A Masterpiece!

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Blistering performances.

This stirring but harrowing adventure was wonderfully produced, directed, filmed and acted. Credit must also go to wardrobe, make-up, and design crews. The sets could not have been bettered. Outstanding work. And of course the music behind it all must not be forgotten.Romola Garai in the title role played it to perfection, likewise in their roles did her two co-stars, Jack Davenport as Lt Ralph Clarke (the colony's military CO), and Alex O'Loughlin as Will Bryant, and were each more than ably supported by the whole magnificent cast of which special praise has to go to the performance of Tony Martin as his namesake (surname) character. Slightly on the downside I did feel that the highly talented Sam Neill as the colony governor was somewhat under-used, and probably as a consequence a tad under-par. But I think maybe I'm being a little over picky.It is based on the true story of young convict Mary Bryant's (nee Broad) transportation to and escape from the Botany Bay penal colony. This included a little matter of giving birth on board ship, and marriage to fellow convict William Bryant after disembarkation, in between.This two-part mini-series was gripping from start to finish. However as usual in this type of production there were a few historical mistakes and omissions in the story.A good deal of the drama centred on Mary's divisive use of the unwitting Lt Ralph Clarke (a fictional character) both for her own convenience, later for escape purposes, and his unrequited jealously obsessional love for her. Why it was deemed necessary to put this extra and completely false complication into the story I'm not sure, because the true saga stands on it's own merits without interference. It was an interesting complication nonetheless, but this coupled with his pursuit across land accompanied by marines were pure fabrication.William, as a sailor, albeit smuggler, was certainly put in charge of the fishing boats. However in no way was he given a percentage of the catch, but the black-market opportunities were too good for him to resist. He was caught selling some of the fish on the sly, and received 100 lashes for his efforts. It was at this point that William (not Mary) decided to initiate an escape attempt. And he had all the needful at hand.Once away from the colony in a cutter stolen from the Governor, the escapees were never pursued either on land or by sea, and the only skirmishes they encountered were not with the militia but with the aborigines. In fact a great many of the guards were sympathetic to the escape.This notwithstanding, the unfolding events depicted were all fairly (although not entirely) accurate until Lt Clarke landed at Timor and discovered that the escapees were there. This is where the story, historically-wise, went a little further awry.William Bryant did in fact have words with his wife, after which he informed against himself, Mary, the children and all the other escapees, whereupon they were all immediately taken prisoner, detained in the castle and strictly examined. But it was not, in the true events, the said fictional Lt. Clarke who then arrived on the scene, but a certain Captain Edward Edwards, who had been pursuing the Bounty mutineers in the Pandora. He had captured some of the mutineers at Tahiti, but then his ship was lost after it ran against a reef just south of New Guinea. He and 120 survivors escaped the wreck, and in a longboat and two yawls, had managed to reach Timor, and it was there that he was told about Mary and her comrades.Captain Edwards clapped the Bryant party in irons, put them on board the Rembang, a Dutch East Indiaman, and they were transported to Batavia where just before Christmas I791 both William Bryant and his little son Emanuel died of fever. William was not shot on a beach as depicted, and Mary did not escape with her two children only to be recaptured. And of course little Emanuel was not buried at sea.After this the tale veers back to a reasonable actuality, give or take a few omissions. On May 5th 1792, Mary's three-year old Charlotte died and her body was indeed committed to the deep, and Mary, when reaching London, was imprisoned in Newgate as an escaped felon, sentenced, but then released due to public pressure. She returned to Cornwall, remarried, and faded into obscurity.The historical inaccuracies noted above do not however take away the fact that this is a superb drama, which highlights to great effect the barbaric treatment of transported convicts in the 18th century (most of whom were probably unjustly sentenced in the first place), and as a drama I couldn't fault it one iota. I would recommend this outstanding piece of work as one not to be missed. It is TV story-telling at it's very best.

It is a story based on true events, but when I saw the trailer I thought it was a story about a female pirate or something. Starring Romola Garai as Mary Broad/Bryant, it is the story of one woman's journey as a slave/prisoner, then an island villager, then mother and wife, then escapee, and finally near criminal. She started out on a boat run by Lt. Ralph Clarke (Jack Davenport, Mastercard's "Priceless" voice). When the boat found an island where they started a new life and village, she met Will Bryant (Alex O'Loughlin) who she married and had her second child with. But they soon got sick of their life on the island and escaped with four other companions. Towards they "film" they become members of a class, but are found guilty in court. Mary is courageous and says she will face the consequences as she lost her children and husband, but the other two she wanted to be released. Also starring a quite good Sam Neill as Governor Arthur Phillip. Very good!

this was a really fantastic drama. the passion shown by the cast - most of whom were unknown to me - was amazing and the story was spellbinding and heartbreaking. i don't really mind that some think it was an inaccurate portrayal of real life, the tragedy of each part of the story was accurate for some poor soul at the time. every unnecessary death pained me, and set against such a beautiful but unforgiving backdrop this really stirred me. i would recommend this to all, and would strongly suggest it as compulsory viewing for history students to see just what life was like 250 years ago. i hope that the cast - particularly Mary and will go on to do more great things

I wonder if the makers of this piece of garbage actually bothered to go to the actual site of the first-fleet landing. I say this because the place where they filmed the first settlement scenes bears no real resemblance to the actual place. Sure, I know that you can't film it in the exact spot, since it would be hard to film without getting accidental shots of the Botanical Gardens pavilions, the Opera House and the Bridge, but seriously! Also, any reading of the seminal historical text "The Fatal Shore" by Robert Hughes will tell you that most of the women on the first fleet were raped on the first night ashore, not once buildings and storehouses had been set up. I know it's only a small thing, but when you set out to make an historical film, get the simple bits right and you're halfway to making the rest fall into place. Get lazy with the little things, and the whole deal looks shabby.