Sands of the Kalahari (Blu-ray Review)
- Review Date: Oct 08, 2025
- Format: Blu-ray Disc
-
Director
Cy EndfieldRelease Date(s)
1965 (July 15, 2025)Studio(s)
Joseph M. Schenck Enterprises/Paramount Pictures (Kino Lorber Studio Classics)- Film/Program Grade: B+
- Video Grade: A-
- Audio Grade: A
- Extras Grade: B-
Review
Previously released to Blu-ray by Olive Films in 2011, Sands of the Kalahari has been remastered in 4K by Paramount in a vastly-improved transfer. The film was something of a follow-up to the Cy Endfield-Stanley Baker production of Zulu (1964), a huge hit released in Super Technirama 70 and which gave Michael Caine his first major film role. Sands of the Kalahari, filmed in ordinary Panavision, has some of that earlier film’s qualities—both are sort of like proto-Werner Herzog movies about “civilized” man’s incompatibility with the cruel, natural world and its primitive, indigenous peoples—but Sands isn’t nearly as good. The main reason for this is its inadequate but overwhelmingly pessimistic script, which for 1965 audiences was shocking in its violence.
A plane crashes in the desert of present-day Namibia, in southwest Africa. Alcoholic Mike Bain (Stanley Baker) badly injures his leg, and the co-pilot is dead, but pilot Sturdevant (Nigel Davenport), big-game hunter Brian O’Brien (Stuart Whitman), English tourist Grace Monckton (Susannah York), diplomat Bondarahkai (Theodore Bikel), and former German officer Grimmelman (Harry Andrews) survive uninjured.
The survivors manage to find shelter in a cave, but a troop of vicious chacma baboons loom above menacingly in the cliffs overhead. Far grimmer than but not unlike Endfield’s earlier Mysterious Island (1961), they manage to find food and fresh water, but after many days Sturdevant decides to leave the group in hopes of finding help. Soon after, O’Brien, bare- and barrel-chested and armed with his hunting rifle and a seemingly endless supply of bullets, begins plotting to kill off the others to better his long-term survival chances, planning on leaving alive only Grace as his new “Eve.”
Though admirably suspenseful, the film has little of the appeal of similar films from this period, notably Ice Cold in Alex and The Flight of the Phoenix. The film’s despairing misanthropy, however, is closer in plot and spirit to Lord of the Flies, and with a similar outcome. The majority of the characters are not likeable, even though they are realistic, if depressingly so, and mostly believable. Even Grace, helpless against the much stronger (and armed) men, throws morality to the wind, passively willing to let the men kill one another, allowing the last man standing to possess if only to stay alive.
One problem with director Cy Endfield’s screenplay, from William Mulvhill’s 1960 novel, is that in setting up the situation, the characters receive the briefest of introductions. Even Universal’s later Airport movies, crude as they are, provided more information, crudely done as it is. The plane in Sands is crashed in the desert probably before the end of the second reel, and the movie audience hasn’t a clue to their pre-crash lives and personalities, other than Mike Bain is a drunk. Some fleshing out, but not enough, comes later in the story, as various characters talk about their backgrounds a little, but we never really get to know who any of them are. The same argument might be made for Zulu, but in that film nearly all the major parts are British military, and each character reveals themselves in how they react to the basic, hopeless situation—a small post overrun with thousands of Zulu warriors—and, particularly to established military protocols of behavior and duty.
Sands of the Kalahari went through multiple casting changes—Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor were set to star early on—and Baker and Whitman switched parts after George Peppard bailed out at the last minute, he originally cast as Mike Bain. Baker ended up with the more interesting character, though he’s largely in the background for most of the first half, nursing that bad leg while drying out. Stuart Whitman is excellent as the genuinely intimidating, disturbing O’Brien; along with Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines, 1965 was surely Whitman’s best year in films.
Nevertheless, the supporting characters played by Nigel Davenport, Theodore Bikel, and the ubiquitous Harry Andrews are far more interesting and appealing than the three leads. Davenport is in his element, best playing straight-shooters frank to the point of rudeness and ruthlessness, and has a particularly good scene once he’s off on his own, trying to reach help. Bikel, fat, sweaty, and wearing a heavy three-piece suit, looks like vulture bait for sure, yet surprises us again and again with his ingenuity and perseverance.
The picture creates an almost otherworldly environment; with its stalking baboons, some have suggested the picture might have influenced the visual style of the later Planet of the Apes (1968)—could be. I don’t recall a troop of baboons ever used previously as a menace in jungle adventures or other films. They’re genuinely scary, and from a technical standpoint, the movie does a fine job integrating real baboons shot for the film, perhaps leashed into position, stock footage (noticeably grainier) of them roaming freely, puppets and maybe even little people or children in costumes for some long shots.
Kino’s new Blu-ray, remastered in 4K, has weak title elements but the rest of the picture looks excellent, though some animal footage and other location shots are inherently variable. Still, even projected on a big screen it’s impressive, with strong color and decent blacks. The DTS-HD Master Audio (2.0) mono is fine, supported by optional English subtitles on this Region “A” disc.
Beyond the usual trailer, the only extra feature is a new audio commentary track by Howard S. Berger and Nathaniel Thompson.
Sands of the Kalahari is well-made, suspenseful, and at times, original. Its very pessimistic view of humanity, though, is a turn-off. Instead of enlightening audiences on the human condition with original, interesting observations, it’s merely obvious and depressing, getting in the way of the fun. Still, it’s definitely worth seeing, and Kino’s new video master is a fine way to do so.
- Stuart Galbraith IV