Le vagabond des mers

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.

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.

Although I have seen a monumental number of films, The Master Of Ballantrae had managed to escape my viewing until recently. I expected that it would not be of the same quality as Captain Blood or other Errol Flynn hits or else it would have been shown as much as they are. This is exactly what it turned out to be, a watchable but lower quality film. Scottish laird Jamie Durrisdeer (Errol Flynn) leaves his father Lord Durrisdeer (Felix Aylmer), younger brother Henry (Anthony Steel), and fiancee Lady Alison (Beatrice Campbell) to go fight the English. Defeated in battle he is pursued back to the family castle accompanied by a talkative Irish mercenary Colonel Francis Burke (Roger Livesey). Their hiding place betrayed, Jamie and Col, Burke must flee. Jamie believes that his brother has betrayed him to the English in order to inherit the family estate. However the snitch is revealed to be Jamie's spurned lover Jessie Brown (Yvonne Furneaux). Jamie and Col. Burke hope to sail to France, with smuggler MacCauley (Moultrie Kelsell), but he, in turn cheats them by sailing to the Caribbean. There the ship is taken by colorful French pirate Arnaud (Jacques Berthier). Just as you would guess Arnaud can see uses for Jamie and makes him a "partner" despite the doubts of Arnaud's second in command Matthew Bull (Francis DeWolff). In a clever plot twist, since you don't really want our hero to victimize innocent people, they set out to rob the booty of another pirate, Mendoza (Charles Goldner). Afterward there is the, to be expected, falling out between Jamie and Arnaud, the fight and Jamie's ultimate victory. Jamie, with Col. Burke, returns home a richer man but still wanted by the English. There he finds that Henry, believing him dead, is courting Lady Alison. Following a battle with the English, misunderstandings are cleared up, love prevails and our heroes escape to live happily ever after. Ah, only in movies! The above highlights what is best about the film, which is that it keeps moving, with a lot of action for only 90 minutes running time. Also the locales, in Scotland and Spain (filling in for the Caribbean) are very scenic. However there are three significant problems which stop this film from becoming an "A" picture. First, as noted in many other comments, Errol Flynn is showing the wear of his lifestyle. In his best pictures he displayed vitality, a dazzling smile and mocked his enemies. Here he is tired, broody and uninspired. However, in his defense, he may also of had other things on his mind. While making this film, he was preparing to produce his next picture, William Tell. If you don't recall that movie it's for good reason because Errol Flynn, after starting production, could never find sufficient funding to complete the film. Secondly, there is no central villain, a la Basil Rathbone et al, in this movie. The English are gentlemen who, thinking they've killed the escaping Jamie, go out of their way to apologize to his father for having to do so. We know that his brother did not betray him (it would have created more dramatic tension if the script had hidden his betrayer until Jamie and Col. Burke return to Scotland). The smuggler who waylays them has only one or two scenes. Only Arnaud generates any interest. Thirdly, there is no sex. OK so there is no sex in any 1953 films but Beatrice Campbell generates none of the interest that say Maureen O'Hara or even Olivia De Haviland possessed. Yvonne Furneaux does create more energy but there is something uncomfortable about her scenes, as her character is grabbing at Jamie, for attention, and he is blithely looking the other way. Having waited this long to see The Master Of Ballantrae would I see it again. The answer is definitely yes but I am more likely to first see Captain Blood or Robin Hood five or ten times more.

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.

The Master of Ballantrae is one of those films that can be enjoyed on its own merits, providing that viewers don't spend the entire duration comparing it to the book by Robert Louis Stevenson.

As an adaptation of The Master of Ballantrae, the film will disappoint as the book's story is almost changed beyond recognition, the characters are reduced to stereotypes (though thankfully still likable ones that are enough to make the story still engaging enough) and the tragic elements of the story are sidelined. However, viewing it on its own terms, while nowhere near one of Errol Flynn's best films, it is decent with its fun and charms.

Starting with the good points, and there are a good many here, what definitely stands out is the vividly colourful cinematography, which captures the elegant costumes and handsomely rendered settings perfectly. William Alwyn's music score is appropriately rousing and bombastic, it's no Korngold but it suits the film very well and adds a lot to it. Smart, witty scripting, some slick action (including the very amusing pirate scenes) and an easy-going chemistry between Errol Flynn and Roger Livesey are further things to like, as are the more than able direction and the generally fun and thrilling second half. In the supporting roles, Roger Livesey really comes to hugely enjoyable life in the type of role associated with Alan Hale, and the rest of the cast do credibly, including lovely leading lady Beatrice Campbell.

For all those good things however, The Master of Ballantrae also has its faults. Despite his gallant charm, twinkling eyes and dashing smile, Flynn is not in his best form here, he looks out of shape from his drinking and fatigued and the action lacks his usual enthusiastic energy. He does handle the more dramatic scenes reasonably well though. Didn't care for the narration either, the news report delivery felt out of place and it wasn't very necessary either and ground the first half to a standstill in places. More show and less tell would have made things better. The first half has a good deal of fun and charm but the second half is noticeably crisper in pace. And while one shouldn't expect another Adventures of Robin Hood or Adventures of Don Juan climax, the climax here was rather anaemically choreographed and lacked excitement.

All in all, decent with a lot of good merits but a little disappointing for Flynn and Stevenson fans. 6/10 Bethany Cox