Il principe di Scozia

Flynn, though pickled and clearly the worse for wear, gives a fine performance here. In fact, his haggard features compliment his role as a defeated war veteran. You`ll see little of the humour and athletic prowess of Flynn`s early movies, but it`s a grand experience none the less. The supporting cast are fine, especially Livesy. But the leading lady is not up to Flynn`s standard. Olivia should have made a comeback for this one. That said, Flynn does engage in some obviously stunt-doubled sword play. However, he is neither as humorous, mischevious or as boyish as he was before. 8/10

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...

In the early 50s, the major Hollywood studios produced many movies in Europe, as it was cheaper to make 'quality' films there, utilizing foreign labor. IVANHOE, QUO VADIS, and ROMAN HOLIDAY were a few memorable titles shot overseas, and when the WB chose to make the last of Errol Flynn's films for the studio, THE MASTER OF BALLANTRAE, in England, no one was happier than Flynn, himself. His career grinding to a halt, his finances in disarray, he had left America with creditors at his heels, finding that in Europe, he was still considered bankable, and his name still had marquee value. He hoped that starring in a swashbuckler (only his second since 1948's ADVENTURES OF DON JUAN) might revive his career, and open doors as he began to freelance. Unfortunately, years of self-neglect had taken it's toll on his appearance and energy, and even the most careful of lighting would no longer create a youthful illusion. At 44, Flynn showed all of his years, and lacked the acrobatic grace that had made his earlier swashbucklers so memorable.

Very loosely based on a Robert Lewis Stevenson novel, with elements of CAPTAIN BLOOD thrown in for good measure, Flynn is Jamie Durrisdeer, the hedonistic eldest son of a Scottish lord, who, after a coin toss, leaves to fight alongside Bonnie Prince Charlie, while his younger brother, Henry, 'plays nice' with the British, in order to save their estate. After the Scottish army is defeated, he finds himself a fugitive, allies himself with Irish mercenary Col. Francis Burke (a scene-stealing performance by Roger Livesey), and sneaks home to borrow money to flee to France. After a tearful reunion with his lady love (Beatrice Campbell, who was certainly no threat to Olivia de Havilland as a Flynn leading lady), Jamie awaits brother Henry's arrival, with funds, on the coast...only to be betrayed, barely escaping with his life. Burke takes the wounded Jamie onboard a waiting ship, only to be informed that the destination is the Caribbean, not France. The pair had been shanghaied!

After a series of events very reminiscent of CAPTAIN BLOOD, Jamie becomes a successful buccaneer, defeating a French rival in combat. Single-mindedly on a mission of vengeance, he returns home to Scotland to confront the brother who had 'betrayed' him...

At a brief 90 minutes, the pace never falters, and the cinematography, by Jack Cardiff, is rich and vivid (and so impressed Flynn that he hired Cardiff to film and direct his 'pet' project, an adventure film about William Tell...which was, sadly, never completed, as Flynn went bankrupt).

While THE MASTER OF BALLANTRAE was certainly not of a caliber with Flynn's best swashbucklers, it was undeniably the best film that the WB had assigned him to since THE ADVENTURES OF DON JUAN. Unfortunately, the reviews were lukewarm, at best, and the film was largely ignored.

For all intent and purpose, Errol Flynn was 'washed up' in America. He would not make another American film for four years...a sad state of affairs for a man who, just a few years earlier, had been the toast of Hollywood!

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.

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.