Bodyline

A must-see for cricket fans. Characters are very well cast. They even give a very convincing batting, bowling and fielding performance. This movie really caught the spirit of cricket, it shows very convincingly how players are in a way obsessed and don't stop talking and thinking about the game.

The directors really knew what they were doing, have been observing and studying the matter thoroughly. Apart from the actors, scenery and original story the movie gives a chilling view on the English determination to beat the Aussies/Bradman. Even if it meant they had to abandon the gentleman-rules of the play. I wish I could get it on video or dvd, but they never released it to the public. May be a good idea to do it after all, I'd certainly buy a copy!

It's been twenty years since I last saw this tour de force of war movies, and, having watched it again just last night, it hasn't aged one day. Sadly, I have. And when I was fourteen, in 1985, (when England had just regained the Ashes from the nice version of Allan Border and his chubby Australians) my love of the sport was far more pure and non-partisan. So it's through those youthful eyes, unsullied by nationalistic distortions, that I will rate this production as 'simply terrific', and for so many reasons: production standards, performances, faith to the sport, and editing are all of the highest calibre, all designed to grip and to entertain and never slipping into the badlands of the docu-drama. This is just great drama, dramatically portrayed, and edge-of-the-seat exciting in its frequent recreational sequences, and in its portrayal of the political and international tensions those sequences allegedly caused.

But what about now, twenty years on? Well, we've just won again, so I really don't care about the 'bias' or the occasional inaccuracies. In fact, upon watching it once more, I realised that perceptions are vital when it comes to representing your country in any sport, indeed in any situation: and the Australian perception of the ruthless Jardine and his foot soldiers at the time is, in fact, faithfully reflected. Of course, that gives the film a wonderfully juicy, ironic dimension in 2006: the all-conquering Australian superstars clearly learnt a lot from Jardine (took them long enough) about ruthlessness, while all we learnt from the Aussies of the same era was how to whinge. Although the worm seems to be turning - yet again...

To all cricket fanatics from opposite sides of the world, this is an absolute must-see, or 'must-see again' if you saw it when it first appeared all those years ago, as I did.

Immediately after this movie there was an episode of "Dallas". Five minutes into that episode I realized how badly made that show was. Then it occurred to me that it was because the previous show (ie, "Bodyline", this show) was so good!

If you're not interested in cricket, or don't understand it, then this movie has nothing for you. You won't learn about the game from this movie; and it won't motivate you about it.

But if you <are> a cricket fan, then this is an excellent movie. It's all about those things that Sydney Morning Herald cricket writers talk about in reviewing a Test Match after the match has finished. The movie is about personal heroism, committment, team spirit, vision, strategy, creativity, sportsmanship. The captain of the England team, the fast bowlers, the Australian team: they have it. They have it in abundance.

Who are the bad guys here? Well, popularly perceived, it is Jardine, the England captain. But this movie shows a new villain: the Australian Cricket Control Board. Gary Sweet's comment sums it up perfectly: "I didn't really think that the Board couldn't grow a spine overnight".

How would this movie compare against the various Babe Ruth movies? Not at all. All the BR movies I've seen portray him as a redneck, a yobbo, although of course a very talented one (but only in one particular way). In "Bodyline", the atmosphere, the focus, the story of the movie is not about the batsman alone.

Finally, there was also a very good one-hour special about the making of this movie. Remember that this movie was made before the ubiquitous computerised special effects, so the bruising, the battering by the cricket ball - in short, everything - is done via a more "traditional" way. Also worth seeing.

Bodyline is a 1984 Australian TV miniseries dramatisation of the Ashes Cricket series of 1932-33, starring Hugo Weaving as Douglas Jardine and Gary Sweet as Donald Bradman.

The Australian touring side won the previous Ashes series in England, with débutant Bradman the deciding factor. In order to counter Bradman, who was predicted to be the major stumbling block, the English team set about determining the tactics for the upcoming series. The miniseries, shows the early development of Bradman and Jardine, the analysis of Bradman's weaknesses by the English team and the development of countering tactics and then shows the result over the 5 Test series. The series uses reconstructions of Test matches played and focuses on the key players involved.

The Ashes contest was controversial at the time for the 'Bodyline' tactic which consisted of short pitched leg side bowling combined with a close-in leg side field and leg side boundary protection. The intimidation of the batsmen, who at the time were virtually unprotected, resulted in several batsmen being hit. This caused claims of unsportsman like behaviour, crowd uproar, press headlines and an international incident. The key thing was the win at all costs attitude of Jardine, which led to the development and use of Bodyline and caused controversy within the English team and in Australia.

The TV series was a success at the time, however it was criticised by those that participated and were still alive. While most of the facts are correctly depicted, some are not. There is also dramatic license taken with the underlying story behind the facts.

While I never saw the series on TV, as an Australian and a cricket fan, I was aware of Bodyline. While the series was well acted, I would recommend anyone watching the series, to research Bodyline and contrast the series with the reality.

Of note was the inability of the British public to fully appreciate the tactics used, and there was no live coverage of the games in Australia. Instead, the English team were able to argue they were using 'fast leg theory' and the British public were unable to distinguish this from leg theory - (an existing tactic involving leg side bowling). Eventually Bodyline bowling was agreed to be dangerous and while legal, not in the spirit of the game. The rules of Cricket were changed to reduce the number of close-in leg side fielders behind the stumps and umpires were also given discretion to prevent intimidatory bowling.

Also, the players were amateurs and had little protection against fast bowling. Intimidatory bowling is still a tactic in the modern game, however the players are better prepared and protected. And better paid!

As a seven-year old just beginning to learn cricket I had just heard the name Don Bradman from my father, being referred as the best batsman ever. Naturally, when the show "Bodyline" started airing in India in 1985/1986, I was excited since I would get to see how prolific Bradman was. I loved the series then, but could never locate it later on reruns or recorded media. Luckily a couple of weeks back I came across an Australian website selling DVDs of the series.

Watching the series in a new light more than 20 years after I saw it for the first time was a great experience. Having acquired a good knowledge of both, the game's history and the rules provided me a fresh perspective. And the verdict? The series is brilliant!

I did believe it over-dramatised events to an extent. There were also minor historical inaccuracies and omissions:

1. Not having a mention of George Duckworth (the English wicketkeeper) being the person who observed the uncertainties in Bradman's stance while facing fast bowling on a wet wicket (attributing it to Larwood instead).

2. Not showing the Notts captain Arthur Carr providing inputs regarding the leg theory approach and rehearsing it with Larwood and Voce in English county cricket (rather showing Douglas Jardine doing all the planning himself).

3. Showing Douglas Jardine as an upright and politically correct person not given to using terms questioning his opponents' parentage (but he actually encouraged his teammates to refer to Bradman as "the little bastard").

4. Bert Oldfield was hit by Larwood on the head while Larwood was not bowling Bodyline, contrary to what the series shows. Moreover the hit was due to a deflection from Oldfield's bat. Oldfield in fact claimed "My own fault" later.

But I am nitpicking. The series is all about showing how and why one of the most vilified cricket strategies came into being. It focuses on Douglas Jardine's drive to get the Ashes back in England and shows that he would not stop at any point as long as he was within the rules.

Contrary to what a few other reviewers on this site have written, I found the representation of the events quite unbiased. Over-dramatisation is a part of the representation of any sporting event on-screen and there is no loss of flavour to "Bodyline" for that. If anything, it was charitable to Douglas Jardine. He is always shown as being in awe of Bradman's batting abilities and the main reason for his tactics comes off as an overwhelming desire to win the Ashes, rather than harbouring racist feelings and hatred towards Australia.

Other players are shown in honest light too - Larwood and Voce obeying their captain's orders to the letter, Pataudi quitting when things were going against the concepts of fair play, Woodfull refusing to employ similar tactics both out of choice and necessity (his team did not have bowlers of Larwood's ability), and so on.

All in all, this is a great watch. If you are a cricket lover then you should definitely see it. And if you are a fan of any kind of sports, then this series shows you to what extent it is possible to go to stop a champion.