Best movie of this year hands down!

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Copyright 22 November 1946 by Paramount Pictures, Inc. New York opening at the Rivoli: 24 September 1946. U.S. release: 22 November 1946. U.K. release: 15 April 1946 (sic). Australian release: 20 December 1946. Sydney opening at the Prince Edward: 20 December 1946 (ran six weeks). 10 reels. 8,903 feet. 99 minutes. SYNOPSIS: Ladd is the spoiled son of a ship-owner who, while drinking in a waterfront dive in Boston one evening, finds himself the victim of Bendix and his gang and wakes up shanghaied, on board the Pilgrim bound for the California coast and back. Conditions on the ship are appalling, and the captain, da Silva, drives the men ruthlessly.NOTES: The movie was actually shot in 1944, but fearful of its adverse propaganda, Paramount delayed release until well after the end of WW2.COMMENT: Director John Farrow's penchant for long takes and elaborate technical effects is well illustrated in this film. Particularly effective is the opening take with Collins in his counting house. Also, as an experienced seaman himself, Farrow was the ideal man to handle this subject. Acting is of a very, very high standard indeed, but Da Silva's impersonation of a Bligh-like Captain and Bendix's well- rounded study of his first mate, deserve special mention. Screenwriters Seton I. Miller and George Bruce have done a first- rate job of transferring Richard Dana's novel to the screen.Yes, the atmosphere and action on shipboard is most effectively conveyed in this creditable costume picture. True, it does seem a little dated by the fact that for all its sweep, it was obviously filmed entirely in the studio — even if the studio sound stages were rather capacious. However, Farrow's aggressive direction and convincing performances by Da Silva, Bendix and even Donlevy more than make up for any slight shortcomings in verisimilitude. Stockwell is compelling too, whilst Fitzgerald (whose inability to remember his lines proved a thorn in Farrow's side during the shooting of "California") seems able enough here in a smallish part. The climax is maybe too fast and perfunctory. On the other hand, a bit of love interest supplied by Esther Fernandez does slow the action slightly. But both Miss Fernandez and Mr. Ladd are strong enough to shoulder this burden. On addition to its solid support cast, the whole movie is lovingly photographed and set.

The novel is all realism with no real plot and drama of an almost documentary character, while the film is more like the stuff of Jack London, Wolf-Larsen, Nordhoff & Hall and Kipling's "Captains Courageous". The most important feature of the book is also in the film, though: the humanity on board in spite of all the hard knuckles of inhumanity.Richard H. Dana is in the film on board the ship all the same, and his part is no less interesting than in the book but taken from another angle, which makes his part even more interesting. He is the only one to enlist on the "Pilgrim" voluntarily while many of the others are shanghaied, and he volunteers for a very specific purpose.Howard Da Silva plays expertly the part of the cruelly insensitive captain provoking a mutiny at any cost, it would seem, sacrificing sailors' lives for the sake of sailing records, William Bendix is always fascinating and raises every film some points, but here he is the brutal first mate with a double edge. Brian Donleavy is Dana and perfect together with Alan Ladd, who makes the main character and a very interesting one. To all this comes Victor Young's irresistible music, always golden, and the splendid thorough hands-on realism all the way, with fascinating insights into life on board. Barry Fitzgerald is the cook, directly out of "Wolf-Larsen" it would seem, and supplies a portion humour and lyricism. There are even some ladies, more prominent and attractive than in the book. The scurvy problem, which is not in the book, brings the drama.

As a lurid melodrama I suppose that this is OK,provided that you do not take it seriously.It may seem'realistic" because it is so grim and gritty, but it will not stand up to close examination.The producers were shamelessly trading on the reputation of one of the greatest books about the sea for a contrived soap opera. It would have been far more honest to make up their own title.Virtually nothing about the movie bears the slightest resemblance to the book. I saw the movie,and have read the book several times. It is a great account full of details, very well written which deserves repeated readings, to get the most out of it.Seeing the movie once was quite enough.The only real characters were Captain Thompson, and Dana himself, who is of course the narrator of the book which is the true account of his own experiences.The real Dana actually was more like the fictitious Stewart than the ordinary seaman he is in the movie. He was from an upper class family, and a student at Harvard who was making this trip to "toughen up" and repair his health.The part about his brother dying from abuse as a seaman was total fiction.The real Captain Thompson was a hard and sometimes brutal man, who abused his authority by flogging two seamen without just cause,although apparently it was a case of loosing his temper. Apparently he secretly regretted it, because later he controlled his temper under much more trying circumstances,and even refrained from flogging the carpenter after he had urged the mate to seize command from the captain.Flogging was apparently much rarer than legend has it;when the ship arrived in California, and word of the flogging spread among the other ships in the hider trade,the seamen on the other ships at first thought it was a joke, and then were very shocked and surprised when they found out that it actually happened, indicating that it was far from normal.Thompson and the "Pilgrim" rapidly got a very bad reputation.The scurvy incident, intended to show the callousness of the captain, actually, if it had happened, would indicate that he was insane.No captain would have done that.Regardless of his lack of humanity, he needed the crew to work the ship,and scurvy would render them helpless.In fact, scurvy did strike during the trip home, and the captain desperately sought out any ship that had fresh provisions, which he found.Actually, Dana was not trying to lessen the authority of the captain in law.He didn't even want to remove his right to flog disobedient seamen;he said that if he ever went to see as a captain, he would want to have the authority to flog,though he would hope that he would never have to use it, because of the unruly elements represented among common seamen.He felt that it was essential as a constant threat to maintain discipline He did say that captains should be held accountable for abuse of their authority,and that courts were far too lenient on ones convicted of abuse.In the book he said that at the time of the floggings he swore to bring Thompson to justice;whether he actually did or not is unclear.His family was friendly with the senior partner of the firm that operated the ships he sailed on in the California hide trade.

By several respects ,some kind of updated "Captain courageous" (Victor Fleming ,1937).The rich kid (Alan Ladd) has grown up and he is still frivolous ,part of the young jet set ,drinking and picking up girls in the low dives of the harbor.When dad learns that his boy is on his own ship,in the clutch of a -rather sadistic- captain ,he does not panic and wisely mumbles something like " it 'll make a man of him" ;which is not entirely false.Not only ,the boy born silver spoon in hand will learn the harsh realities of life ,but he'll also feel for his unfortunate shipmates (many of them poor press-ganged aboard victims like himself ).Although the movie is centered on Ladd's misadventures ,it actually depicts "Henry Dana's crusade to expose mistreatment of men at sea" (Maltin).But the reviewer is wrong when he writes that it is a "badly scripted story":in fact only the female character gets in the way and the ending is botched.All that remains is absorbing ,the standout being for me the ship's boy.Farrow was better at film noir ,but his attempt at an adventures movies is recommendable.Like this ? try these ...."Mutiny on the Bounty" (Frank Lloyd's 1935 version is still the best) "Captain Courageous" (Fleming,1937) "Down to the sea in ships" (Henry Hathaway,1949) "Ghost Ship" (Mark Robson/Val Lewton,1943) "White squall" (Ridley Scott,1996)