ENDURANCE
by Chris Dashiell

The Shackleton Expedition to Antarctica was long hidden in obscurity, famous only to explorer buffs, overshadowed by the earlier drama of the Amundson/ Scott race to the Pole. A recent bestseller by Caroline Alexander, occasioned by a 1999 American Museum of Natural History exhibition, changed all that. Now there is a film - The Endurance: Shackleton's Legendary Antarctic Expedition - directed by George Butler, based on Alexander's book.

The expedition, begun in 1914, was intended to be the first crossing of the continent of Antarctica by land. One day away from the goal, the ship Endurance became trapped in the pack ice, then frozen fast. Shackleton and his 28-man crew waited, immobilized, in the hope that the ice would eventually thaw, but after ten months the ship was destroyed by ice pressure. For five months they camped on the ice, as the huge floe revolved towards the open sea. Finally Shackleton led an arduous trek to the water, where they rowed three lifeboats for a week - in incredibly harsh conditions that almost cost them their lives - 100 miles north to Elephant Island.

Although they were now finally on land, the island lay outside of normal shipping lanes and was practically barren of food, while the severe cold added to the men's woes. Shackleton decided to attempt the impossible. Selecting five of the hardiest men, he took a single boat on a journey of 800 miles, across a raging sea, with a sextant the only navigation tool, to the island of South Georgia. Worsley, the captain of the Endurance, was only able to make four readings on the voyage, most of the time relying on "sailor's sense" where a mistake of a degree could mean failure. Miraculously, they arrived at their destination 17 days later. However, they were forced to land on the island's western shore - ships and relief were on the opposite side.

Shackleton and two men then crossed the island's mountainous terrain, that had never been charted, with nothing but a compass and three days rations, in 36 straight hours without sleep. Finally they reached a whaling town, and the three men on the island's other side were rescued, but it took another four months for Shackleton to get another ship back to Elephant Island to pick up the remaining crew. who had just about given up hope. Not a single man from the expedition died.

Thus, in brief, is the Shackleton story, and it is an amazing one indeed. Still, it would be hard for any film about the expedition to rise above the usual PBS documentary level if it weren't for one curious fact. Shackleton brought along a photographer - Frank Hurley - who shot motion pictures and stills throughout. The movies are fascinating, and bring an immediacy to the story that would be impossible for a reenactment. After the Endurance sunk, the movie camera became an expendable luxury, so the rest of the story was captured in still photographs - but by that time one is thoroughly absorbed in the tale.

The filmmakers returned to the Antarctic region to photograph some of the places that Shackleton and his men explored, and the color photography is skillfully interspersed with Hurley's footage to recreate the experience of this 22-month ordeal. They also interviewed descendants of the crew, who provide insight into the personalities of these adventurers, and the class distinctions that to a great extent defined their relationships.

Shackleton emerges as a hero. Although the film leaves some of his decisions open to question, his attitude of unwavering hopefulness and determination to save all his crew is worthy of the highest praise. Qualities of leadership are sometimes intangible - Shackleton had something that inspired his men to continue following him, and through constant setbacks, each more discouraging than the last, they somehow survived. On their return to England they found that public notice was monopolized by the Great War. Shackleton attempted another Polar expedition in the 1920s, but died of a heart attack on South Georgia Island, where he was buried.

Other films have been made about Shackleton - the silent movie South (1919) was based on his memoirs, and there have been later documentaries as well, including a recent IMAX film. Butler's work is exciting and informative. Just seeing the Hurley footage on a big screen is enough to make your jaw drop. The picture also boasts a fine score by Michael Small and is narrated by Liam Neeson.

*******

Everyone has their blind spots - cinematically and otherwise. One of mine is the Coen Brothers. With the exception of The Big Lebowski (their best film, I think) and Raising Arizona - the Coen movies with the least admixtures of darkness - my response to their films has tended to be a shrug and a "So what?"

I keep hoping that will change, but The Man Who Wasn't There didn't fulfill my hopes. Still, I must admit that it's one of the most visually accomplished American films in years - the black and white photography (Roger Deakins - robbed again of the Oscar he deserved), and Joel Coen's skillful noir-styled compositions of figures, angles and shadows - are a joy to behold. Yeah, a Coen film always looks good. There's no denying that. But what's it about?

It's about film noir itself, I guess. The darkly comic tale follows a taciturn barber (Billy Bob Thornton) in postwar Santa Rosa, California, who suspects that his wife (Frances McDormand) is having an affair with her boss (James Gandolfini). When he encounters a traveling salesman with a get-rich scheme involving dry cleaning, he decides to anonymously blackmail his wife's lover to get start-up money. But of course the plot goes terribly wrong, with consequences that continue to get worse as the film goes on.

So we have classic noir fatalism (no matter what the protagonist does, the events he has set in motion drag him inexorably down), with injections of Coen-style irony and wise-guy humor. It's all very slick, and once again I shrugged. The characters are like puppets. I didn't feel involved with them because the Coens aren't really involved with them other than as vehicles for their genre-referential conceits. Once in a while I was jarred into active dislike of the picture, in moments involving UFO paranoia, and an unlikely vehicular blowjob in the weak Scarlett Johansson subplot.

Thornton, who has become one of the screen's more accomplished performers, manages to be rather amusing as the emotionally dead narrator. Tony Shalhoub is masterful as a hotshot lawyer. None of it seems to come from anywhere but the Coens' desire to make another airtight (airless, I would say) genre spoof. So once again I ask: So what? And I'm sure many who loved the film, and love the Coens, will have an answer for me. But what can you do? Maybe it's just a blind spot.....

©2002 Chris Dashiell
CineScene