Bodyline

It's been twenty years since I last saw this tour de force of war movies, and, having watched it again just last night, it hasn't aged one day. Sadly, I have. And when I was fourteen, in 1985, (when England had just regained the Ashes from the nice version of Allan Border and his chubby Australians) my love of the sport was far more pure and non-partisan. So it's through those youthful eyes, unsullied by nationalistic distortions, that I will rate this production as 'simply terrific', and for so many reasons: production standards, performances, faith to the sport, and editing are all of the highest calibre, all designed to grip and to entertain and never slipping into the badlands of the docu-drama. This is just great drama, dramatically portrayed, and edge-of-the-seat exciting in its frequent recreational sequences, and in its portrayal of the political and international tensions those sequences allegedly caused.

But what about now, twenty years on? Well, we've just won again, so I really don't care about the 'bias' or the occasional inaccuracies. In fact, upon watching it once more, I realised that perceptions are vital when it comes to representing your country in any sport, indeed in any situation: and the Australian perception of the ruthless Jardine and his foot soldiers at the time is, in fact, faithfully reflected. Of course, that gives the film a wonderfully juicy, ironic dimension in 2006: the all-conquering Australian superstars clearly learnt a lot from Jardine (took them long enough) about ruthlessness, while all we learnt from the Aussies of the same era was how to whinge. Although the worm seems to be turning - yet again...

To all cricket fanatics from opposite sides of the world, this is an absolute must-see, or 'must-see again' if you saw it when it first appeared all those years ago, as I did.

I remember when this series debuted in Australia and at the time I thought it was a bit of Aussie flag waving jingoism; another of their rose-tinted historical spectacles which abounded in the 1980s...the kind where the British are the unfair toffs or moustache twirling villains and the Australians are the brave underdogs or larrikins. But viewing this again recently, I'm not so sure that's true. In fact, it might be more on the side of Douglas Jardine's England! Jardine (Hugo Weaving in his first major role) absolutely dominates the series. He's a far more interesting and complex character than the way the series depicts Don Bradman. But he's not the baddie: Jardine is charged with winning the Ashes for England, Bradman is the batsman supreme, almost invincible so he sets about working out if he has a weakness. The way Jardine does this is with intelligence and reason, asking his colleagues for feedback whilst applying his mind to the situation. In any other movie, this would be the act of the hero. He finds his answer in a quintet of fast bowlers, all of whom are honest, decent sportsmen who want to play for their country and win. To balance Jardine's methodical approach is Plum Warner, a former cricket great and, here, depicted as an honest upholder of decency and fair play. He worries that Jardine is being too analytical and single minded.

By contrast, the Australian cricket team are beset by nit-picking officials who prevent Bradman from playing in the early matches and who carry an air of smugness about them; as if the Ashes are theirs by right. The England team are greeted by an angry Australian "fan" who hurls abuse at them from a rowing boat. Is he a cheeky larrikin or is he a vile nutter? I mean, is hurling abuse at a visiting sports team either normal or virtuous in the context of positive movie or TV portrayals? Warner thinks he's a harmless local character but Jardine sees something more base and sinister in the man. Later events show that Jardine's view might be right. This character hovers over the Australian team, being privy to meetings between English and Australian cricket officials, saying rude and abusive things when he hears something he doesn't like. Later on, he leads the crowds in yelling "bastards" at the England team and burning the Union flag. His mind and his actions have not been shaped by Bodyline (a term Australians coin, not the English)...he held angry and aggressive opinions about England before a ball had been bowled. In short, he's an agitator, not a true fan and Jardine knows this.

There's also another scene where English cricketer turned journalist, Percy Fender, shows up in the Australian press box and he's all smiles, friendliness and earnestness as he sets about doing the best job he can whilst slobbish Australian journalists roll their eyes and shake their heads at him. Again, are we meant to side with the slobs over the dedicated and friendly? Jardine pushes his team hard, but he's always fair with them. When they demand to know the tactics, he gives in and tells them. He pushes Eddie Paynter to play when the man should be in hospital, but Paynter scores a century and Jardine is generous afterwards, in an unpretentious and unshowy way. Jardine pays tribute to the talents of his team and while the depiction of Australian cricketers has them smiling at one another and being matey to the point of insular, the director shows the English batsmen in graceful slow motion as captions tell of their exploits and Jardine's voice over extols their talents.

Whilst Jardine increasingly becomes single minded to the point of obsessive, the rest of the England team behave well. Even Bob Wyatt, who was a very serious and taciturn person, comes across in this series as jolly and affable. Some refuse to bowl Bodyline but all back the captain. None of them mock the Australians or twirl moustaches or behave in a villainous way. Australia lodge a complaint, it gets out of control, there's a diplomatic outrage and basically England agree to all of Australia's demands after they win.

But tellingly, the final moments of Bodyline tell of Jardine's life after cricket; as a war hero risking his life behind enemy lines. Bradman gets a line about going on to captain Australia. So, an Aussie hatchet job against England or a sneaky appreciation of sports professionalism and dedication....maybe even a sly tribute to Douglas Jardine? I'm tending to think it's the latter.

Needs to be re-introduced. This is an excellent series, but unfortunately, not available on popular streaming platforms like Netflix and Prime Video. This series needs to be remastered and re-introduced to these streaming platforms!! If not free then at least with a paid option. It will be very popular in cricket playing countries like India, UK, Australia, Pakistan, etc. The current generation needs to view and familiarise themselves with the history of leg theory and the legacy of the great Don Bradman. It is available on YouTube, uploaded by some fans, but the quality of the video is poor. And they are unofficial versions.

As a seven-year old just beginning to learn cricket I had just heard the name Don Bradman from my father, being referred as the best batsman ever. Naturally, when the show "Bodyline" started airing in India in 1985/1986, I was excited since I would get to see how prolific Bradman was. I loved the series then, but could never locate it later on reruns or recorded media. Luckily a couple of weeks back I came across an Australian website selling DVDs of the series.

Watching the series in a new light more than 20 years after I saw it for the first time was a great experience. Having acquired a good knowledge of both, the game's history and the rules provided me a fresh perspective. And the verdict? The series is brilliant!

I did believe it over-dramatised events to an extent. There were also minor historical inaccuracies and omissions:

1. Not having a mention of George Duckworth (the English wicketkeeper) being the person who observed the uncertainties in Bradman's stance while facing fast bowling on a wet wicket (attributing it to Larwood instead).

2. Not showing the Notts captain Arthur Carr providing inputs regarding the leg theory approach and rehearsing it with Larwood and Voce in English county cricket (rather showing Douglas Jardine doing all the planning himself).

3. Showing Douglas Jardine as an upright and politically correct person not given to using terms questioning his opponents' parentage (but he actually encouraged his teammates to refer to Bradman as "the little bastard").

4. Bert Oldfield was hit by Larwood on the head while Larwood was not bowling Bodyline, contrary to what the series shows. Moreover the hit was due to a deflection from Oldfield's bat. Oldfield in fact claimed "My own fault" later.

But I am nitpicking. The series is all about showing how and why one of the most vilified cricket strategies came into being. It focuses on Douglas Jardine's drive to get the Ashes back in England and shows that he would not stop at any point as long as he was within the rules.

Contrary to what a few other reviewers on this site have written, I found the representation of the events quite unbiased. Over-dramatisation is a part of the representation of any sporting event on-screen and there is no loss of flavour to "Bodyline" for that. If anything, it was charitable to Douglas Jardine. He is always shown as being in awe of Bradman's batting abilities and the main reason for his tactics comes off as an overwhelming desire to win the Ashes, rather than harbouring racist feelings and hatred towards Australia.

Other players are shown in honest light too - Larwood and Voce obeying their captain's orders to the letter, Pataudi quitting when things were going against the concepts of fair play, Woodfull refusing to employ similar tactics both out of choice and necessity (his team did not have bowlers of Larwood's ability), and so on.

All in all, this is a great watch. If you are a cricket lover then you should definitely see it. And if you are a fan of any kind of sports, then this series shows you to what extent it is possible to go to stop a champion.

A must-see for cricket fans. Characters are very well cast. They even give a very convincing batting, bowling and fielding performance. This movie really caught the spirit of cricket, it shows very convincingly how players are in a way obsessed and don't stop talking and thinking about the game.

The directors really knew what they were doing, have been observing and studying the matter thoroughly. Apart from the actors, scenery and original story the movie gives a chilling view on the English determination to beat the Aussies/Bradman. Even if it meant they had to abandon the gentleman-rules of the play. I wish I could get it on video or dvd, but they never released it to the public. May be a good idea to do it after all, I'd certainly buy a copy!