Edge of the World

There are few tales of greater derring do than that of The White Rajah of Sarawak. This film sadly does not do it justice. That's not to say it's not a perfectly decent Sunday afternoon watch. There was too much caricature in the portrayals to really engage the viewer and far too much reflective dreaming.

This is quite an interesting story but the execution of it is pretty slow and plodding. The script suffers from too many unfinished sub-plots and the director seems intent on trying to show the inner demons of Brooke's mind rather than tell a good story. As such, there are elements of Heart of Darkness but it is certainly not A Man Who Would Be King or Apocalypse Now. Indeed, it is a rather confusing and drawn-out affair.

Why do Hollywood-style films always follow the same corrupting boiler-plate model? Here was a chance to really examine an interesting anomaly of British Colonial history in the Far East. Brook's character was certainly more interesting than the portrayal Mr. Meyers summoned with occasional Shakespearean oration. The supporting cast were forced to play along, it seemed, with his inability to convey complexity. The insertion of romantic elements didn't help. It appears we are in an age where having little respect for the value of history as it has been documented is just fine.

We don't take the script apart or delve into what the director did or didn't do.

Did my wife and I find this film entertaining? Yes Did we enjoy it? Yes That's it, end of!! We vote 7/10.

Don't believe the low ratings and reviews. This movie touches subjects like colonialism, imperialism and Islam. So of course many people will rage about the movie not being in line with their views or beliefs on the subjects. It's not a movie for peoples that need a "safe space".

I don't have any biases on the subjects and to me it seemed pretty fair. The movie doesn't depict the British Empire as all evil or all good. It doesn't depict the Muslims as good or evil either. It doesn't show the indigenous people in a particular good or bad light either. So I'd say the movie didn't sink into modern politics which is always surprising and refreshing.

As for the movie in general. Actors are great, scenery is great, music is good enough, costumes look good at least for someone not knowing exactly what costumes of the times are supposed to look like.

As for historical accuracy. According to Wikipedia, there doesn't seem to be a lot to go about with this story. The place was quite isolated in a time when info didn't circulate very well. So in this condition making the movie forces the artists to make romanticized relationships, characters and dialogs.

My main complain about this movie would be about the fact the guy's reign lasted around 27 years and this movie is more about how it all began. I felt it would have made a great TV show or mini series. So it's a bit sad that it felt like watching the first episodes of an unfinished show.

Also they tried to be a bit pretentious about the main characters thoughts. Thoughts they probably had no way to know anything about. So I wouldn't have made the choice to go with made up thoughts no one can relate to or care about. Yet it did provide some context of the time period.

To sum it up. This movie is quite ok, pleasant to watch and certainly no where near as bad as people are saying in the reviews.