Did you people see the same film I saw?

Best movie ever!

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

I have read Shackleton's account of his 1914 expedition to Antarctica (and also the published diaries of Robert Falcon Scott's doomed mission in 1912) and so have both a great interest and admiration for these brave explorers, looking to chart the last unknown territories on this planet, unknown because they are so remote and dangerous. I was therefore most interested to finally watch this two-part dramatisation of the remarkable events of Shackleton's failed attempt to cross Antarctica the hard way, as his ship, the Endurance, becomes ice-bound and eventually ice-crushed, leaving him and his crew to attempt a tortuous journey back to civilisation and safety or share the fate of Scott and his team two years before.For me, though, the first of the two parts, which concentrated on introducing the viewer to the crew, shading in the background to Shackleton's private life as well as his determination to get funding (and sees him making the rounds of visiting in person wealthy potential donors) was far too slow and delayed the action. Did I need to know that there was another woman in his life as is implied here? Did she really make a telephone call to Shackleton's long-suffering wife to ask her if she knew he was still alive after being missing for so long? What did it matter if Shackleton had a dodgy brother, imprisoned for fraud? It just seemed to me that director Charles Sturridge wanted to indulge himself in some period melodrama at the expense of the meat of the story which was of course the incredible journey the explorer and his crew made, his promise to get them all back alive after they lost their ship and especially his incredibly brave decision to strike out with only four companions in a tiny boat to attempt to get to the whaling station at South Georgia to procure a rescue ship for his men. Thus, exciting as they are, these latter events seemed almost rushed, days and days of endeavour reduced to mere minutes. I really do think the first half could have lost an hour to the second half. I also don't remember reading of any dissent in the ranks of his crew as is portrayed here and again suspected another abuse of dramatic licence as Shackleton locks horns with a hard-nosed Scot, the shop's carpenter (a lippy chippie if you like).It has to be said though that the actors perform admirably, especially in the arduous scenes on the ship and especially on the ice. Kenneth Branagh is excellent in the title part but there are many good performances around him. There's a suitably sweeping orchestral soundtrack reminiscent of Vaughn-Williams' celebrated score for "Scott Of The Antarctic" many years before.In the end though my impatience for the director to get me to the heart of the story belied my enjoyment of a nevertheless still worthy and compelling account of a truly fantastic journey.

I have read quite a lot on Shackleton and Antarctic exploration more generally, and, the movie Shackleton provides a reasonably decent introduction to the man and what has been called the "Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration." In terms of exploration technique, Shackleton was more like Amundsen than Scott but in fact he exhibited something of both. Shackleton was burdened by his English background but liberated somewhat by his career in the Merchant Marine. Scott was an RN officer and suffered from ego and Victorian overconfidence. Shackleton originally tried to obtain a craft like Nansen's Fram, which was used in an Arctic Drift of some 3 years in the 1890s but the lack of funds forced him to obtain the ship that he eventually used; a well-made craft, suitable for use in ice but not built to withstand the crushing pressures of moving ice. Whereas a ship with a rounded hull like Fram was simply forced to the surface by ice pressure, Endurance, with its squared-off sides, was gripped by ice and easily crushed.What Shackleton accomplished is perhaps unparalleled in the annals of survival during any era. Surviving for more than a year on ice floes in tents and then navigating in small boats to an island hundreds of miles distant required more than skill and physical endurance. Shackleton was imbued with considerable luck but he also understood the capabilities of men under pressure and how best to harness human will. He was also unquestionably brave. Perhaps even more remarkable than his survival on the ice and trip to Elephant Island, was his "Boat Journey" across the "Roaring 40s" to New South Whales; after spending almost 2 years out of doors! This journey was successful not so much because of Shackleton but owing to the navigational skills of Skipper Frank Woosley, who wrote a book about it (Shackelton's Boat Journey); a remarkable book that fills in the details left out of the movie and the book about the popular 1914-1916 expedition on which the movie was based. Had Woolsey been so much as a half degree off in his calculation, Shackleton would have missed New South Wales and died somewhere in the South Atlantic.In the 1980s, several mountain climbers attempted the journey across New South Wales. These men were in excellent physical condition and had modern equipment. One man ended up with a broken leg and the trip took much longer than that required by Shackleton. The leader of the 1980s group was unable to understand how Shackleton made the trek at all without maps, compass, equipment of any kind, and in a weakened condition after more than two years of exposure to the elements and poor food.Were Shackleton and his men a breed apart? Could anyone living today survive such an experience? What humanity attained before the Industrial Revolution and mechanical power became widespread is remarkable. Humans have become dependent on all manner of technological aids and it remains to be seen if even well trained and experienced people could attain the achievements of our ancestors. Keep in mind that while Shackleton's journey was extraordinary, it was not the only story of its type. Scott's tragic run for the South Pole is incredible in its own right; although marred by Scott's egotism, ethnocentrism, and ignorance. Peary's adventures in the Arctic are rather incredible but then so were the deprivations experienced by most men who were foolish enough to risk Arctic and Antarctic exploration during that period. Perhaps the Norweigians alone can boast that their polar explorations were the best organized and equipped, staffed by qualified men who were used to the cold and willing to adapt whatever techniques that allowed them to achieve their objectives. Virtually every English expeditions was marred by disease and death while at the same time exemplary of valor and bravery.The movie is in my opinion reasonably accurate, with fine performances, and a compelling story. I never found the movie to drag and wished it was a little longer.

Take Ridley Scott's "White Squall," Peter Weir's "Master and Commander," throw in a splash of "Titanic," and put Kenneth Branagh front and center in what is clearly the performance of an already illustrious career, and you have "Shackleton," one of the best and most invigorating true-life adventure stories ever made. It'll knock your socks off and then some. The performances are stellar all around, the cinematography gripping and evocative, the screenplay crackling with gutsy emotion, wry humor, and a fierce yet exquisite honesty that is rarely found in genre films. Do yourself a favor and see this amazing film.

Some years ago I read an article in the Times (London daily) that Shackleton and his men survived because they were largely 19th century British merchant seamen, by ethic if not by age alone. The writer doubted that modern men (or women) could have survived this ordeal as we are not tough enough. I tend to to agree. Today, if someone at the South Pole has a problem airplanes airlift them to safety. We just are not exposed to ordeals like this anymore. Not that I would wish the Shackleton ordeal on anyone except maybe Uncle Saddam or Sammy Bin Lama.