El bribón del mar

It is generally conceded today that Robert Louis Stevenson's two greatest works are the unfinished novel WEIR OF HERMISTON, and the completed THE MASTER OF BALLENTRAE. The latter story (published in 1889) is centered on a filial rivalry and hatred that lasts literally until the death of the two brothers involved.

Ballentrae is an estate in 18th Century Scotland, and the chief heir is James Durie. On the surface he is an easy going, fun loving type. When the 1745 Jacobite revolt under Bonnie Prince Charlie occurs, the Laird of Ballentrae is in a quandary. As a Highland Laird, he has to show he is a supporter of the ancient royal house of Scotland (the Stuarts) that Prince Charles represents. As a man who knows what the Hanovarians are like, he dare not fully come out as a supporter. So he hedges his bets. He has James go off to fight for the Stuart cause, but keeps his younger son Henry at home. Henry is not a fun loving type - he is a quiet, business-like type, who does not make friends easily.

So James goes off, and time passes. He is eventually reported as dead. Henry immediately becomes the heir to the estate. But suddenly James returns, and willingly brings troubles with him. The British government does have a price on his head, and if he is found on the estate the Duries may be imprisoned and their wealth taken away. Yet the old man insists that Henry do what is right for his older brother, and James keeps reminding Henry that by rights he is "Master of Ballentrae".

What happens, of course, is a disaster. To begin with, it slowly comes out that James may have declared for the Stuart cause, but he never showed up to fight for that cause. In short he acted like a loud mouth, attracting the anger of the government but then showed he was a coward. Not a total coward (where his own interest is involved) but one who won't put himself out for others when the chips are down. Secondly it turns out that his fun-loving activities are coming home to roost - he's had an affair, and left an illegitimate child. This, of course, means that the family has to support the bastard child.

Moreover, Henry has married the woman who would have married James under normal circumstances. He is now trying to unofficially regain her attention. This proves too much for Henry, and leads to one of the best passages in Stevenson's writings - the duel between the brothers in a darkened room. It ends with Henry believing he killed James. Would that he had.

James persecutes Henry and his wife for the rest of the novel (the father eventually dies of shame after learning how James was so cowardly at Culloden). The novel eventually goes to New York (then a colony) where both brothers meet up and meet their joint destiny.

This review of the story does not go into Henry's character flaws (he is a money grubber in the end). Stevenson never did make a better completed novel, even though there are elements of the improbable in it.

The story was made into this 1953 film, probably the last good movie Errol Flynn had the lead in that was a swashbuckler. The ambiguities and moral lapses of the two brothers are not used here (Henry is played by Anthony Steel, and he is far too young here for the role). James' opportunistic streak, and his non-appearance at Culloden is not in the film - he shows up at the battle. Indeed, he meets Colonel Francis Burke, an English Jacobite (Roger Livesey) who becomes his one ally and friend in the novel. In the film there will be other allies. Mervyn Johns plays the family servant MacKellar, who narrates the actual novel (but not here), and sees the flaws of both brothers all too clearly (although he ends up sympathizing with Henry). Lord Durrisdeer, the father of the brothers is Finlay Curray. The cast is generally quite good. But the excellence of the story is dropped and replaced into a tale of misunderstanding, and how a universal dislike of the English manages to keep the family together. Stevenson would have been amazed and hurt by what was done here.

I am willing to give the film an "8" for it's good points, mostly the performances (in particular Livesay's chemistry with Flynn). But I miss the tragic element of the novel. To properly appreciate the novel, if one can't read it, try to catch the television version made with Michael York and Richard Thomas and John Guilgud back in the 1980s. It too changed the end, but it stuck closer to the spirit of hopeless competition and hatred that Stevenson concocted in his masterpiece.

During the 1950s, Errol Flynn was a full-fledged alcoholic who was just counting the days until liquor would eventually take his life. As a result, he looked extremely old and puffy in these films and the overall energy level of the films were very low. Sadly, like Alan Ladd, his career was cut very short because of the drinking.

Despite this, MASTER OF BALLANTRAE is one of only a few shining moments in an otherwise drab decade for Flynn. Now this isn't to say the film is great and I am sure that had Flynn made the film ten or twenty years earlier it would have been better (as often he looked a bit drunk and immobile), but it still was enjoyable and held my interest.

The film is based on a Robert Louis Stevenson novel by the same name--a story very similar to another famous work by Stevenson, "Kidnapped". Like this other tale, they are set in the period immediately following the defeat of the forces of Bonny Prince Charlie after the Battle of Culloden. This time, Flynn plays a brother forced to leave his homeland because those loyal to the Prince were being rounded up and executed. I am actually glad the film left Scotland, as the pirate sequences were exciting (even if the Tortugas look nothing like they do in the film--there are no mountains on these barren islands off the Florida Keys).

In addition to a sluggish but acceptable performance by Flynn, he was very ably supported by Roger Livesey--the only actor in the film who really came off as exciting or three-dimensional.

Errol Flynn's 1950s work has always been taken for granted as being inferior to the star's output during his period of glory (1935-45); personally, I've always liked AGAINST ALL FLAGS (1952), which is forthcoming on DVD from Universal: now that I've caught up with this one, I can safely say that it too emerges as a very adequate addition to his string of popular swashbucklers.

The appeal of the film is actually two-fold: apart from being a typical Flynn vehicle, it's based on a classic adventure novel by Robert Louis Stevenson; incidentally, not having read the original, I was surprised the narrative took the star from the highlands to (the more familiar territory of) the high seas – where he's involved with many a colorful character, at least three women, and even a usurping sibling. Perhaps to account for Flynn's age (he was 44 at the time), his character isn't quite as agile as in earlier adventures – given that he's wounded some three times during the course of the film; that said, as already mentioned, his attraction to females remains undimmed (though, in perhaps another sign of maturity, he never actually strays from his devotion to fiancée Beatrice Campbell) – ditto his wit, especially when it becomes necessary to put-down some gruff and pompous adversary.

This lively costumer is competently helmed by Keighley, a regular throughout Flynn's heyday, and deals with the 18th century struggle by the Scots to break free from British rule and elect Bonnie Prince Charlie as their sovereign. Besides, the film is boosted by an array of British players (including Anthony Steel as Flynn's over-eager brother, Felix Aylmer, Mervyn Johns, Ralph Truman, Francis de Wolff and, especially, Roger Livesey – cast against type as the star's fun-loving Irish sidekick, a role usually filled by Alan Hale); the Warners DVD I watched, then, really does justice to the film's gorgeous color cinematography (courtesy of the great Jack Cardiff).

Ultimately, while no classic, THE MASTER OF BALLANTRAE is a pleasant romp and, at this stage, I wouldn't mind checking out the rest of Flynn's ventures in similar vein: actually, I only have three more to go – THE ADVENTURES OF CAPTAIN FABIAN (1951), CROSSED SWORDS (1954) and THE DARK AVENGER (1955) – but their low-profile (and, in the case of the first two, their European backing) doesn't augur well for the films' imminent availability...

I wasn't expecting too much of this later Errol Flynn vehicle, especially as it was taking on one of my favourite authors, my fellow-countryman Robert Louis Stevenson. However, while some of my fears were justified, on the whole I was well satisfied with this irreverent, knockabout swashbuckler.

It probably helps that it's years and years since I read the novel plus the movie also gained big "brownie-points" with me for not calling my countrymen "Scotchmen" and basically by filling up any pauses in the story with big action set-pieces, so that any gripes I may have had about authenticity and truth to source evaporated.

On the down side, there's no question that old Errol was getting on a bit, especially for this type of part. He seems far too old to be his brother's brother, if you follow me, never mind the rakish playboy figure he cuts at the start of the movie. That said, he's still undoubtedly a handsome man, in reasonable shape and still able to leap aboard a pirate ship or engage in a sword-fight to the death with almost the old panache. He's well supported by Roger Livesey who hams it up royally as an Irish adventurer (does anyone in this movie speak in their native dialect?).

On the debit side are devices like the stentorian-voiced announcer who makes "voice of God" interjections it seems every 15 minutes, the complete lack of suspense at Flynn's two supposed early demises (as if...!) and I can't resist saying it after all, the complete lack of even one authentic Scottish accent - Flynn doesn't even try. (I've checked the cast-list and not one is Scots-born!)

But with Jack Cardiff's sparkling photography (every frame seems bathed in an almost Rubens-ian like golden-light), some good if not "Robin Hood" - vintage sword-play and similarly good if not "Captain Blood" - vintage action on the pirate-ship, the movie proceeds with the pace of a page-turning Stevenson novel and before you know it you're at the finish as Flynn, Livesey (and Beatrice Campbell as his lover Lady Alison) evade the English Army's hangman's rope (hurrah!) and make their dramatic escape over the hills and far away.

A bit two for the price of one then, pirate action coupled with a historical-costume swashbuckler. Personally I rather enjoyed it and will consciously now not avoid, as I have been doing, Flynn's post-war work. More "used-to-be" than "has-been" and there is a difference.

There are some problems with this version of the Robert Louis Stevenson classic, not least of which is the changing of the ending and parts of the story to make it more appealing to the juvenile appetite. Psychological complexities are minimized here, so that what you're getting is an adventure yarn about greed and jealousy. It could have been a lot more.

Yet there are compensations. Jack Cardiff's photography is really eye-catching, and Mr. Livesey carves a nice bit of ham from his role. Flynn himself seems more interested in the proceedings than at any time since before the war. He is out of condition, and lacks physical vigor, but a clarity of eye indicates he may have had some inkling of what this could have been.

Made to utilize Warners Brothers frozen assets in England, the film is not Stevenson, but is but no means a bad way to pass part of a rainy afternoon.