Bodyline

This mini-series depicts the most scandalous portion of Australian sporting history; when the touring English cricket team employed controversial tactics in order to try and win back "the ashes"; the symbolic cricketing trophy between England and Australia. Australians play all the major roles, including those of Englishmen, showing that for 1984, Australian acting and cinema had come of age and Australians could portray other nationalities in their own films.

Of special note in "Bodyline" is the early appearance of veteran Australian actor, Hugo Weaving ("Priscilla; Queen of the Desert", "Russian Doll", "The Matrix" etc)as the fussy and feisty England captain, Douglas Jardine. Look also for pretty-boy Gary Sweet as the evergreen Australian cricketing hero, Don Bradman and the venerable Frank Thring as Lord Jackson, the English cricketing president.

Immediately after this movie there was an episode of "Dallas". Five minutes into that episode I realized how badly made that show was. Then it occurred to me that it was because the previous show (ie, "Bodyline", this show) was so good!

If you're not interested in cricket, or don't understand it, then this movie has nothing for you. You won't learn about the game from this movie; and it won't motivate you about it.

But if you <are> a cricket fan, then this is an excellent movie. It's all about those things that Sydney Morning Herald cricket writers talk about in reviewing a Test Match after the match has finished. The movie is about personal heroism, committment, team spirit, vision, strategy, creativity, sportsmanship. The captain of the England team, the fast bowlers, the Australian team: they have it. They have it in abundance.

Who are the bad guys here? Well, popularly perceived, it is Jardine, the England captain. But this movie shows a new villain: the Australian Cricket Control Board. Gary Sweet's comment sums it up perfectly: "I didn't really think that the Board couldn't grow a spine overnight".

How would this movie compare against the various Babe Ruth movies? Not at all. All the BR movies I've seen portray him as a redneck, a yobbo, although of course a very talented one (but only in one particular way). In "Bodyline", the atmosphere, the focus, the story of the movie is not about the batsman alone.

Finally, there was also a very good one-hour special about the making of this movie. Remember that this movie was made before the ubiquitous computerised special effects, so the bruising, the battering by the cricket ball - in short, everything - is done via a more "traditional" way. Also worth seeing.

As a seven-year old just beginning to learn cricket I had just heard the name Don Bradman from my father, being referred as the best batsman ever. Naturally, when the show "Bodyline" started airing in India in 1985/1986, I was excited since I would get to see how prolific Bradman was. I loved the series then, but could never locate it later on reruns or recorded media. Luckily a couple of weeks back I came across an Australian website selling DVDs of the series.

Watching the series in a new light more than 20 years after I saw it for the first time was a great experience. Having acquired a good knowledge of both, the game's history and the rules provided me a fresh perspective. And the verdict? The series is brilliant!

I did believe it over-dramatised events to an extent. There were also minor historical inaccuracies and omissions:

1. Not having a mention of George Duckworth (the English wicketkeeper) being the person who observed the uncertainties in Bradman's stance while facing fast bowling on a wet wicket (attributing it to Larwood instead).

2. Not showing the Notts captain Arthur Carr providing inputs regarding the leg theory approach and rehearsing it with Larwood and Voce in English county cricket (rather showing Douglas Jardine doing all the planning himself).

3. Showing Douglas Jardine as an upright and politically correct person not given to using terms questioning his opponents' parentage (but he actually encouraged his teammates to refer to Bradman as "the little bastard").

4. Bert Oldfield was hit by Larwood on the head while Larwood was not bowling Bodyline, contrary to what the series shows. Moreover the hit was due to a deflection from Oldfield's bat. Oldfield in fact claimed "My own fault" later.

But I am nitpicking. The series is all about showing how and why one of the most vilified cricket strategies came into being. It focuses on Douglas Jardine's drive to get the Ashes back in England and shows that he would not stop at any point as long as he was within the rules.

Contrary to what a few other reviewers on this site have written, I found the representation of the events quite unbiased. Over-dramatisation is a part of the representation of any sporting event on-screen and there is no loss of flavour to "Bodyline" for that. If anything, it was charitable to Douglas Jardine. He is always shown as being in awe of Bradman's batting abilities and the main reason for his tactics comes off as an overwhelming desire to win the Ashes, rather than harbouring racist feelings and hatred towards Australia.

Other players are shown in honest light too - Larwood and Voce obeying their captain's orders to the letter, Pataudi quitting when things were going against the concepts of fair play, Woodfull refusing to employ similar tactics both out of choice and necessity (his team did not have bowlers of Larwood's ability), and so on.

All in all, this is a great watch. If you are a cricket lover then you should definitely see it. And if you are a fan of any kind of sports, then this series shows you to what extent it is possible to go to stop a champion.

I remember when this series debuted in Australia and at the time I thought it was a bit of Aussie flag waving jingoism; another of their rose-tinted historical spectacles which abounded in the 1980s...the kind where the British are the unfair toffs or moustache twirling villains and the Australians are the brave underdogs or larrikins. But viewing this again recently, I'm not so sure that's true. In fact, it might be more on the side of Douglas Jardine's England! Jardine (Hugo Weaving in his first major role) absolutely dominates the series. He's a far more interesting and complex character than the way the series depicts Don Bradman. But he's not the baddie: Jardine is charged with winning the Ashes for England, Bradman is the batsman supreme, almost invincible so he sets about working out if he has a weakness. The way Jardine does this is with intelligence and reason, asking his colleagues for feedback whilst applying his mind to the situation. In any other movie, this would be the act of the hero. He finds his answer in a quintet of fast bowlers, all of whom are honest, decent sportsmen who want to play for their country and win. To balance Jardine's methodical approach is Plum Warner, a former cricket great and, here, depicted as an honest upholder of decency and fair play. He worries that Jardine is being too analytical and single minded.

By contrast, the Australian cricket team are beset by nit-picking officials who prevent Bradman from playing in the early matches and who carry an air of smugness about them; as if the Ashes are theirs by right. The England team are greeted by an angry Australian "fan" who hurls abuse at them from a rowing boat. Is he a cheeky larrikin or is he a vile nutter? I mean, is hurling abuse at a visiting sports team either normal or virtuous in the context of positive movie or TV portrayals? Warner thinks he's a harmless local character but Jardine sees something more base and sinister in the man. Later events show that Jardine's view might be right. This character hovers over the Australian team, being privy to meetings between English and Australian cricket officials, saying rude and abusive things when he hears something he doesn't like. Later on, he leads the crowds in yelling "bastards" at the England team and burning the Union flag. His mind and his actions have not been shaped by Bodyline (a term Australians coin, not the English)...he held angry and aggressive opinions about England before a ball had been bowled. In short, he's an agitator, not a true fan and Jardine knows this.

There's also another scene where English cricketer turned journalist, Percy Fender, shows up in the Australian press box and he's all smiles, friendliness and earnestness as he sets about doing the best job he can whilst slobbish Australian journalists roll their eyes and shake their heads at him. Again, are we meant to side with the slobs over the dedicated and friendly? Jardine pushes his team hard, but he's always fair with them. When they demand to know the tactics, he gives in and tells them. He pushes Eddie Paynter to play when the man should be in hospital, but Paynter scores a century and Jardine is generous afterwards, in an unpretentious and unshowy way. Jardine pays tribute to the talents of his team and while the depiction of Australian cricketers has them smiling at one another and being matey to the point of insular, the director shows the English batsmen in graceful slow motion as captions tell of their exploits and Jardine's voice over extols their talents.

Whilst Jardine increasingly becomes single minded to the point of obsessive, the rest of the England team behave well. Even Bob Wyatt, who was a very serious and taciturn person, comes across in this series as jolly and affable. Some refuse to bowl Bodyline but all back the captain. None of them mock the Australians or twirl moustaches or behave in a villainous way. Australia lodge a complaint, it gets out of control, there's a diplomatic outrage and basically England agree to all of Australia's demands after they win.

But tellingly, the final moments of Bodyline tell of Jardine's life after cricket; as a war hero risking his life behind enemy lines. Bradman gets a line about going on to captain Australia. So, an Aussie hatchet job against England or a sneaky appreciation of sports professionalism and dedication....maybe even a sly tribute to Douglas Jardine? I'm tending to think it's the latter.

Bodyline was a good TV film. It gave the Australian Film Industry the chance to celebrate an Aussie "legend" and paint the poms as mean , vindictive and unsporting in a story centred around the events of 1932-33 Ashes series. Ian Holts, Harold Larwood was great and the actor who played Eddie Painter was a stunning portrayal of an often forgotten English cricket hero.Capt Douglas Jardine was portrayed as a racist and a man who would bend the rules to win at any cost.Whilst Capt Bill Woodfield was the great noble battler trying in vain to play the game against unscrupulous opponents. Bradman (played by Gary Sweet) is the hero , as he is bowled out 1st ball and then proceeds to try and get into journalism so he can get a career.Bradman is swiftly brought back into line and then proceeds to score the centuries he was famous for. Though the producer or director didn't delve into Bradmans popularity with his fellow players...An Aussie will know what I mean.

Tempers fly and International recriminations dog the tour , also the Australian attempt at fairness was the portrayal of Guppy Allen who wouldnt bowl Bodyline , so that the viewer was assured that not all poms are bad.. The sick in the bucket moment was when one of the Aussie cricketers was comparing there experience to there fathers experience in Gallipoli and then urged his players "to kop it sweet". After all the justifiable criticisms , this Made for TV Film should be welcome to any English home , because we just love sentimental Australians.