, this one features an insane martinet in command who adores tormenting his men. Such plots were seen in many films, including "The Lost Patrol" and "Beau Geste". Because of this, it's less likely you'll seek out "Adventure in Sahara"--it's all too familiar. It also was apparently done on a shoestring budget. Columbia Pictures made a ton of Bs--and at just about one hour, it's clearly intended as a second film in a double-feature. Unlike most of these other Foreign Legion films, this one features relatively unknown actors---with the leading role played by the capable Paul Kelly--hardly a household name. Also, in desert battle scenes, the number of extras used is extraordinarily small--and you can't help but laugh at about 12-15 guys making attacks on the French garrison! And, oddly, despite the French having a machine gun (along with other lovely weapons), they hardly make a dent in the lightly armed North African raiders--all 12-15 of them!! The only time more than 12-15 attack is when they insert footage from another movie! It's easy to tell--the print featuring this large-scale attack is fuzzier and streaky. And, you never see the huge group of Bedouins ever interacting with the Legionnaires--and when the camera pans back, you see just the same 12-15 guys in bedsheets! Despite the film having a very familiar plot and the low production values, is the film worth seeing? Well, if you've never seen a Foreign Legion film before, sure. Plus, quality-wise it's better than the average B--even with the unimaginative story idea. It is well-acted and interesting and offers a few twists. But, the overall film just is ordinary--and it's probably not one Sam Fuller fans would enjoy.