Associate producer: Sidney Cole. Producer: Michael Balcon. An Ealing Studios Production, made at Ealing Studios, London, and on locations in Norway and Switzerland. Presented by J. Arthur Rank. Dedicated to the memory of Captain Scott and all the members of his expedition.Copyright 20 April 1949 (in notice: 1948) by Ealing Studios, Ltd. New York opening at the Little Carnegie: 24 February 1951 (sic). U.S. release (through Eagle Lion): 20 April 1949. U.K. release (through General Film Distributors): 7 March 1949. Australian release (through British Empire Films): 6 October 1949. 111 minutes. SYNOPSIS: Although ostensibly leading a scientific expedition to Antarctica in 1911, Captain Scott actually wants the glory of being the first man to reach the South Pole. But he is beaten by the Norwegian explorer, Amundsen. NOTES: Number 4 at U.K. ticket windows for 1949. The film did well in other territories too, although it failed to duplicate this sort of success. VIEWERS' GUIDE: Okay for all. (Available on an excellent Optimum DVD). COMMENT: Burdened with a slack script, indifferent acting and some surprising budgetary shortcuts, "Scott of the Antarctic" fails to hold up well today.Dealing with the script first, because it is the weakest element in the film, it's obvious that the producers were constrained from introducing any real conflict into their material, except for man versus the elements and, to lesser degree, honorable British gentlemen versus tricky Norwegians. This has the effect of reducing the characters to little more than names, an error then confounded five times over by Mary Hayley Bell whose amateurish, cliché-ridden additional dialogue is rarely less than embarrassing.Faced with a lifeless script, the actors can do little to put drama into their portraits. Mills seems miscast, and most of the others are mere stereotypes. True, our first sight of James Robertson Justice without his usual beard is somewhat startling, but he soon settles back into the conventional. The only other surprises are Gregson's minuscule role — despite his prominence in the cast list, he has only one line of dialogue — and Christopher Lee's comparatively large but completely nonspeaking part. Lee is constantly hovering around in the foreground, but doesn't have so much as a single word!Frend has directed in a routine, if somewhat choppy style, leaving all the work to his brilliant cinematographers who have captured some marvelous location footage — albeit undermined by obvious special effects and miniature work, plus one of the worst painted studio backdrops I have ever seen in a major studio production.The script's vices were not lost on composer Vaughan Williams who often tries to drown out the worst of the dialogue clichés by an over- riding and portentous score. Personally, I would have preferred something a little less overly "dramatic", a little more poetic and melodic. In short, a tragic, heroic, highly charged and potentially instructive story reduced to the lackluster level of a kindergarten primer on British pluck and Mr. Nice Guys.

SCOTT OF THE ANTARCTIC is the famous film version of Scott's ill-fated 1912 journey to the South Pole, acted by John Mills who is supported by a whole slew of notable faces including future greats like John Gregson and Christopher Lee. This Ealing production has exemplary production values and no action or effects of any kind, and yet it grips from beginning to end through the sterling attention to detail and the unending realism. The film is quite lengthy and slowly-paced, but the story is so engrossing and the characters so well-acted that it doesn't really matter. I can't imagine anyone not being affected by this film's moving climax.

History and heroism have always made for fertile ground for storytellers. The story of the ill-fated 1910-1912 British arm of the race to the South Pole that was led by Captain Sir Robert Falcon Scott would prove to be no exception to that rule. While history's opinion of Scott and his expedition has tended to shift back and forth and thus can cloud the issue of this film's historical accuracy one thing is certain though. That is that this film, not matter one's thoughts on its historical accuracy, is a fine film armed with a fine cast, strong production values and a fantastic score. The result is a fine film recreation of the tale of Scott and his men.To begin with the film boosts a fine cast of actors. John Mills plays Captain Scott as a heroic figure doing his best to lead his men in one of the harshest places on Earth, an interpretation that (if other reviews are anything to go by) is certainly cause for controversy six decades on but in the film's context works well. If one needs any proof of just how good Mills is listen to him as he reads out entries from Scott's journal throughout the film. There's also a fine supporting cast including Harold Warreneder as Naturalist E.A. Wilson, Derek Bond as Captain Oates, Kenneth More as Lt. "Teddy" Evans, Reginald Beckwith as Lt. "Birdie" Bowers, Clive Morton as famed Antarctic photographer Herbert Ponting and even a young Christopher Lee in the role of Bernard Day. Sadly the only actresses in the film, Diana Churchill as Scott's wife and Anne Firth as Wilson's wife, seem to be far too constrained by the conventions of wive roles of the time. Overall though it is a fine cast.Scott Of the Antarctic also boosts some strong production values as well. The sets of Arne Akermark are some fine recreations of the various elements of the expedition including the Terra Nova ship, Scott's base of operation and the tent interiors along the way to the pole and back. The costumes of Anthony Mendleson are also fantastic recreations of the outfits and uniforms worn by those who took part on the expedition. Then there's the make-up work which helps to bring a sense of the effects of the Antarctic wilderness upon the men of the expedition. There's also some incredible cinematography as well that reaches not only from the sets but to footage of the Antarctic as well. All together they make for a meticulous and incredible recreation of the places and things involved in the expedition.The film is also blessed with a fine score from composer Vaughan Williams. Williams score is an epic and sweeping piece that makes, all by itself, an incredible portrait not only of the expedition but of the icy continent. Of special mention is Williams pieces for the opening credits, Scott's entry from the end of the Discovery expedition, the Terra Nova's arrival in the Antarctic and the music that accompanies the films last few minutes. The quality of the music makes it no surprise that Williams took this score (of which only half the music he composed ended up in the film) and created his seventh symphony from it.Last, but not least, there is the script. If other reviews that I've read are any indication of things it is that the script is the single most controversial aspect of the film. After some six decades, the controversies surrounding Scott's expeditions make it nay impossible to properly judge the film on its historical accuracy. That said there are some definite changes to the historical events (the death of P.O. Evans being a prime example) but these can be forgiven as virtually every film based on a historical event makes changes to the facts to suit its needs . Judging the script from a writing point of view alone, the script is pretty good in terms of most of its dialogue and compressing years worth of events into under two hours of screen time.While the historical accuracy of the script will continue to be debated I'm sure, there are plenty of other fine things to be found in Scott Of The Antarctic. These include the fine cast, the superb production values and the fantastic score of composer Vaughan Williams. If one can say nothing else about this film it is this: that after six decades it remains a good old fashioned film of adventure and courage.

This film is as accurate in its presentation of the Terra Nova expedition as anyone can hope to enjoy in cinematic format.Any polar aficionados will undoubtedly be aware of the consequences of the race between Amundsen and Scott. In my opinion Scott has been poorly evaluated by critics for his failure to reach the Pole first. Of all of the critics, Roland Huntford is the most inept. Scott was not a man incapable of organisation, or undeserved of applause. Huntford has done no justice to a man he could only aspire to in his near-fictionous warblings. The title of 'biographer' is far too rewarding to a man who spins fairy tales around the most unfeigned episodes of exploration.John Mills can be applauded for not basing a raw and gripping performance on the Huntford conjuring of Scott. Or perhaps he was lucky that Huntford's 'studies' of events had not surfaced on history yet.An excellent film in my opinion; vivid colour and an enticing soundtrack that charts the expedition's unremitting penchant for adventure.