Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #49824 in DVD
• Released on: 2004-08-24
• Rating: NR (Not Rated)
• Aspect ratio: 2.20:1
• Formats: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dubbed, DVD, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC
• Original language: English, French
• Subtitled in: English, Spanish, French, Japanese
• Dubbed in: French
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 154 minutes

Amazon.com essential video
Three years after Lawrence of Arabia, the largely impressive Lord Jim (1965) finds Peter O'Toole again essaying a self-doubting but remarkable, white Englishman who leads a foreign people against their oppressor. Based on the Joseph Conrad novel, Lord Jim is the story of a British maritime officer, Jim (O'Toole), who takes a brief post on a tramp steamer and flees in terror during a storm at sea. Dogged by a reputation for cowardice, Jim attempts to reinvent himself in his own eyes, commanding an attack against a feudal warlord (Eli Wallach) in a distant, Southeast Asian village and basking in god-like glory afterward. A sinister plot by a gentleman pirate (James Mason) sets the stage for Jim's confrontation with his true destiny. Simplified and adapted by writer-director Richard Brooks (In Cold Blood), Lord Jim sometimes feels rushed and obvious, but O'Toole's golden performance and legendary cinematographer Freddie Young's 70mm footage are outstanding. --Tom Keogh

Customer Reviews

Lawrence of the South Seas
Well, Peter O'Toole was never going to find another character or film as magnificent as Lawrence of Arabia. And his first films after that triumph were commendable attempts to avoid typecasting - What's New Pussycat and Becket. But it was inevitable he would again become a tormented blonde Englishman in an alien environment. And he could have done a lot worse than starring as Lord Jim for Richard Brooks.

Any discussion of this film has to concentrate on O'Toole and Brooks. That is not to say there are no other impressive performances, or that the film is not beautifully photographed or graced with a lushly evocative score. But the film is Brooks' vision and O'Toole is the one who must bring it to life. They are both reasonably successful.

Brooks obviously wanted to create an intelligent epic -one to rival the Robert Bolt/David Lean collaborations. But Brooks was both writer and director - and he was adapting a book that was as pyschological as potentially visual. Luckily for him, audiences in the 1960's were more sophisticated (dare we say intelligent?) and willing to think about what they were watching than today's consumers of assembly-line disposable entertainment. So characters could discuss and debate as well as blow things up. Although the disjointed nature of some of the film suggests pre-release studio interference. In the end, the film is a commendable attempt - perhaps more worthy than enjoyable, but still with lots to hold the viewer's interest.

The southeast Asian locations are frequently spectacular and some sequences - the storm at sea and the final battle with pirates - are excitedly staged. The film always looks and sounds beautiful. And, for once, an international cast with various accents actually contributes to the flavor of the script and characters. Stalwart Jack Hawkins, industrious Paul Lukas, wily Eli Wallach (doing a variation on his Magnificent Seven bandit) and James Mason seemingly enjoying himself as a gentleman pirate. The "native" players are also unusually good. Only gorgeous Daliah Lavi occasionally seems out of place, looking more like a 60's dolly bird than an exotic maiden.

But, of course, it is Peter O'Toole who commands the greatest attention. He is seldom off the screen and is probably the main reason for viewing the film today. He is properly enigmatic although without the multiple layers of Lawrence. This may well be the only film in which O'Toole occasionally underacts. After all these years, I still remember the Mad Magazine parody of Lord Jim. Two extras keep asking which emotion O'Toole is displaying - anger, love, determination, fear, doubt. For each one, he wear the same expression.

I'm quite glad to have seen Lord Jim again after so long - and with it looking so good. It's not a classic, not a film to be watched repeatedly. But it's a fine example of a large scale epic that could also be thoughtful and almost moving. A relic of an age of big and brave film making.

Thrilling Adventure, Warfare on Two Fronts
"Lord Jim" is handicapped by the fact that people will always compare it to David Lean's "Lawrence of Arabia," which had the same leading man and a similar theme. Despite its Conradian source, "Lord Jim" doesn't have a hero as complex or a setting as compelling as Lean's masterpiece. But it is spectacular entertainment, and a serious inquiry into the roots of human actions.

Despite some B-Movie flourishes (Eli Wallach and Jim's "love interest" are particularly risable), the vulnerability and humanity of its hero captivate the viewer. And the Indonesian setting, while culturally very inaccurate, does evoke the mystery and exotica of 19th century travelogues. At its conclusion, the script tends to talk to death certain conclusions that the viewer could have reached on his/her own, but O'Toole is gifted enough to make it affecting. And anyway, the action sequences, and musky South China Sea atmosphere, are breathtaking.

For those who complain that it is overlong, I suggest you view it as a trilogy, as it is divided quite neatly into three sections, each with its own conflict, cast, and rising momentum. The first is the best, but all have their own brand of power and fascination. I've seen this film many, many times, and even the clumsy or silly parts give me enormous pleasure. I think you'll feel the same way.

In conclusion, I don't share the general bitterness that Amazon endorses a reviewer like Leonard Maltin. He has simply seen more movies than anyone else (it's his whole "life," after all), hence is more likely to have seen whatever film Amazon needs reviewed. It's obviously a decision based on convenience, not ability.

Lord Jim
Conrad's novel, like many he wrote, was on one level a ripping yarn, and on another, an exploration of the inner man. The psychological aspect to the story, written at the turn of the twentieth century, heralded a new style of fiction. This adds to its interest, although the heavily descriptive prose is an acquired taste.

It is the journey of a troubled outcast, roaming the South Seas in a time gone by, taking us through adventure and ending in redemption. It is both glorious romance and personal enlightenment. The novel opens with a description of the character, a manly seaman, dogged and taciturn, yet susceptible to deeper agony. This was the essence of the story: the soul in tempest.

The picture is a very competent adaptation of the book, well written and filmed on location with an excellent cast. Peter O'Toole is a fine actor and at this time was at the height of his powers. He is more suited to playing eccentrics and had already defined Lawrence of Arabia on screen. He might have been less convincing as Jim, but his performance was solid and sufficiently enigmatic to carry the role.

Like all good stories, it has a good ending. While not a happy one, it is the most satisfying resolution of a tale you will ever get. The written version is exquisite, and the film captures this beautifully. You will never forget it.