The 1965 Columbia Pictures film, "Lord Jim," has an excellent pedigree. A fine writer-director in Richard Brooks, who made such distinguished films as "The Professionals," "In Cold Blood," and "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof;" an outstanding cast of international stars that includes Peter O'Toole, James Mason, Curt Jurgens, and Eli Wallach; and a classic story by Joseph Conrad. What could go wrong? Plenty it seems.
Conrad's story details a man's search for redemption. Midshipman aboard a leaky tub that is over crowded with 800 pilgrims, Jim and other crew members panic and abandon the ship and the passengers during a violent storm. Jim and his mates reach safety, where they discover that the ship and the passengers have been rescued, and, while the other crew members flee, Jim faces an inquiry into his cowardly actions. Against picturesque Cambodian locations, Jim tries to keep a step ahead of his past, while seeking heroism to compensate for his perceived cowardice. Unfortunately, Jim's introspective quest makes for a pedestrian workmanlike film. The few battle scenes are static and unexciting, watching Jim grimace and flash back to his cowardly actions is not dynamic filmmaking, and the characters talk and talk and talk.
Peter O'Toole excelled in such rich flamboyant roles as Henry II, Lawrence, and Alan Swann; however, Conrad's Lord Jim is an internalized character, and O'Toole's cool detached performance turns Jim into a colorless unsympathetic man. Jim relates to no one, even his supposed affection for the girl, played by Daliah Lavi, is unconvincing; O'Toole and Lavi have no chemistry, let alone any romantic spark. While Eli Wallach is always interesting to watch, and his General is easily the most memorable part, a supporting player cannot carry a two-and-a-half-hour movie. A film laden with veteran actors that also include Akim Tamiroff, Jack Hawkins, and Paul Lukas, in addition to the aforementioned O'Toole, Wallach, and Mason, "Lord Jim" had the potential to be a film rich in performances.
Perhaps Conrad is an impossible author to successfully film, unless risks are taken, such as those dared by Coppola with "Apocalypse Now," his loose adaptation of Conrad's "Heart of Darkness." Brooks wrote a literate script, perhaps too literate, and cast veteran actors with proved skills in an evidently big-budget production. However, while the recipe was good, the end result was not. "Lord Jim" is slow going and requires patience to sit through. Given the effort, the director, the cast, and the location photography, the film can only be rated a major disappointment.
Conrad's story details a man's search for redemption. Midshipman aboard a leaky tub that is over crowded with 800 pilgrims, Jim and other crew members panic and abandon the ship and the passengers during a violent storm. Jim and his mates reach safety, where they discover that the ship and the passengers have been rescued, and, while the other crew members flee, Jim faces an inquiry into his cowardly actions. Against picturesque Cambodian locations, Jim tries to keep a step ahead of his past, while seeking heroism to compensate for his perceived cowardice. Unfortunately, Jim's introspective quest makes for a pedestrian workmanlike film. The few battle scenes are static and unexciting, watching Jim grimace and flash back to his cowardly actions is not dynamic filmmaking, and the characters talk and talk and talk.
Peter O'Toole excelled in such rich flamboyant roles as Henry II, Lawrence, and Alan Swann; however, Conrad's Lord Jim is an internalized character, and O'Toole's cool detached performance turns Jim into a colorless unsympathetic man. Jim relates to no one, even his supposed affection for the girl, played by Daliah Lavi, is unconvincing; O'Toole and Lavi have no chemistry, let alone any romantic spark. While Eli Wallach is always interesting to watch, and his General is easily the most memorable part, a supporting player cannot carry a two-and-a-half-hour movie. A film laden with veteran actors that also include Akim Tamiroff, Jack Hawkins, and Paul Lukas, in addition to the aforementioned O'Toole, Wallach, and Mason, "Lord Jim" had the potential to be a film rich in performances.
Perhaps Conrad is an impossible author to successfully film, unless risks are taken, such as those dared by Coppola with "Apocalypse Now," his loose adaptation of Conrad's "Heart of Darkness." Brooks wrote a literate script, perhaps too literate, and cast veteran actors with proved skills in an evidently big-budget production. However, while the recipe was good, the end result was not. "Lord Jim" is slow going and requires patience to sit through. Given the effort, the director, the cast, and the location photography, the film can only be rated a major disappointment.