Boring, long, and too preachy.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

The Mark of Zorro starts in Madrid in Spain as expert swordsman & dueling champion Don Diego (Frank Langella) announces his return home to California, upon arrival back home in California he finds things are not well. The locals that his father once served are now in a state of fear & hate as the new Governor Don Luis Quintero (Robert Middleton) kills, beats, tortures & taxes them making their lives a misery. Don Diego is shocked at what he sees & speaks with his father Don Aleandro Vega (Gilbert Roland) who is powerless to stop Quintero & his bloodthirsty soldiers lead by Captain Esteban (Ricardo Montalban), Diego acts like a clueless buffoon but things are not always what they seem as Diego decides to don the black mask & hat of the legendary outlaw Zorro to right the wrongs around him & put an end to Quintero's tyranny...Directed by Don McDougall this made for telly adventure film was a remake of the classic The Mark of Zorro (1940), I have never seen the 1940 version but apparently the two are virtually identical & while this isn't the type of film I usually watch I thought I would give it a go since it was showing on telly over here. To be fair I didn't think that much of this at all, it's fairly colourful & lasts for less than 80 minutes but there's not much here to get excited about unless your a die-hard Zorro fan. The script moves along at a decent pace but there's little build-up to anything & it tries to juggle some adventure, some romance & sword fighting action without much success. The mark of Zorro just feels so pedestrian & like the afternoon telly film that it is, sure it's watchable if your bored but it never excited me or particularly interested me. It's all rather predictable, from handsome heroes who save the day to family feuds that are resolved to the villains getting their comeuppance. The character's are all broad clichés & I doubt people acted like this back then, a pretty simplistic story that the script doesn't really flesh out to any great effect. I don't know, it's not the type of film that I usually watch so I will go easy on it & it's middling entertainment I suppose so while I can't say I liked it I won't say I hated it, at least I watched it all without getting too bored along the way.Another big problem with this version of The mark of Zorro is the lack of action & when the action occurs it's pretty forgettable stuff with some wimpy sword fights & not much else. This 70's Zorro is certainly a colourful production with vibrant costumes & locations, in fact it looks a little too colourful at times & maybe both the tone & look of the film should have been a bit darker on occasion. Just to emphasise the similarities between this & the 1940 Zorro film this actually reuses the original musical score from the 1940 version by Alfred Newman.Filmed in Tuscon in Arizona this is quite well made on what must have been a tight budget. The acting is alright, Langella is OK but it's difficult to believe no-one recognises Diego & Zorro as the same person, telly regulars Ricardo Montalban & Yvonne DeCarlo provide decent support.The Mark of Zorro is a fairly mundane action adventure that feels like Robin Hood set in the Californian desert as Zorro robs the rich & evil to give back to the poor, it will pass 80 odd minutes but that's about the best thing I can say about it.

I haven't seen this TV film for years and would really like to see it again. I think I fell in love with Frank Langella because of it - OK, OK, so I was much younger and more impressionable at the time but, well, he was beguiling. As suggested in one or two other commentaries on this, I felt it was as effective a version, if not even a tad better than the 1940 one - perhaps because of both the eponymous hero's sexual magnetism and the charming, intelligent and spirited Anne Archer's Teresa. From what I remember, the film was to a large extent faithful to Tyrone Power's vehicle, and added a J-ne-sais-quoi to it.Dashing as Power undoubtedly was, to my taste Langella's rich chocolatey voice, commanding height and seductive gaze made this viewer long to be the object of his affections. I admit it, I'm shamefacedly still a bit in love with the character!

What's the point? Why do they do it? The original "The Mark of Zorro" was not exactly a cinematic classic but it was rousing fun with everyone hamming it up.Well, this is not a shot-for-shot remake, but it uses the same score and lifts some of the dialog from the original. Why? I guess another nickel might be squeezed out of the adventure tale. I can't think of any other reason to remake a film that was about as good as it could be expected to be.Nothing quite measures up to the original. Nothing wrong with Frank Langella as Zorro. He's convincing enough in his prissy disguise. Further, I admire Langella as a man and as an actor. His craft was important enough for him to write a piece for the New York Times, when, in Italian-American households, according to Gay Talese, being "literary" is a bit of a stigma. If you write a novel like, say, "The Blackboard Jungle," you change your name.Beyond that consideration (whatever that consideration was -- I've already forgotten), the acting is simply not up to snuff. Frank Langella, okay. Maybe. Although he's given a fashionable 1974 hair style in contrast to Tyrone Power's curly Spanish locks. And Gilbert Roland brings so much history to his role that it's hard to criticize him. The rest of the performances are no better than TV standards. Anne Archer is a beautiful woman, but she is not a virginal teenage Lolita. Makeup has been unkind to her. Ray Middleton as the alcalde lazes his way through the part as if on opiates. Ricardo Montalban is actually pretty good, but not up to the required standards of evil established by Basil Rathbone in the original.In short, well, watch the original if only for one reason. It's better.

Frank Langela ( most famous for his role of Dracula in the late 70's) faithfully recreates the role made famous by Tyrone Power in the 1940's. Although they were using a cut down version of the script, and a considerably smaller budget, they produced a very good film. The cast was experienced and interpreted the characters quite well. Gilbert Roland having played several Zorro like characters himself, was a good choice as the father. For a low budget remake it is very entertaining. Definitely worth the time to watch. The completest would want to add this to their collection. Those Zorro fans who are not completest, would definitely want to consider this. Just over look the small crowd scenes and small scale sets.JPMotis