Memorable, crazy movie

For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

SCOTT OF THE ANTARCTIC is the famous film version of Scott's ill-fated 1912 journey to the South Pole, acted by John Mills who is supported by a whole slew of notable faces including future greats like John Gregson and Christopher Lee. This Ealing production has exemplary production values and no action or effects of any kind, and yet it grips from beginning to end through the sterling attention to detail and the unending realism. The film is quite lengthy and slowly-paced, but the story is so engrossing and the characters so well-acted that it doesn't really matter. I can't imagine anyone not being affected by this film's moving climax.

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 sucks in so many ways. As an Englishman I find this self conscious stiff upper lip acting style of Mills and his cohorts utterly embarrassing and stupid. That people seem to like this cartoonish drivel only makes it even worse especially when you see real adult English people trying to imitate it in real life. Then in this film we have the heroising of a man who led an expedition which was by all accounts a consummate failure. Why this perverse English need to make a hero out of a loser? Not only did Scott lose the race but all the loss of life, and suffering including the death of horses and dogs for what? Just to try to be the first person to stand on a bit of ice which is the south pole. Why? To satisfy a massive ego. You think it would all be forgotten as an embarrassing mistake in English history. But no. Back when I was young my school was divided up into four 'houses' named after famous explorers: Lawrence, Livingstone, Rhodes and Scott. I was in Scott. Ugh! The shame of it.

Captain Scott (John Mills) sets out to be the first explorer to reach the South Pole. He recruits his team, eg, Wilson (Harold Warrender), Oates (Derek Bond), Bowers (Reginald Beckwith), Evans (James Robertson Justice), Teddy (Kenneth More) and they set sail. However, a rival Norwegian explorer, Amundsen has the same idea.......The film gets going at a good pace as we are introduced to the characters that will accompany Scott on his journey. Unfortunately, the film loses pace once we land in Antarctica. The scenery is impressive but the film degenerates into lots of walking in the snow interspersed with dull moments together. There is no real emotional involvement with the characters - everyone is slightly stiff and they all look the same with their beards. I thought the characters of Wilson and Bowers came out best as they seemed to have a little more depth. John Mills is wooden and I didn't well up or shed a tear at the outcome. This lack of emotional involvement means that I am in no need to see the film again.I think that more time should have been spent on the tragic parts of the story - it could have been better.