The Buccaneer

I first saw this film when it came out in the late 50s,and watched it every time it came on tv for decades afterward.It might say something about my tastes,because I thought it was a rousingly good adventure story.I still feel that way-for a pirate and battle film,it's first-rate.Where,then are my criticisms?First;a.)The battle of New Orleans was fought about 3 weeks after a peace treaty had been signed,and was,technically,irrelevant;b.)Unlike what they imply in the film,the British and the American forces were evenly matched-when the citizens of New Orleans and the pirates joined Jackson,the British were out-numbered;c.)The reason Laffite was not appreciated by the American government was not the PIRACY,per se,(they had legal commissions as privateers issued by Simon Bolivar)but because of the smuggling;d.)Laffitte had to leave,not because of the actions of a renegade captain under his command,but because he had returned to smuggling after he had received a presidential pardon;e.)Dominique,who was Laffite's much older brother,was an earthy,warm-hearted man who stayed behind and became a political hack under the Americans.Boyer is giving a reprise of an earlier portrayal on Napoleon;.I get the feeling that,with the big production,the large number of stars and well-known character actors who were doing supporting parts,the elaborate sets and props,and routines,they were trying to duplicate the success and magnitude of "The Ten Commandments"several years earlier.The big scenes-the pirate captains' conference;the pirate market;the taking of the"Corinthian"and the scenes at Barataria are well-done.(One bogus sequence,however-when Laffite challenges the pirate captains to kill Miggs before they can divy up the gold,and they back down-give me a break.Given the opportunity to get the loot-they would have lined up to slit the kid's throat.)The Battle of New Orleans is exteremly well-handled.Numerous viginettes of men preparing a variety of activities leading into the final fight-adds up to an impressive fourth act.And the love scenes do drag.This is not what De Mille was known for.So,enjoy this film on it's own merits,and realize that nothing is ever perfect.

This movie has great stars in their earlier years: Ingor Stevens never looked prettier; Yul Brynner was a very convincing Jean LaFitte, conflicted about his piracy and desiring to keep neutrality with the United States. Charlton Heston did a pretty good job as Andrew Jackson, but some moments were a bit stilted. It's really a good flick for students to learn that part of our history, AND it shows that all happy endings do NOT include the lovers getting together with each other--sometimes the happier ending is that they sail away and find partners of similar background who will understand them better in the long run. I have viewed it every year at least twice for 16 years now; and though it is not the best movie I've ever seen, I love it every time!

In 1938, Cecil B. De Mille directed "The Buccaneer", a retelling about Jean Lafitte and his assistance in winning the Battle of New Orleans in 1815. The story was part fact, part fiction. In 1958, De Mille's son-in-law, Anthony Quinn, directed a remake of the 1938 film. And, perhaps as a homage to the original film, De Mille himself does a prologue. Oddly, at no point in the prologue and throughout the story did they mention that the battle actually occurred about a monthAFTER the peace treaty was signed between the USA and Britain! The reason...the British fleet and American forces hadn't yet received word of the end of the war!

A major player in the battle and in this film is Jean Lafitte (Yul Brynner). Lafitte is considered in the movie and in history books to be a pirate, though I don't think he ever captained a vessel. Instead, he was the boss of a fleet of pirate ships operating in the Gulf of Mexico...making a fortune smuggling items into the US and nearby countries.

Much of the film is spent with the British trying to woo Lafitte into working for them...offering him a fortune and the captaincy of his own ship. He strings them along for some time and eventually approaches the Americans...offering to help them AND divulging the British invasion plans to them as well. The film follows these events and Charlton Heston plays General Andrew Jackson, the man most often credited with the victory...though he might have lost had he not had the help of Lafitte and his men who were experts with artillery.

So is this film any good? Well, considering that very, very few movies even mention the War of 1813, then it is a must-see for history buffs. Just don't consider it to be a perfect representation of what occurred...though it's closer to the facts than you'd find in a typical De Mille film! Add to this excellent acting, lovely sets and a decent script and it's an enjoyable flick...even more so than the 1938 version.

By the way, according to IMDB trivia, Quinn had intended to make the film much more historically accurate. This would have eliminated some romances that simply never occurred as well as showing the American forces being much more ready for the British troops. However, his interfering father-in-law did much to undo this.

If you're at all interested in pirates, pirate movies, New Orleans/early 19th century American history, or Yul Brynner, see this film for yourself and make up your own mind about it. Don't be put off by various lacklustre reviews. My reaction to it was that it is entertaining, well acted (for the most part), has some very witty dialogue, and that it does an excellent job of portraying the charm, appeal and legendary fascination of the privateer Jean Lafitte. While not all the events in the film are historically accurate (can you show me any historical film that succeeds in this?), I feel the film is accurate in its treatment of the role Lafitte played in New Orleans' history, and the love-hate relationship between the "respectable" citizens of New Orleans and this outlaw who was one of the city's favorite sons. Don't worry about what the film doesn't do, but watch it for what it does do, i.e., for its study of one of New Orleans', and America's, most intriguing historical figures.

This interesting feature has a very fine story-line, rather colorful characters and a very steady pace. it also incorporates a plot device from "Reap the Wild Wind", and since Cecil B. Deille directed that and his son-in-law Anbthony Quinn directed this film from his preparations, that can hardly be a coincidence. it works in both cases, I must report. The unusual set-up tells the viewer that Barataria, an island ruled by Jean Lafitte is built upon piracy, but during the war of 1812, and before, he has always refrained from bothering United States' vessels. Now General Andrew Jackson has been charged with defending nearby New Orleans with only 12,000 men against 60,000 British Imperial redcoats and 60 ships. Lafitte's men want him to side with the stronger force; he wants freedom and pardons for his men before ceding such a strategic landing spot to the U.S. forces. There are other factors at work in the story-line; pirate Bonnie Brown and her father want to attack U.S. ships and do so in defiance of Lafitte's orders, leaving a boy alive without knowing they have missed an eyewitness. When his testimony finally comes out, Jackson cannot grant what Lafitte asks; but Lafitte supports him anyway and in the fog, the pirates and Jackson rout the British and he sails away to whatever destiny awaits a man who had genius and statesmanship but not fortune. The cast of this colorful and physically-lovely film are skilled indeed. Yul Brynner has one of his best roles as the pirate king, Inger Stevens is beautiful; as the girl he loves, Charles Boyer has many good lines as his adviser, powerful Lorne Greene is a rival, E.G. Marshall the Governor, and Claire Bloom is charismatic as Bonnie Brown. Others in the cast include Ted de Corsia, Douglass Dumbrille, George Mathews, Henry Hull as Jackson's adviser, Bruce Gordon, Onslow Stevens, Robert F. Simon, Henry Brandon, Fran Jeffries, and Leslie Bradley, among others. The music by Elmer Bernstein is very memorable, and the 1938 script remade here had only to be freshened a bit. The shiny cinematography was the work of veteran Loyal Griggs, the set decoration was supplied by Albert Nozaki, Hal Pereira and Walter Tyler, with set decoration by Sam Comer and Roy Moyer and costumes by Edith Head, John Jensen and Ralph Jester. Nellie Manley did the elaborate hairstyles and Wally Westmore the difficult makeup. The film contains quite a bit of good adventure-level dialogue and a very strong climactic battle scene. Charlton Heston, as as Andrew Jackson, prepared to play the part of an elder general and then discovered the man was young at the time of the battle; but he is often effective, grey-haired or not, especially in his exchanges with Henry Hull as Mr. Peavey. This is an exciting and well-mounted entertainment, which looks exactly as if C.B. DeMille had completed his production; it is a beautiful and nearly a very-fine motion picture.