Thu 26 Sep 2024
A Movie Review by Dan Stumpf: BILLY BUDD (1962).
Posted by Steve under Action Adventure movies , Reviews[15] Comments
BILLY BUDD. Allied Artists, 1962. Robert Ryan, Terrence Stamp, Peter Ustinov, Melvyn Douglas, John Neville, David McCallum, Lee Montague, and Niall MacGinnis. Adapted by Peter Ustinov, DeWitt Bodeen, and Robert Rossen, from the novel by Herman Melville. Produced & directed by Peter Ustinov.
I’ve said it before, and it bears repeating: “If you only see one movie in your entire life, it should be… Chamber of Horrors” (Warners, 1966).
But if you think you could possibly stretch it to Two, you could do a lot worse than Billy Budd.
Actor/writer/producer/director Ustinov shaped Melville’s ponderous novella into a compelling fable of Good vs Evil, played to perfection by Terrence Stamp as Billy, the ingenuous merchant seaman pressed into the Royal Navy, and Robert Ryan as Claggett, the sadistic Master-at-Arms who sets out to destroy him.
It’s a film that works on many levels, mostly because Ustinov chose to write it that way. The story of Budd and Claggett plays out against a backdrop of colorfully painted characters, all the way from Ustinov’s cautious Captain, down to Melvyn Douglas’ thoughtful sail-mender, with stops along the way for class-conscious officers, scrappy sailors, squealers, and entry-level killers.
The conflict that plays out against this background is not so much a clash of personalities as it is one of alternative realities. Budd is so genuinely guileless and decent that he quickly becomes beloved by his crewmates and respected by his superiors. Claggett, on the other hand, lives on hate. He breathes it in and out as decent men breathe air. And when he and Billy confront each other — in a brilliantly imagined and deftly played scene — it’s Claggett who wavers. And Billy who pays the price.
Ustinov also owes a debt of gratitude to Producer Ustinov for getting most of this filmed outdoors on shipboard (or a reasonable facsimile) with a minimum of fakey process shots. The total effect is to demystify the tale and lend the natural power of the Seas to its telling.
September 26th, 2024 at 1:49 pm
Chamber of Horrors 1940 or 1966?
September 26th, 2024 at 5:33 pm
Barry,
Double-check my review; Warner Bros, 1966
September 26th, 2024 at 6:19 pm
Chamber of Horrors with Patrick O’Neal matters to me on a personal note. I liked and admired him, and up to a certain point it was,reciprocal.
September 26th, 2024 at 7:41 pm
I was always a fan of his, too, no matter how far off the subject a discussion got.
September 27th, 2024 at 2:14 am
Billy Budd was the film that taught me (I was about eleven when I saw it) that film was more than just one thing after another, so it could be the most important film I saw.
In between Melville and the film there was a theatrical adaptation by Louis O. Coxe and Robert H. Chapman.
September 27th, 2024 at 5:20 pm
The movie that all at once made me realize that yes, you could have opinions about it and even talk about it with someone else, was THE YOUNG LIONS, way back in 1958. I don’t remember anything about it now, but it certainly opened my eyes to the world.
September 27th, 2024 at 7:00 pm
Me too. I admit a personal connection to the flick as well. I don’t mean ‘in person’ but it was one of a handful of literary adaptations shown to me in my middle school English composition class.
So it’s a cardinal cinema experience in my memory. One of the first really fine B&W studio movies I may have ever seen. Special feeling for it.
Made a strong impression on me at a very susceptible age –not just viewing and enjoying it but also being instructed in it by an English teacher. Never forgotten it. Each flick accompanied by reading assignments. It really sticks with one.
Others shown to us in that same grade year were: Huckleberry Finn, Great Gatsby, Dorian Gray, Moby Dick, The Crucible, Death of a Salesman, Glass Menagerie, Of Mice and Men, Charly, Tale of Two Cities …you know the kind of thing. We all had to write a 1-2 page report on each.
Anyway. The film itself, is little-catch-in-the-throat” stuff for sure. Sensitive performances and evocative setting. Intricate characters. Climactic final scene will still get me on the edge of my seat all this time later. What a gripping movie moment.
“Goodbye, Rights-of-Man!” (this is from the beginning of the flick)
Fave member of Billy’s crew? Gotta be Melvyn Douglas playing, ‘The Dansker’.
September 27th, 2024 at 7:35 pm
Good memories, Lazy, that’s for sure. Thanks for sharing!
September 27th, 2024 at 11:14 pm
The film is often held up as a perfect transition from page to screen and I certainly agree (Conrad’s THE SECRET SHARER has similar credits though is actually only a short film).
Stamp’s innocence becomes a visual allegory as the character in the book was a literary one and is matched by a fine cast all seemingly aware they are doing something special.
What can you say about Robert Ryan, who seemed born to play characters trapped in their own hate? No one else could play these roles with his subtlety never mis stepping and going over the top and never underplaying the intensity. Anyone else might have chewed the scenery as Claggett, but Ryan is perfect.
September 28th, 2024 at 3:08 am
Lazy,
Interesting that this was picked to by educators as an example of “Literary Adaptation” since only a few of the film’s big dramatic scenes are in the book!
September 29th, 2024 at 7:33 pm
I read and really liked Melville’s original novella.
Have never seen the film.
Impression: film historians rarely remember the film. And rarely write about it.
Am amazed this review says it’s the second best film of all time!
And that so many people here think it’s a key work.
All this could be true, of course.
September 29th, 2024 at 7:40 pm
More thoughts?
The Broadway play was filmed for TV by the talented Robert Mulligan in 1959.
Have never been able to find a copy to watch.
I made it through the first act of the 1951 opera.
Problems. The story was heavily reworked.
And I can’t stand Benjamin Britten’s music.
September 30th, 2024 at 3:38 pm
A key work for me personally, Michael E Grost.
I just watched again and it’s a very good film: not an innovative masterpiece or whatever, but it makes you realise the small space the cast are in, with two superb pieces of acting, and you think about its implications.
One thing I hadn’t noticed so much was Ustinov’s own acting: Vere isn’t a Hornblower or Aubrey, but an intelligent man caught in his own role like Claggart and Budd. It’s a secondary role dramatically and morally, but Ustinov makes it completely convincing and fits in perfectly with Ryan and Stamp.
October 1st, 2024 at 8:52 am
Ustinov’s interpretation of “Starry Vere” is a fine little treasure in this flick.
Ustinov –so often a supporting co-star –and here was well –nonetheless dominates the story more than anyone except Claggart.
Short, portly, waddling, Ustinov –with his rotund belly –was so often a hapless figure in his movies; often a buffoon. But in ‘Budd’ he is a memorable and convincing sea captain.
I’ve been watching him in the clips, moving around the room filled with taller crew, taller officers. He’s utterly in authority over all the lankier, more able-bodied men.
There’s also a beautiful hint –in his brusque manner, in the way he spits out his words –of impatience and distaste for his job. This fits in with Melville’s backstory. ‘Starry’ Vere loves the heavens, loves navigation by constellation, loves use of the sextant.
His ‘managerial’ duties disgust him even on a ‘good’-day-at-sea. As the story unwinds, (I think) you can see it written on his face as he’s gradually driven into a hard corner by Budd’s predicament.
He’s hoisted on his own petard at the end of the flick –and in a sense, “it couldn’t happen to a better guy”.
Is the film worth ranking as #2 overall, in all of cinema history? Well …maybe not but it is superbly crafted. Ustinov sure put his heart into it.
I’d certainly rate it shoulder-to-shoulder with ‘Caine Mutiny’ or any other sea yarn I’ve ever encountered…
October 1st, 2024 at 9:04 am
A ‘saturnine figure’, is Captain Vere. One might say.