Au péril de sa vie

The performances of the principles in this movie are really very good. The story is interesting and the presentation is balanced in regard to all of the characters. Both the native African and the missionary viewpoints are well presented and believable. The Head Witch Doctor, the chief of the tribe, and Rachel's chief assistant are both believable and representative of a different cultural viewpoint. The way in which she finally puts herself on the line to gain the trust of these people is compelling. Her guilt when she feels that she has failed to be true to her preaching and beliefs appears genuine. The difficult decisions she faces at the end seem to be realistic. All in all a very good movie.

I spent a good deal of "The Sins of Rachel Cade" confused, wondering whether or not I had already seen it. Or was I mixing it up with "The Nun's Story" - not hard to do, since Peter Finch, a brilliant, sexy actor apparently was cast in the same part over and over. It seems to me his role in this was similar to his role in "The Nun's Story." The story is similar to "The Nun's Story" and also to "Sister Kenny."

During World War II, Rachel Cade (Angie Dickinson), a beautiful young nurse, goes to the Congo to help in the hospital and to bring Christianity to the people. She meets two men, both of whom are interested in her - Colonel DeRode (Finch) and a downed airman who turns out to be a surgeon, Paul Wilton (Roger Moore). Cade suffers inner conflict as a result, and it changes her life.

I like Angie Dickinson in this - she gives a very simple performance, that of a dedicated spiritual woman with great inner strength, and one who really understands why the people of the Congo love her and respect her. But she's miscast. To put it bluntly, Dickinson is too hot a number for this role. If she were just beautiful in the Audrey Hepburn sense, she would be believable. But Angie's always been a sex bomb and how anyone thought she could work in darkest Africa and not spend 99% of her time fighting off men was crazy. Either someone a little older, like Jean Simmons, or with less sex appeal would have been more appropriate.

Peter Finch was very good, very appealing, but I just saw him do this role in "The Nun's Story." I'm still confused.

Two favorites of mine, Woody Strode and Juano Hernandez, are on hand as well and give excellent performances.

There are certainly interesting aspects to "The Sins of Rachel Cade," and it has some appeal, but in the end it leaves one feeling a little flat.

Although The Sins Of Rachel Cade does present a realistic view of Africa which Hollywood was now doing after The African Queen and King Solomon's Mines the story never gets above the level of a Harlequin novel set in Africa. This story could have just as easily played out in the good old USA.

Which is where Angie Dickinson in the title role hails from, Kansas in fact, about as far from the Belgian Congo as you can get. She's been sent to aid Dr. Douglas Spencer who no sooner than when she arrives goes and dies on her. That leaves the inexperienced Angie to run the mission until God knows when.

District Commissioner Peter Finch tries to be of help, but he's in a tenuous position. It's never really brought out, but as his country has been overrun by the Nazis, his authority as a Belgian is severely limited. Belgium it is well known did not have a sterling record, in fact it had the worst colonial record of any European power. But Nazi racial doctrines did have a limited appeal to the natives there, so Finch is safe for the moment.

He's liking Angie, but when American doctor from Boston who is volunteering for the Royal Air Force played by Roger Moore drops from the skies, she's his. And her moral authority is put to the test when she has Moore's baby in violation of the beliefs she's been preaching to the natives.

The Sins Of Rachel Cade found a wealth of opportunity for prominent black actors like Woody Strode, Juano Hernandez, Errol John, and Rafer Johnson to play various tribal figures. Dickinson's interaction with them is far more interesting than the hackneyed romance she has.

I wish the film had been more about the politics and less about the romance in another girl done wrong film no matter how exotic the location.

Soapy jungle set melodrama with a bit of a social conscience. Angie, who looks great, gives a good performance in the lead matched by Peter Finch as a military man who yearns for her. Mary Wickes has a small part that perks up the film whenever she appears which isn't nearly enough. The weak link is Roger Moore as a boorish doctor who literally crashes onto the scene, he's handsome but doesn't make much of an impact. It's not really his fault his role is poorly conceived. There's nice production values as well.

The film has a few too many plot threads that it dangles, picks up and drops throughout the picture's running time but is best when it focuses on Rachel's crisis of faith and also her gradual evolution from naive missionary to leader of a small village of people.

Not a great film but earnestly played with an interesting back story and some tortured romance at its core.

Definitely in line with IMDB majority opinion here in regarding this as a mostly bombastic (especially where religion is involved), dull film with occasional flashes of interest and a couple good performances, from Juano Hernandez and the always under rated Angie Dickinson in the title role. The main problem with it flows from the egregiously bad story decision by scenarist Edward Anhalt to soft peddle the most interesting conflict, namely that of Rachel versus the tribal hierarchy symbolized by Hernandez, and instead highlight the pale, bloodless love triangle between Dickinson, Peter Finch and truly one of the dullest British actors ever to trod the boards, Roger Moore. His romantic scenes with Dickinson act as built in bathroom and snack breaks. The ones between Finch and Dickinson are a little better because Finch is a ten times better thesp than Moore but, still, you weary of them and want more scenes like the African dance that arouses Finch's and Dickinson's carnal desire...and not just for each other. Yes, the scene is on the racist side with its not so subtle message that white passions can be unhealthily aroused by dark races, but it is also quite envelope pushing for 1961, a good seven or eight years before the code was sent a packing, and I'm sure got this movie at least semi banned or censored in the American South. Give it a C plus.

PS...Hard to say whose supposed accent was worse, Finch's Belgian or Moore's American.