William Samuel Loosely based on the Famed Mutiny on the Bounty, Damn the Defiant is a strong Napoleonic era period piece, and also an above average naval drama. But above all it is a study of two very different men and their contest of wills. Alec Guinness's Captain Crawford is a humane, fair officer who knows the value of discipline and efficiency but also understands the importance of a crew's morale and well being. His opposite in nearly every matter is first lieutenant Scott-Padget (Dirk Bogarde). Bright, ambitious, needlessly harsh and often insubordinate, Scott-Padget is a firm believer in the lash who cares only for his own advancement and is used to getting his way. A dangerous combination, and one that drives the Defiant over the edge.Both leads put on very good performances. Guinness brings Captain Crawford's empathy and resoluteness fully to life. Although he would loathe the comparison, at times he does seem rather like a certain desert hermit in his kindly, aged wisdom. And for his part Bogarde is the epitome of a jerk. With his displays of anger, pettiness, and entitlement he makes himself very easy to hate. The production values are good, with fairly authentic costumes, sets, and other period touches. The naval battles are also quite rousing impressive, with good swordplay and effects that have stood up well considering their age.The film's main shortcoming is that it never treats the mutiny with any serious depth. It's true that a great deal of time is dedicated to the conditions on the Defiant, and to the build-up of discontent that lead to the mutiny. It's also clear that the men have very real grievances, mostly relating to Lieutenant Scott-Padget. But no time is taken to dwell on whether their actions were justified in a time of war, or any soul searching by the men themselves. The ending leaves me inclined to agree with Captain Crawford's lenient position, yet it stills feels like too easy an answer. But perhaps I'm asking too much from what's intended as a fun war movie.All in all, Damn the Defiant may not equal the classic Billy Bud or some of the better adaptations of Horatio Hornblower, but with good acting and good action it's a worthwhile voyage for all ages.

Theo Robertson During the Napoleonic War Captain Crawford is given command of the Royal Navy ship HMS Defiant . A new crew are press ganged in to service . These unwilling recruits must be turned in to sailors but very quickly the practical Captain Crawford finds himself clashing with First Officer Scott Padget The QUATERMASS trilogy of the 1950s made Nigel Kneale a household name . Unfortunately Kneale didn't like this name or to be pigeonholed as a science fiction writer and spent all his energies trying to escape this albatross around his neck . He adapted the film versions of LOOK BACK IN ANGER and THE ENTERTAINER and adapted the novel Mutiny by Frank Tilsley in to this film DAMN THE DEFIANT and what a nice little gem of a film it is too . He wouldn't thank me for saying this but if you enjoyed the personality clash between Breen and Quatermass in QUATERMASS AND THE PIT you'll enjoy this movie too Two things Kneale was outstanding at was both character interaction and dialogue . There's a golden rule of scriptwriting of " Show don't tell " and Kneale never breaks this rule but the dialogue is flowing with exposition and character even if there's not much action happening on screen . At the heart of the story is the conflict between Crawford and Scott Padgett on the methods used on getting the best out of the crew . Crawford is experienced and though he's no soft touch he's aware sailors are only human and they're not sailors through their own free will so walking along the thin divide of what is needed to be done and not overstepping the line is his paramount concern . Scott Padget's view is entirely different and rules through a brutal iron fist . The crew however don't care who is running the ship and are going to mutiny regardless This film might seem a little bit old fashioned and stagy compared to something we might get today but nowadays directors like to wave the camera about trying to show off how much money the studio spent on the production . Nowadays the going rates for stars are also a bit too high for my liking and how many so called " stars " nowadays have the presence of a Guinness or a Bogarde as seen here . Even the actors in relatively small roles such as Tom Bell and Murray Melvin impress in a tightly plotted story that is the best of British

raven_1-1 Alec Guiness is the kindly, but unimaginative, captain of a Royal Navy frigate (HMS Defiant)during the Napoleonic wars engaged in a battle of wills for command of the ship with his brilliant, but sadistic, 1st Lieutenant, wonderfully played by Dirk Bogarde. Their conflict is set amongst a crew endeavouring to get a petition going with a view to righting their grievances and joining in a peaceful mutiny with the rest of the fleet. The leader of the mutineers is played most sympathetically by Anthony Quayle.The acting talent ensures that the film is always entertaining to watch and the scenes of ships do not suffer from that disease that permeated films of this era where the waves/water-drops are far too big relative to the size of the ships.The film suffers from many errors and unlikely scenes, e.g. the flagship would have cut her cables and ran on seeing the fire ship heading towards her and no matter how much influence (or 'interest' as it was termed then) the 1st Lieutenant had there is absolutely no way that he could have influenced an examining board to pass the elderly midshipman for lieutenant. In those days when a midshipman faced the examining board he had to produce his sea journals and log book for scrutiny and answer a large number of lengthy and difficult questions on seamanship and navigation. The board was made up of at least three senior captains who were unknown to the midshipman under examination and all three had to agree. This was the only point in an officer's career where 'interest' did not count.Most officers were not rich and 'posh' as some posts seem to imply; most officers were the sons of sea officers or parsons etc, and were usually very poor. Most would never have received a commission in the army!! The mutinies at the Nore and Spithead were to right grievances the common sailors had (though the leadership at the Nore mutiny seemed to have a different agenda) and largely succeeded. Some of the grievances included regular and increased pay (the sailors pay had not increased in 160 years!!), shore leave and the removal of certain bad officers. However, their grievances did not include the abolition of the cat O' nine-tails or the press gang as most sailors approved of the 'cat'.The conditions of sailors and the press gang have been much exaggerated over the years, as their conditions compared very favourably with starving landsmen in England and the press could take up only certain kinds of men, and if an officer leading a press gang made a mistake then he could be taken to court and imprisoned, which did happen; consequently officers were very careful who they had pressed. It is estimated that up to 40% were pressed. Contrary to one comment, sailors always received their share of prize money (eventually sometimes!); their share was stated in regulations and if an admiral, captain or admiralty official had refused to hand it over then they would have been tried for theft.

theowinthrop In April 1789 Captain William Bligh was set adrift off the Friendly Islands by Fletcher Christian and the crew of H.M.S. Bounty, tired of Bligh's bad temper and harsh tongue. Bligh and the loyal crew members (except two killed by cannibals on one island they stopped at) managed to sail the open boat 2,100 miles despite lack of supplies and dangerous seas and weather to safety. Bligh returned to England, and eventually made a second trip to Tahiti to complete his original mission. Christian and most of the Bounty mutineers fled on the Bounty and reached Pitcairn Island, where their descendants live to this day. The mutiny on the Bounty is the one that most people think of whenever they hear the word "mutiny". Otherwise they think of THE CAINE MUTINY. Actually there have been many mutinies. In 1905 a mutiny on the Russian battleship Potemkin occurred at Odessa on the Black Sea. It was immortalized by Serge Eisenstein in his film of the name POTEMKIN. It surprises many people outside of England that the Bounty was peanuts compared to the Great Mutiny of 1797 at the Nore and Spithead of the entire British fleet (also the 1931 Invergordon Mutiny of the British fleet during the depression, which was a total surprise). The Great Mutiny is supreme because it occurred just when England was facing revolutionary France in the French Revolutionary Wars. A force being planned by Wolfe Tone and the French General Lazare Hoche was to invade Ireland. By sheer chance the French were unable to take advantage of the moment of England's peril to invade.The 1797 Mutiny at Spithead was actually successful - various gains in pay and food were made by the sailors. Then came the Nore Mutiny, which was led by a seaman of some leadership qualities named Richard Parker. Parker's demands were impossible, and he apparently toyed with leading the fleet to France. Instead the British Admiralty got tough, and crushed the mutiny. Ironically one of the last ships to give up was H.M.S. Director, which was commanded by William Bligh. It was the second mutiny (of three!) that Bligh would face in his career. Parker was tried for mutiny and executed, as were dozens of other sailors.It would be nice if some enterprising producer would make an accurate film of the 1797 Mutiny - but until that day comes we are left with two films that roughly approximate the story. There is Peter Ustinov's BILLY BUDD, which is set in the period of the Great Mutiny, and this one. BILLY BUDD has much going for it regarding it's source material (Herman Melville's brilliant study of good and evil, and how they are impossible to separate). Then there is DAMN THE DEFIANT / H.M.S. DEFIANT, which tells the story from the point of view of a single vessel and the evils that permeated all the crew from the Captain to the tars. Alec Guinness is a well meaning but weak leader who is the Captain of Defiant, and has been stuck with Dirk Bogarde as his new second in command, a socially well-connected sadist. Bogarde is determined to be the real commander of the ship, and is willing to do what is needed to bring Guinness and everyone in sight under heal. Guinness's son is a midshipman on the DEFIANT, and Bogarde keeps finding ways of punishing the young man that Guinness (because of fears of favoritism) will not interfere with. On top of this, during one battle, Guinness loses an arm (a salute to Lord Nelson who was similarly was crippled).However, the men led by Anthony Quayle, decide to join the mutiny. And then it is Bogarde's turn to sweat.What were the gripes of the mutineers? Low pay (the government spent money on bribes for votes, but not decent pay). Nothing like pensions for the men - frequently kidnapped by press gangs in the major cities - and left cripples after serving in the naval battles. Food was crap - the quartermasters and the people who sold supplies were in cahoots and sold rotten food to the ships. It was a "lovely life". The wonder is that there weren't more bloodbath mutinies. One (in 1798) on board H.M.S. Hermoine led to the murder of a dozen officers, including the Captain (one Hugh Pigott). Reading of it makes one realize how lucky Bligh and the Admirals were that they did not face the real wrath that was just under the surface.