Scott of the Antarctic (1949)

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.

Those windswept expanses and icy glaciers had me running for a heating pad and hot coffee right away. The movie's a harrowing account of the ill-fated Scott expedition to the South Pole. It's a prestige picture all the way, clearly vested in British national honor that was at stake in 1912. No cowards here. The men bear up bravely despite the harshest conditions possible. The movie depends greatly on a recreation of Antarctic conditions; happily, the freezing locations in Norway and Switzerland succeed, in spades. It's really hard to imagine slogging through 1000-plus miles of frozen ice and snow to reach an imaginary point on the map. But, with bone-wearying fortitude, the expedition manages, except, of course, for the return trip. Though the final tent scene remains stoically poignant, the dramatic highpoint, to me, is with the ponies. There, the harsh reality of insurmountable conditions is really driven home. Of course, those conditions are indelibly etched on the ravaged faces of the men, thanks, I suspect, to a terrific job by the make-up department.For better or worse, the movie is shorn of whatever human conflict arose in the expedition's planning and execution. In the movie, the men do get along remarkably well. All in all, it's an account minus whatever human warts there may have been. Still, if you're looking for a harrowing installment in man's eternal struggle with nature, this is a hard account to beat. But my advice is to keep a heating pad handy.

This film is magnificent! A true icon of British film making.But a few of the reviewers here see themselves as experts in polar travel, or worse, repeating other people's mistakes:-A common point people repeat WITHOUT PROOF!!; Is that Captain Scott made the decision to take 5 men instead of 4 on the last leg to the pole, BUT TOOK NO FURTHER PROVISIONS!!!Scott was a very experienced Polar traveller, plus Do you really think the 4 other men would NOT have mentioned the fact about rations???And to reviewer Theowinthrop; Did you just read Roland Hateford (Sorry) Huntford's book in a vacuum??? Without referencing other materials? You really ought to read more, instead of repeating one man's vitriol! Who's ONLY experience with cold climates, is being ski correspondent to a Scandinavian newspaper! Some credentials eh? You really should read the works of people who have been to the Polar region, and not some average journalist' who has spent his entire life in libraries fermenting his hatred!!!Honestly!!! It seems that some reviewers take other people's opinions (Without proof...) and repeat them ad-nauseum.

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