Joseph Conrad's 1915 novel "Victory" is a complex treatment of life-denying philosophy, human wickedness and the power of love. It's very interesting to see its first movie version, done in 1919 and probably only known today since Lon Chaney on his to way to fame did a good performance of the crazy villain Ricardo in it.
But all in all this movie is a disappointment. The script reduces the novel to a quite silly and simple love and adventure story, where in the ending (different from the novel) Heyst, the lonely reclusive on the island, has learned to "hack and slay for his woman", as one of the silly intertitles says. The movie never works because there are too much intertitles, clumsily interrupting the action, and the plot of the novel gets spread out in fast forward without any care for detail or atmosphere. Just look how the character of Ms. Schomberg got changed! The acting is OK overall, I guess, since the actors haven't any chance because of the bad script. Photography is good and sometimes great, which gives the movie somewhat of a raw power, but the scriptwriter and the director obviously wanted to make Conrad's novel into an exotic and simple adventure story on all costs. The booklet of the Image Entertainment DVD call the director "gifted", but I can't see much talent in this superficial, silly movie.
I wonder if Joseph Conrad saw this movie and what he thought of it. I guess he hated it. If you want to see a surprisingly good - in fact, it's great - movie version of this novel go and see Mark Peploe's 1995 version.
But all in all this movie is a disappointment. The script reduces the novel to a quite silly and simple love and adventure story, where in the ending (different from the novel) Heyst, the lonely reclusive on the island, has learned to "hack and slay for his woman", as one of the silly intertitles says. The movie never works because there are too much intertitles, clumsily interrupting the action, and the plot of the novel gets spread out in fast forward without any care for detail or atmosphere. Just look how the character of Ms. Schomberg got changed! The acting is OK overall, I guess, since the actors haven't any chance because of the bad script. Photography is good and sometimes great, which gives the movie somewhat of a raw power, but the scriptwriter and the director obviously wanted to make Conrad's novel into an exotic and simple adventure story on all costs. The booklet of the Image Entertainment DVD call the director "gifted", but I can't see much talent in this superficial, silly movie.
I wonder if Joseph Conrad saw this movie and what he thought of it. I guess he hated it. If you want to see a surprisingly good - in fact, it's great - movie version of this novel go and see Mark Peploe's 1995 version.