Scott of the Antarctic

source: Scott of the Antarctic

Associate producer: Sidney Cole. Producer: Michael Balcon. An Ealing Studios Production, made at Ealing Studios, London, and on locations in Norway and Switzerland. Presented by J. Arthur Rank. Dedicated to the memory of Captain Scott and all the members of his expedition. Copyright 20 April 1949 (in notice: 1948) by Ealing Studios, Ltd. New York opening at the Little Carnegie: 24 February 1951 (sic). U.S. release (through Eagle Lion): 20 April 1949. U.K. release (through General Film Distributors): 7 March 1949. Australian release (through British Empire Films): 6 October 1949. 111 minutes. SYNOPSIS: Although ostensibly leading a scientific expedition to Antarctica in 1911, Captain Scott actually wants the glory of being the first man to reach the South Pole. But he is beaten by the Norwegian explorer, Amundsen. NOTES: Number 4 at U.K. ticket windows for 1949. The film did well in other territories too, although it failed to duplicate this sort of success. VIEWERS' GUIDE: Okay for all. (Available on an excellent Optimum DVD). COMMENT: Burdened with a slack script, indifferent acting and some surprising budgetary shortcuts, "Scott of the Antarctic" fails to hold up well today. Dealing with the script first, because it is the weakest element in the film, it's obvious that the producers were constrained from introducing any real conflict into their material, except for man versus the elements and, to lesser degree, honorable British gentlemen versus tricky Norwegians. This has the effect of reducing the characters to little more than names, an error then confounded five times over by Mary Hayley Bell whose amateurish, cliché-ridden additional dialogue is rarely less than embarrassing. Faced with a lifeless script, the actors can do little to put drama into their portraits. Mills seems miscast, and most of the others are mere stereotypes. True, our first sight of James Robertson Justice without his usual beard is somewhat startling, but he soon settles back into the conventional. The only other surprises are Gregson's minuscule role — despite his prominence in the cast list, he has only one line of dialogue — and Christopher Lee's comparatively large but completely nonspeaking part. Lee is constantly hovering around in the foreground, but doesn't have so much as a single word! Frend has directed in a routine, if somewhat choppy style, leaving all the work to his brilliant cinematographers who have captured some marvelous location footage — albeit undermined by obvious special effects and miniature work, plus one of the worst painted studio backdrops I have ever seen in a major studio production. The script's vices were not lost on composer Vaughan Williams who often tries to drown out the worst of the dialogue clichés by an over- riding and portentous score. Personally, I would have preferred something a little less overly "dramatic", a little more poetic and melodic. In short, a tragic, heroic, highly charged and potentially instructive story reduced to the lackluster level of a kindergarten primer on British pluck and Mr. Nice Guys.

Although it verges on being a hagiography and cannot be considered to be historically accurate (what historical film is?), Scott of the Antarctic is a beautifully shot film with a great score and a solid cast. Some of the equipment from the actual expedition was used as props. One of the other commentators on here makes mention of various failings of Scott's. Skis were depoted on the plateau due to poor surface conditions, as it was easier to haul without them and to carry them would have meant a considerable extra weight. Scott's own team depoted their skis, but went back for them when the conditions improved – they did after all have an extra 200 miles to travel than Teddy Evan's team. Taff Evans wasn't abandoned on the Beardmore: he was suffering from possible brain damage and unable to pull the sledge. Considering that they all faced death if they didn't make the next depot in time, the other expedition members went on ahead with the intention of letting him catch up, whereupon he collapsed and died. Out of Teddy Evans's returning party only Evans himself came down with scurvy as he refused to eat either seal or pony meat for months. The other two members of his team, Crean and Lashly, didn't come down with scurvy and when the bodies of Scott and his men were discovered, the signs of scurvy were not visible on them either. Nansen DID use dogs on his attempt at reaching the North Pole in 1893-95, although his earlier crossing of Greenland was done by manhaul. Scott already had decided to take skis on his expedition BEFORE he met Nansen in Norway, as he had gone there to buy the skis and test the motorised sledges. In fact it was he showed Nansen his locally purchased skis that the great man suggested Scott taking Gran with him. Gran DID teach Scott's men the basics of skiing on the pack ice on the way south. Scott himself was as good a skier as the average Norwegian. There is no evidence of an affair between Kathleen Scott and Nansen as on the occasion in question she was staying with American friends, not in the hotel with Nansen. According to the evidence they were good friends and nothing more.

There have recently been a lot of dramatised and documentary programmes on UK terrestrial and satellite TV on the pioneering polar explorers, erstwhile rivals and colleagues Scott & Shackleton so I was keen to view this British made dramatisation of the former's doomed 1912 expedition to the South Pole. I was not disappointed. It is obviously difficult to maintain cinematic excitement for the viewer of what is basically a long march (a similar problem as in "The Spirit of St Louis" and "The Old Man & the Sea"), but the true to life tragedy here proves compelling in the end. Jack Cardiff's colour photography is splendid and I was surprised to observe so few "process" shots for a film from the 1940s, given the scale of the task here. John Mills is excellent in the key role of Commander Scott but the supports are all excellent, many of them chosen for their physical similarity to their real life counterparts - Mills too bears a more than passing likeness of physiognomy to Scott. In the post - war climate, Britain obviously sought comfort and inspiration from past heroes as the country rebuilt itself in economic austerity and Scott must have been an ideal model for glorification. Regardless of sniping comments from historians about Scott's poor planning, the film quite rightly avoids judgements and asks the viewer to recognise and admire the human heroism of these gallant men. There is surely no more tragic sacrifice in all exploration than Oates' "I'm going outside, I may be gone some time" - exit and the movie captures this moment with the necessary pathos, later repeating the sensitivity as Scott and his last two colleagues expire with the so near and yet so far "11 miles" on their freezing lips. The Vaughan-Williams music is suitably sweeping and elegiac. One wonders why Hollywood ignored the film at the Academy Awards of 1948, certainly the acting, cinematography and music, to name but three, were worthy of recognition. I wonder if anyone would remake it in the modern era as we approach the centenary of the triumph and tragedy of Scott's expedition. Are you listening Peter Jackson...?

I'll not add to the lengthy and learned discussions already entered in regard to this film. It's pretty obvious that Scott's reputation has taken a severe beating since he was erected as the model for all English youth as the First World War was beginning. I will say that the British miniseries "The Last Place on Earth", based on Roland Huntford's book on Scott and Amundsen's race to the pole, is the best piece of television I've ever seen, one which I fortunately taped and have re-viewed several times. The performances in this film are very sturdy and the cinematography outstanding as well. Most historical films have a biased viewpoint anyway, so this one is no more guilty than any other. The one point I did want to make that I had not noticed in other comments is that the score for this film is by Ralph Vaughn Williams and is the basis for his "Symphonia Antartica", a beautiful and haunting piece, which deserves to be heard more often.

This film sucks in so many ways. As an Englishman I find this self conscious stiff upper lip acting style of Mills and his cohorts utterly embarrassing and stupid. That people seem to like this cartoonish drivel only makes it even worse especially when you see real adult English people trying to imitate it in real life. Then in this film we have the heroising of a man who led an expedition which was by all accounts a consummate failure. Why this perverse English need to make a hero out of a loser? Not only did Scott lose the race but all the loss of life, and suffering including the death of horses and dogs for what? Just to try to be the first person to stand on a bit of ice which is the south pole. Why? To satisfy a massive ego. You think it would all be forgotten as an embarrassing mistake in English history. But no. Back when I was young my school was divided up into four 'houses' named after famous explorers: Lawrence, Livingstone, Rhodes and Scott. I was in Scott. Ugh! The shame of it.

OK, we've heard a lot about the "real" history and the debate over whether Scott was a hero or a complete imbecile. Whatever the truth is and whatever revisionist or hagiography history is being peddled, "Scott Of The Antarctic" is a beautifully made film: One of the best looking early colour films which evokes a bye-gone era and is strangely compelling and haunting at the same time. The music by Vaughn-Williams, the greatest British classical composer of his time, is powerful and, again, haunting. In some scenes, they've recreated exactly some of the photos taken during the Scott expedition. The casting is spot on; look at the original photos and Millsy is uncannily like Scott, Kenneth More is Teddy Evans, Reginald Beckwith and James Robertson Justice do their real counterparts well and John Gregson, in one of his first film roles, captures Tom Crean perfectly (compare his performance with Paul McGann's Crean in "Shackleton", which was pretty good). Many film critics feel that "Scott of the Antarctic" was somewhat robbed at the 1949 Oscars.

The first thing to remember is that Scott fouled up mightily in his attempt to be the first to reach the South Pole in 1912. He was stubborn, rather arrogant, yet malleable to the wishes of his wife. When his diaries were found on his frozen remains they were in fact later edited and altered by his wife (and the publisher) to depict Scott as a Great Heroic Figure. That was a lie; the depiction of him in the movie is a lie. And in recent years the unedited diaries were released proving the old myth was not the reality. It should be added the U.S. polar explorer Richard C. Byrd was an even bigger fraud - as his recently released personal notes also demonstrated. This film is generally well done, and the Antarctic (actually Greenland, I believe) scenery is spectacular. The very slow deterioration of Scott's team is fascinating to see; their heartbreak upon viewing Raoul Amundsen's Norwegian flag flying over the Pole in the distance - meaning they had lost the race to the greatest of all explorers - is palpable. From then on it becomes a matter of survival and getting back home. Bit by bit the elements wear them down - untill they can finally go on no longer. When one says "I don't want to wake up tomorrow" with the wind howling just outside their little tent as they try to eat a morsel of cold food. . . you know it's over for them. Heartbreaking. BUT THE CAUSE OF THE DISASTER IS NOT DELINEATED!! WHY did it happen? Bad luck? Scott's decision not to rely only on sled dogs? Yes. But his planning and leadership was also flawed badly - and that was not shown, as mentioned above. I had no particular problem with the acting. It could possibly have been more emphatic and emotive, but then I assume the English were indeed as stoic as depicted in the film. Mills' understated Scott is to be expected as part of the MYTHICAL version of Scott - the REAL Scott I have no doubt was more emotional and weaker, as seen in the uneditied diary. All in all, a moving film worth seeing - so long as you know this is not the reality of the Scott expedition but the cleansed version to make Scott and company as heroic as possible. If you want a better Arctic film try "The Red Tent", and check the reviews on the IMDb for background on it.

Captain Robert Falcon Scott of the Royal Navy became the second man by days to reach the South Pole. But it was the attempted return trip that made him a legend. That and the diary he kept of the journey. When Scott and his four companions were found his diary among other effects were returned to his widow Kathleen. She carefully edited it and had it published. It became a popular literary classic, embodying all the best virtues the British like to see in themselves. Kathleen Scott in her widowhood became a lot like Libby Bacon Custer, widow of George Armstrong Custer who survived him and the massacre at the Little Big Horn in 1876 all the way until 1932. She also jealously guarded the reputation of her husband. Kathleen Scott had the easier job, her husband's reputation even today despite some revisionist opinion has stood a lot better than General Custer. Diaries are in and of themselves self serving, edited as Scott's was it made him out to be almost a saint. In fact even the film shows that Scott made several decisions that doomed his fate. Whether he admitted it or not, he was in fact in a race with Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen to see who would be first to the South Pole. Scott insisted on preserving a certain fiction that this was in fact a scientific expedition right to the end, his men carried rock samples back from the pole to their deaths. I'm still trying to figure out why he didn't just leave them and mark the spot and go back for them. He insisted on some motorized transport that broke down in the bitter cold. We have machines that operate in extreme cold now, we couldn't explore space if we didn't. Also anti-freeze had not been invented yet. Scott also brought some Shetland ponies who also broke down had to be killed. Amundsen brought only sled dogs and used valuable knowledge he gathered from the Inuit about polar travel. Amundsen is kind of an unseen villain here and he certainly didn't help his historic reputation by leaving an in your face type of letter to be found by Scott on his arrival only days later. Still the plain fact is that he knew his job better than Scott which is why he made it and did survive. John Mills both plays Scott and supplies the narrative from his diary. It was one of Mills's most popular roles and it's almost like he was playing two different parts. Both as husband and father and leader of the expedition he's in one character and the man narrating Scott's diary is another. He did both very well indeed. Diana Churchill, daughter of another UK legend, is Kathleen Scott and Mills's companions on the final dash to the pole are Harold Warrender, Derek Bond, James Robertson Justice, and Reginald Beckwith. Despite his flaws as a leader, Robert Falcon Scott was a courageous explorer into the unknown and this film does his historic reputation well. Despite revisionist opinion it too has stood the test of time.

Scott of the Antarctic is a flawed but compelling and beautifully made film, that is definitely worth seeing. The pacing is rather pedestrian in places, the film does sort of idealise the character of Robert Falcon Scott and there is one or two meanderings in the story. Flaws aside, the special effects are absolutely incredible, even for back then, the cinematography is very skillful, the scenery is splendid and the score is resolutely haunting. Also very well done is the focused direction and the compelling performances of John Mills, James Robertson Justice, Diana Churchill and Kenneth More. And there are excellent values portrayed throughout, achievement, triumph, friendship and endeavour, consequently the film's ending is quite moving to say the least. All in all, it isn't perfect but it is worth seeing for the acting and the effects. 7/10 Bethany Cox