Whether you like Disney or despise the company, they have been pioneers in cinema.  Though Walt’s boys, as he liked to sometimes refer to them as, did not invent the sodium vapor process, they were the first to make extensive use of it.  I am not here to explain how that works.  You can look it up for itself.  At its base, it was an early method of hiding rudimentary special effects.  The film that probably best displays its effectiveness is The Parent Trap (1961), starring Hayley Mills and, well, Hayley Mills.  To be clearer, that was one actress playing two roles, Susan Evers and Sharon McKendrick, twins separated at birth.  It delighted audiences at the time.  I bring it up only to compare it to another Disney flick that attempted the same effect, The Prince and the Pauper (1962).  My only guess as to why the former is considered a classic and the latter is little thought of is, I suppose, history?  It is not good history, but the past is rarely high on people’s list of entertainment choices, even if it is the Mouse’s adaptation of Mark Twain’s version of those events.  I like it as a practicing Catholic, but I am often alone in these opinions.

The Prince and the Pauper are, respectively, Prince Edward (Sean Scully) and Tom Canty (Sean Scully).  Though born of different fathers and mothers, they are nonetheless identical to one another and come into the world on the same day.  They grow up living different lives.  John’s cruel, drunkard of a dad, John Canty (Donald Houston), forces the child to beg for their family’s sustenance even though begging has been outlawed by Kind Henry VIII (Paul Rogers).  Despite his sufferings, Tom dreams of loftier things, of having a better life like Prince Edward.  The heir to the throne, being the king’s only son, has the weight of the state on him and feels restricted by his station.  The person we first focus on is Tom, who is given three ha’pennies from a passerby.  Though he hopes to donate one to his mentor and teacher, Father Andrew (Niall MacGinnis), another to his mother (Dorothy Alison), before handing the remainder to dear ol’ dad, all three coins spill onto the floor once Tom gets home.  Feeling like his son is stealing, John demands the next day that he bring home the same amount or face a beating.  Great parenting, huh?  Instead, Tom follows his whim to catch a glimpse of Prince Edward at the palace.  Prince Edward overhears when the guards cause a raucous in throwing Tom off the fence, and comes to the lowly boy’s aid.  Prince Edward invites Tom to his private quarters to dine with him, and it does not take long for them to realize the striking similarities in their physical appearance.  To Tom’s horror, Prince Edward suggests that they switch clothing, wanting to experience life in the London streets and perhaps see some of the, er, “delights” of the rest of society.  I mean, Tom describes playing in mud and seeing performing monkeys, and this is what piques Prince Edward’s interest. . . ?  Chalk it up to the sixteenth century, I guess.  Anyway, once the exchange is made, Prince Edward orders Tom to stay in the heir’s private apartment for a few hours until the royal returns.  Predictably, nothing works as these teenagers plan.  Upon getting to Tom’s hovel, Prince Edward finally has had enough of the gutter life and begins referring to himself by his actual identity.  John believes his son has gone mad and takes swings at the boy in the streets.  When Father Andrew comes to whom he thinks is Tom’s aid, the priest is struck on the head and killed by John.  This forces John to attempt to flee London with his supposed son, but Prince Edward’s continued insistence on his heritage brings the attention of Sir Miles Hendon (Guy Williams).  Though Sir Hendon, too, does not believe the kid’s seemingly wild story, he is nonetheless willing to indulge the claim and come to Prince Edward’s assistance.  Meanwhile, it does not take long for others at the palace to come to the apartment and take Tom for also having gone crazy for claiming to be a beggar.  The first of these is his cousin, Lady Jane Grey (Jane Asher), whose report of the unsoundness of the would-be Prince’s mind reaches the king.  This could not come at a worse time as the current ruler is about to die, and he desires to know the succession is secure.  To do this, they need a royal decree to execute the current person charged with the transition of power, and name the next person.  This requires the royal seal, which had been entrusted to Prince Edward.  Tom mistakes it for a nutcracker, and cannot speak to its location.  On the following day, Prince Edward is kidnapped by John, who is going on the lam.  John soon joins up with a band of outlaws that had been made so by King Henry VIII’s repressive laws.  Their complaints give Prince Edward insight into the feelings of his subjects, but it is still a setting from which he is eager to escape.  Luckily, Sir Hendon (who has not given up searching, for some reason) finds Prince Edward and the pair get away.  Along the road back to London, they learn from a peasant that King Henry VIII has died, and that there is soon to be a coronation.  It is while discussing this event that Sir Hendon finally accepts that Prince Edward is truly the soon-to-be crowned King Edward VI.  Together, they make it back to London in time for the real Prince Edward to sneak into Westminster Abbey before the ceremony takes place.  As such, he is on hand to reveal himself, much to Tom’s relief.  When the pauper exposes himself for his status by talking about how he used the royal seal, all is seemingly forgiven.  Later, Tom and his mother are given gifts from the king, and Sir Hendon is rewarded for his service.  The end.

I know I surmised in the introduction that the reason why The Prince and the Pauper is not as popular as its technological Disney cousin is because of history.  Unfortunately, that is the direction in which I must take the Catholic portion of this review.  I would not have thought twice about the subject but for the inclusion of Father Andrew.  Naturally, being a Disney film, and one made in 1962, there needs to be some disclaimers.  The Mouse is well known for presenting idealized versions of society, past or present.  Having said that, they do deserve some credit for portraying a little of the despotism of King Henry VIII’s reign.  What it makes zero mention of is religion.  Again, Disney is not about to get into messy topics, nor should it be looked to for historical accuracy.  After all, the movie is based on a book written by famous American novelist Mark Twain.  For a Catholic and historian watching this silliness, the lack of any word on the matter is conspicuous.  To give you a quick refresher, England was Catholic until Henry VIII broke with Rome in the early 1530s.  The classic explanation is that his first wife, the Catholic Catherine of Aragon, could not produce a son.  This was not an acceptable explanation for a divorce for Rome, so Henry VIII started his own, what became known as the Church of England.  This is remarkable when you consider a lesser-known fact that Henry VIII was once considered a devout Catholic.  At any rate, what is less discussed is how Henry VIII quickly confiscated Church property, enriching his royal coffers.  I give you this as context for the real Prince Edward, historically speaking, who was the first English monarch to be raised a protestant.  This might seem trivial, to your life and the movie, if it were not for one pertinent scene.  As Tom is filling the role of regent until the coronation, he pardons a number of crimes.  It is his half-sister, one Catherine’s surviving children and who remained Catholic, that speaks against what she sees as being too soft on the people.  By itself, the moment is a bit of a throwaway.  Yet, it speaks to tensions that were present in England because of religion.  It may be a farcical Disney production, but I will always feel these matters are important.

Still, you should not watch The Prince and the Pauper because of its hint at English religious history.  As I said, it is a problematic portrayal, not just on this topic, but in a variety of ways.  Outside of these, it is mostly harmless, if outdated in every possible way.  If you want a better film that makes use of the special filming technique mentioned in the introduction, watch The Parent Trap.