Thanks to the Pirates of the Caribbean movies over the last decade or so, pirates in general have had a bit of rebirth in pop culture recently. No doubt a lot of that can be attributed to Johnny Depp's Captain Jack Sparrow, a lovable scab of a pirate who even as he commits all these despicable acts still finds a way to be endearing in his greed, stupidity and general cluelessness. Long story short? Pirates were just plain old nasty folks, killing, pillaging and raping wherever they went. 'Blood River' is certainly in that boat, portraying pirates in a negative light in an adventure story that is just a lot of fun.
It's sometime in the early 18th Century on the Isle of Devon, and in a small community of Huguenots, Jonathan Standing (Kerwin Matthews) is in trouble. Accused of having an affair with a married man's wife, Jonathan is sentenced by his own father to 15 years working in the penal colony. He goes, working several months before pulling off a dangerous escape. Fighting his way through the jungle, he's rescued by a crew of pirates led by a Frenchman, Captain LaRoche (Lee), who cuts a deal for Jonathan to lead him to the village. The pirate captain says he's looking for a resting spot for his ship and crew, but Jonathan quickly figures out otherwise. LaRoche is looking for treasure, and he's convinced there's hidden riches waiting for him. With help from an old friend, Henry (Glenn Corbett), Jonathan does everything he can to rescue his people.
After finishing this movie, I somewhat stupidly started investigating some. Where was this Isle of Devon? Who were these Huguenots? Is there any truth to this pirate story, any basis in fact? Basically it was all wasted time. As near as I can figure, there's no Isle of Devon, the Huguenots were a real people, and there was no basis at all for this premise. This island appears to be somewhere in the Caribbean, maybe somewhere off of Central or South America? Who knows though, it's never said and it's not really that important. The point is that the movie doesn't need any of that background. It doesn't matter where this island is or who these people are. Jonathan's folks are the good guys, and Lee's pirates are the oh so bad guys. Enough said, sit back and enjoy the flick.
There is something appealing about the films that came out of the Hammer Studios that is hard to explain. The stories have a small scale to them, but never feel like low-budget features. A simplicity to the story is always nice as is the case here, good guys vs. bad guys with no real shade of gray. It's never trying to deliver a message. It's a fun movie with lots of action, gunfights and sword play. A win-win combination if there ever was one. Director John Gilling actually never left England to film this movie which is impressive because I had the sense to think he filmed in some sort of Caribbean/jungle location. The pirates are all duded up, the Huguenot community looks like pilgrims, and there's enough action to keep everyone involved and entertained.
The casting is interesting, and in a positive way for the most part. Matthews is the heroic lead given a chance to redeem himself, but Corbett takes some of his screentime as friend and sidekick Henry. I guess Jonathan needed some help dispatching the pirates so cue Henry, and away we go. Lee not surprisingly steals his scenes as LaRoche, the smooth, above-it-all pirate captain who always knows how far he can push his men and still get results. Lee's LaRoche does look ridiculous in his silk shirt, eye patch and tight black pants, but it's just one more weird oddity that adds up. Marla Landi plays Bess, Jonathan's sister, while Andrew Keir has a good part as Jason Standing, Jonathan's stubborn, strong-willed father. LaRoche's pirates include a young Oliver Reed, Peter Arne as Hench, LaRoche's right-hand man, and Michael Ripper as Mac, a possibly mutinous, back-stabbing pirate.
Looking back over what I've written, I'm seeing that I haven't gone into much detail about the film. I think it would be a case of over-analyzing a movie that just doesn't call for it. Is this a great movie? No, not even close. What it is though is an exciting historical action flick from a studio that knew how to appeal to the wants and likes of an audience. From the credits to the final scene, I very much enjoyed Pirate's 87-minute running time. Underrated, exciting, and with some interesting casting. A weird one, but a good one. There are three extended clips available at Youtube, but there's no real rhyme or reason to them so I'm not going to link to them.
The Pirates of Blood River <---trailer (1962): ***/****
No comments:
Post a Comment