Lord Jim

Conrad's novels,like those of Pasternak,are often read more for the mood and the tone than for the plot.In certain cases,the facts are the least important aspect.In my opinion,this is the state of "Lord Jim".The middle part does appear to be similar to a cross between a Tarzan movie,any film revolt against oppression,and "Treasure Island".Oh,but isn't Wallach's General,philosophical and sadistic,evily wise and perceptive,a vast improvement on the original?Sherif Ali was a crook,masquerading as a religious fanatic.The appearance of the pirates,however,enjoyable as it is,really proves to undermine Conrad's intrention.This is a bungled robbery,and Mason's sterling performance shows us a clever and insightful crook manipulating a dupe.In the original,the pirates appear almost as an instrument of fate,allowing Jim to destroy himself.Brown is Jim's unrecognized alter-ego;without acknowledging his own dark impulses,and dealing with them constructively,he(and the rest of us as well) fouls up his career and life.Everything else considered,this is still an enjoyable film,and a great tale of adventure.Watch it,but read the novel when it comes time to do the book report.

Lord Jim is one of those great works of fiction that is best watched after having read the novel, or at least a solid summary of the book. Without this background, the movie could be hard to understand. I also found that it was helpful to watch the film twice. Since some of the details of the movie do not square with those of the novel, it was a bit confusing at times to follow the sequence of the movie, and a second viewing brought all of that into focus. In my opinion, the motion picture does capture quite well the spirit of the book, if not the absolute letter.

I actually found Peter O'Toole's depiction of the lead character to be a quite good representation. He is just as naive and disoriented a character in the movie as in the book. His heroics in the movie are appropriately tempered with self-doubt, and his ultimate fate squares with the novelist's intent for his hero/anti-hero.

I enjoy watching movies of this kind to see how a director and actors visualize the plot of their respective novels, and to me Lord Jim was not a disappointment.

"Lord Jim" is a film that offers viewers satisfaction on many levels. Although it is set in an exotic locale and has a considerable amount of action, the real story of this movie is its exploration of the human condition. Love, honor, courage, commitment and redemption all come into play as the story moves from the sea to the jungle. It reminds us how a split-second decision can alter dramatically the course of our lives.

"Lord Jim" is a well-paced, engaging film. Peter O'Toole's thought-provoking and moving performance will stick in your mind long after you see this movie. I haven't read the book so I can't speak to the movie's faithfulness to the original text, but it does stand on its own legs as a thoroughly entertaining film. If you like movies such as "Lawrence of Arabia" or "The Sand Pebbles", you will definitely enjoy "Lord Jim." I highly recommend it.

Hopefully, it will become available on DVD soon.

Peter O'Tooles eyes are disturbingly blue. Lots of visual detail, good cinematography, cheap special effects. It moves slowly and doesn't really explain the motivations of the main character very well. O'Toole is good but oblique. The movie doesn't really pick up until Eli Wallach shows up. He is quite good, cheerfully cruel and sadistic, and I think he may have taken things from this role that he later expanded on in The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. Curt Jurgens is delightfully seedy, a sweaty and cowardly drunk who needs a haircut. I don't know anything about the rating system here but I'm giving it a seven for just for watchability.

It is sometime in the late 19th century, and Jim is an up-and-coming merchant seaman. After rising through the ranks under Captain Marlowe, Jim is injured and stranded in Java. After recovering, he signs on with the first available ship: the SS Patna, bound for Mecca with hundreds of pilgrims. During a storm, the crew abandon it, thinking it will surely sink, and in a moment of weakness; Jim joins them. Back in port, they realise the ship was saved, and Jim's guilt impels him to turn himself in. After a public humiliation at an official inquiry, Jim becomes a drifter in the Asiatic waters; determined to one day restore honour to his good name.

Written and directed by Richard Brooks- and based on Joseph Conrad's novel of the same name- 'Lord Jim' is a grandly photographed adventure that is enjoyable, though doesn't live up to its source material. Despite Brooks' best efforts, he fails to recapture the psychological intrigue and headily atmospheric nature of the novel. His version of the story is more of a straight adventure piece, missing the subtle, profound examinations of guilt and honour that made up the dark heart of Conrad's tale.

This is not to say the film isn't worthwhile, however. Though it culminates with a dull battle sequence, and the pacing is sluggish in places, 'Lord Jim' still engages and entertains. Brooks' dialogue and characterisation is strong, while the portrayal of the colonial attitudes of the time is striking and powerful. Despite the fact that his handling of the novel's themes feels lightweight, the central message about redemption and dignity still comes across; albeit a little watered down.

Furthermore, Freddie Young's immersive colour cinematography gives the film a crisp look and an epic feel. He successfully captures the contrast between the different settings of the film, from the bustling port of Java to the exotic, remote village of Patusan. His utilisation of various camera angles and movements creates dynamic, dramatic scenes, whether it be the stormy night on the Patna, the tense trial of Jim, or the final showdown. Young's consummate work enhances the mood and tone of the film, making it a visually stunning spectacle.

Conversely, Alan Osbiston's ponderous editing lends proceedings a sluggish pace, which is most evident in the latter half of the film. Though just under two and a half hours, 'Lord Jim' feels more protracted than it should have. On the other hand, Bronislaw Kaper's score is atmospheric and stirring, giving life to even the most lethargic of scenes, complementing the fine work of the aforementioned Young.

Also worthy of praise is the cast, led by a pitch-perfect Peter O'Toole. There were- and still are- few actors who could inject the same degree of intensity into their performances as O'Toole did, time and time again. As Jim, he enthralls with his obsessive desire to clear his name of dishonour, and his co-stars prove to be equally impressive. Eli Wallach does typically fine work as the villainous warlord The General, while Curd Jürgens steals every scene he's in as the duplicitous, drunken Cornelious. Moreover, James Mason's turn as the oily, cut-throat bandit Gentleman Brown may make your skin actually crawl; and is the main highlight of the uneven latter half.

In conclusion, Richard Brooks' adaptation of Joseph Conrad's 'Lord Jim' is a mixed-bag if ever there was one. Though Conrad's fascinating tale of guilt, honour and redemption is slightly truncated, it is not totally lost in translation; and the film still packs a narrative punch. Freddie Young's cinematography is captivating, while Bronislaw Kaper's score is stirring and the performances are of a particularly high quality- especially that of star Peter O'Toole. At the end of the day, though it goes through some choppy waters, 'Lord Jim' is still a cruise you should embark on.