My original review from June 2016:
"Der Ölprinz" or "The Oil Prince" is a West German / Yugoslavian co-production from 1965, so this 90-minute movie had its 50th anniversary last year. Once again, it stars Pierre Brice as the title character and Stewart Granger is on board too playing Old Surehand with Lex Barker (and the recently deceased Götz George) not in it this time. But there are familiar faces from other Karl May adaptations, such as Terence Hill and a whole lot of Yugoslavian actors. Overall, this film can be summarized pretty nicely that it is hurt by the absence of a not too great actor like Lex Barker. At least he had tons of charisma. Pierre Brice is not a good actor in my opinion and should not have headlined this franchise. The result is that this movie we have here is almost entirely forgettable and lacks in many departments, especially story-telling. The director and also one of the two writers who adapted Karl May's work is Harald Philipp and I have seen other works from him that disappointed me. Still I am not sure if it is really his fault or if May is the one too blame as I have never read the base material. The result in this very case is a film that may be visually beautiful at times, but is really empty in terms of the story. If you want to see a great oil movie, go for "There Will be Blood" instead.
And after a rewatch in October 2022, let me just add a few more things:
Time for a little brainstorming: It can be said that it was not just Philipp who directed this, but one scene is from South German filmmaker Alfred Vohrer, who is still pretty well-known here and the reason are mostly his Edgar Wallace films. I still think that Pierre Brice is not a good actor and honestly I think so in an even stronger fashion now. There are so many moments during which his character Winnetou feels utterly cringeworthy, which also has to do with how the character was written. This character is really the definition of absence of shades in these films. He is so wise and perfect, but at the same time so humble. He saves those kids' lives on the raft. He offers his life to avoid a massacre. He shows up right in time to protect his non-Indian friend Old Surehand from one of the bad guys. He is willing to listen to an artist's music when the latter complains that nobody else wants to. He sides with the good guys, even against his Indian friends towards the end because creed really does not matter to him, but only the kind heart does. He is ready to forgive his Indian friend, when that friend realizes he was in the wrong. He always speaks of himself in the third person etc. By the way, the Indian friend also changes his opinion so quickly in the end that it did not feel very realistic. What he had to say felt very written to be honest. In general, this film was at its best when Brice was out for a little while. Stewart Granger as the actual lead did a fine job here as Old Surehand I would say and I did not miss Barker as much this time. It was still a bit soft how Surehand was a perfect shooter, but never killed the evil ones, just hit their guns.
The film is named after Harald Leipnitz's character and he is the main antagonist here, a man who is always on the lookout to make some money with the help of oil and he is ruthless at the same time. He is not a sadist though, just a businessman and he even criticizes his careless helpers when they killed somebody. But he does not fire them, he just wants them to be more careful to make sure that there will be no backlash for him. Well, there is backlash in the end of course and while we don't see it on the screen, we understand his character is killed by the Indians for what he (indirectly) did to a young Indian. Leipnitz I felt was almost too good for the role. The final scene when his character tries to put the blame on somebody else made this very obvious. I think he was among Germany's finest actor's at least in the 1960s and made much more challenging characters work, so yeah his turn and Granger's were maybe the film's best aspects. I think I enjoyed the film more in the first half of these under 1.5 hours. The introduction and buildup were fine. Scenes like the one when one of the bad guys is killed before he can say who he works for were alright and even somewhat similar to what we have seen in (modern) 007 films for example. And in many others. Okay, the introduction of the main antagonist and his evil deeds was a bit shaky. I am talking about the scenes when we see how the Oil Prince's henchmen burn down an area and the guy affected by this now does not go to see Leipnitz's character to sell his property to him (as he is pretty much forced to), but instead goes with the intention to kill him and take revenge and is then killed himself. The cast has also other interesting names to mention. Ralf Wolter, who just died slightly over two weeks ago closer to the ancient age of 100 than to the age of 90, is not the comedic sidekick this time, but Milan Srdoc is. One Yugoslavian inclusion. He is doing an okay job with what he is given.
Unfortunately, pretty much every single character here is a bit on the gimmicky side with their actions and there is only so much the actors could have done and it was impossible to turn this film into something good. This also applies to the key actors really including Granger. One example would be how he knocks out the guy behind the door. This almost had a touch of Bud Spencer and Terence Hill. And boom, there we have it: Terence Hill was actually in this movie and his character was also not just in one scene or totally minor, but among the more relevant characters. It was still funny to see how he is beaten up here in the earlier stages of the film because this is exactly the opposite of what happened to his characters when his career continued. Except when he was fighting Spencer's character in a playful manner here and there. In this film here, Hill (still credited as Mario Girotti) was around the age of 25 and he was a huge heart throb, the only character with a real romance story line and also kinda the only one with a bit of shades where you could not be sure for a while at least if he pleads loyalty really to the good or the bad guys. It still becomes obvious fast enough. Interesting inclusion though and his presence here was also for me the crucial reason to give this film a rewatch. Another one I totally have to mention is Heinz Erhardt. Sure, today in the 21st century not all of his jokes are winners anymore and have aged really well, but here and there he will still make you smile, also with his entire aura and all his mannerisms. His joking about how his sister is a widow already when somebody mistakes him for her husband and threatens to kill him and turn her into a widow was what stayed in the mind the most for me. Plus his musical talent. People loved him at that point in the 1960s for sure and so it must have been especially interesting to see him in a film like this because honestly Heinz Erhardt with the rather bourgeois background his characters usually had was absolutely nothing you would expect to see in a Karl May western. Story-wise, the film also could have done completely without him if we are honest. You cannot deny that, no matter how much you like him. But he brought what he always brings and what he does better than anyone, so it was nice for me to see him in here.
As for the key story, I was a bit surprised that I preferred the first half like I said earlier already. There was a lot more drama and action on a bigger scale in the second half, but it did not feel too thrilling, no matter if we are talking about danger in a roaring river, people on an unstable bridge above a gigantic canyon/abyss or the killing of the son of an important Indian tribe leader and the revenge plot resulting thereof. Maybe I disliked the second half also more because it featured Brice's Winnetou more frequently. Anyway, it is nice to see some of the younger folks from back then still alive now over 55 years later and I am talking here about Hill of course and also Macha Méril who played his love interest. Not exactly a female character with a lot of depth gently-speaking, but she was mostly cast because she was pretty I assume and this I cannot deny. So all in all, this rewatch did not change my opinion that these Karl May Winnetou films are not exactly high-quality filmmaking. Once again, this is a gently-speaking way to say it. Still, at the same time, I also do not agree with the recent wave of art-opposed (maybe art-destroying) political correctness here in Germany that struck the old Karl May westerns in particular where people argued those should not be shown anymore because of the stereotypical depiction of Indians. Maybe a little more lightness from the 1960s would not be too bad for those from the 2020s that are always so full of tension and hatred and constantly suspect discrimination lurking around the corner. It cannot be healthy at all. If this should not be shown anymore, then simply because it is not a particularly good movie unfortunately. "Der Ölprinz", which is also known as "Rampage at Apache Wells", stays at two stars out of five for me and thus gets a negative recommendation. Watch something else instead unless you (for whatever reason) really love these old Karl May westerns. I wouldn't know why though. I mean at least they are not scared of killing off characters, which is good and otherwise would have been a total travesty as this should pretty much be a given for the genre, but I think there are probably hundreds of superior and also criminally underseen western films from many other countries, most of all the United States of America obviously. See one of those.
"Der Ölprinz" or "The Oil Prince" is a West German / Yugoslavian co-production from 1965, so this 90-minute movie had its 50th anniversary last year. Once again, it stars Pierre Brice as the title character and Stewart Granger is on board too playing Old Surehand with Lex Barker (and the recently deceased Götz George) not in it this time. But there are familiar faces from other Karl May adaptations, such as Terence Hill and a whole lot of Yugoslavian actors. Overall, this film can be summarized pretty nicely that it is hurt by the absence of a not too great actor like Lex Barker. At least he had tons of charisma. Pierre Brice is not a good actor in my opinion and should not have headlined this franchise. The result is that this movie we have here is almost entirely forgettable and lacks in many departments, especially story-telling. The director and also one of the two writers who adapted Karl May's work is Harald Philipp and I have seen other works from him that disappointed me. Still I am not sure if it is really his fault or if May is the one too blame as I have never read the base material. The result in this very case is a film that may be visually beautiful at times, but is really empty in terms of the story. If you want to see a great oil movie, go for "There Will be Blood" instead.
And after a rewatch in October 2022, let me just add a few more things:
Time for a little brainstorming: It can be said that it was not just Philipp who directed this, but one scene is from South German filmmaker Alfred Vohrer, who is still pretty well-known here and the reason are mostly his Edgar Wallace films. I still think that Pierre Brice is not a good actor and honestly I think so in an even stronger fashion now. There are so many moments during which his character Winnetou feels utterly cringeworthy, which also has to do with how the character was written. This character is really the definition of absence of shades in these films. He is so wise and perfect, but at the same time so humble. He saves those kids' lives on the raft. He offers his life to avoid a massacre. He shows up right in time to protect his non-Indian friend Old Surehand from one of the bad guys. He is willing to listen to an artist's music when the latter complains that nobody else wants to. He sides with the good guys, even against his Indian friends towards the end because creed really does not matter to him, but only the kind heart does. He is ready to forgive his Indian friend, when that friend realizes he was in the wrong. He always speaks of himself in the third person etc. By the way, the Indian friend also changes his opinion so quickly in the end that it did not feel very realistic. What he had to say felt very written to be honest. In general, this film was at its best when Brice was out for a little while. Stewart Granger as the actual lead did a fine job here as Old Surehand I would say and I did not miss Barker as much this time. It was still a bit soft how Surehand was a perfect shooter, but never killed the evil ones, just hit their guns.
The film is named after Harald Leipnitz's character and he is the main antagonist here, a man who is always on the lookout to make some money with the help of oil and he is ruthless at the same time. He is not a sadist though, just a businessman and he even criticizes his careless helpers when they killed somebody. But he does not fire them, he just wants them to be more careful to make sure that there will be no backlash for him. Well, there is backlash in the end of course and while we don't see it on the screen, we understand his character is killed by the Indians for what he (indirectly) did to a young Indian. Leipnitz I felt was almost too good for the role. The final scene when his character tries to put the blame on somebody else made this very obvious. I think he was among Germany's finest actor's at least in the 1960s and made much more challenging characters work, so yeah his turn and Granger's were maybe the film's best aspects. I think I enjoyed the film more in the first half of these under 1.5 hours. The introduction and buildup were fine. Scenes like the one when one of the bad guys is killed before he can say who he works for were alright and even somewhat similar to what we have seen in (modern) 007 films for example. And in many others. Okay, the introduction of the main antagonist and his evil deeds was a bit shaky. I am talking about the scenes when we see how the Oil Prince's henchmen burn down an area and the guy affected by this now does not go to see Leipnitz's character to sell his property to him (as he is pretty much forced to), but instead goes with the intention to kill him and take revenge and is then killed himself. The cast has also other interesting names to mention. Ralf Wolter, who just died slightly over two weeks ago closer to the ancient age of 100 than to the age of 90, is not the comedic sidekick this time, but Milan Srdoc is. One Yugoslavian inclusion. He is doing an okay job with what he is given.
Unfortunately, pretty much every single character here is a bit on the gimmicky side with their actions and there is only so much the actors could have done and it was impossible to turn this film into something good. This also applies to the key actors really including Granger. One example would be how he knocks out the guy behind the door. This almost had a touch of Bud Spencer and Terence Hill. And boom, there we have it: Terence Hill was actually in this movie and his character was also not just in one scene or totally minor, but among the more relevant characters. It was still funny to see how he is beaten up here in the earlier stages of the film because this is exactly the opposite of what happened to his characters when his career continued. Except when he was fighting Spencer's character in a playful manner here and there. In this film here, Hill (still credited as Mario Girotti) was around the age of 25 and he was a huge heart throb, the only character with a real romance story line and also kinda the only one with a bit of shades where you could not be sure for a while at least if he pleads loyalty really to the good or the bad guys. It still becomes obvious fast enough. Interesting inclusion though and his presence here was also for me the crucial reason to give this film a rewatch. Another one I totally have to mention is Heinz Erhardt. Sure, today in the 21st century not all of his jokes are winners anymore and have aged really well, but here and there he will still make you smile, also with his entire aura and all his mannerisms. His joking about how his sister is a widow already when somebody mistakes him for her husband and threatens to kill him and turn her into a widow was what stayed in the mind the most for me. Plus his musical talent. People loved him at that point in the 1960s for sure and so it must have been especially interesting to see him in a film like this because honestly Heinz Erhardt with the rather bourgeois background his characters usually had was absolutely nothing you would expect to see in a Karl May western. Story-wise, the film also could have done completely without him if we are honest. You cannot deny that, no matter how much you like him. But he brought what he always brings and what he does better than anyone, so it was nice for me to see him in here.
As for the key story, I was a bit surprised that I preferred the first half like I said earlier already. There was a lot more drama and action on a bigger scale in the second half, but it did not feel too thrilling, no matter if we are talking about danger in a roaring river, people on an unstable bridge above a gigantic canyon/abyss or the killing of the son of an important Indian tribe leader and the revenge plot resulting thereof. Maybe I disliked the second half also more because it featured Brice's Winnetou more frequently. Anyway, it is nice to see some of the younger folks from back then still alive now over 55 years later and I am talking here about Hill of course and also Macha Méril who played his love interest. Not exactly a female character with a lot of depth gently-speaking, but she was mostly cast because she was pretty I assume and this I cannot deny. So all in all, this rewatch did not change my opinion that these Karl May Winnetou films are not exactly high-quality filmmaking. Once again, this is a gently-speaking way to say it. Still, at the same time, I also do not agree with the recent wave of art-opposed (maybe art-destroying) political correctness here in Germany that struck the old Karl May westerns in particular where people argued those should not be shown anymore because of the stereotypical depiction of Indians. Maybe a little more lightness from the 1960s would not be too bad for those from the 2020s that are always so full of tension and hatred and constantly suspect discrimination lurking around the corner. It cannot be healthy at all. If this should not be shown anymore, then simply because it is not a particularly good movie unfortunately. "Der Ölprinz", which is also known as "Rampage at Apache Wells", stays at two stars out of five for me and thus gets a negative recommendation. Watch something else instead unless you (for whatever reason) really love these old Karl May westerns. I wouldn't know why though. I mean at least they are not scared of killing off characters, which is good and otherwise would have been a total travesty as this should pretty much be a given for the genre, but I think there are probably hundreds of superior and also criminally underseen western films from many other countries, most of all the United States of America obviously. See one of those.