Customer Reviews

The Last Place on Earth

5 star:		(28)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This dramatization is based on the book, Scott and Amundsen by Roland Huntford. It is a detailed study, centered around the 1910-1912 Great Race for the South Pole by two brave explorers; the Norwegian Capt. Amundsen and the British Capt. Scott. The legend of Capt. Scott had long been considered sacred. Afterall, Capt. Scott and his five-man party died on the return journey from the Pole after having reached it a month after Capt. Amundsen. Roald Amundsen, conversely, has largely been overlooked and even slandered for his achievement of safely reaching the Pole first. Mr. Huntford's research had uncovered so much information about Capt. Scott and Capt. Amundsen that it created a public scandal - a public outcry that even came to condemn the author. After all, a long-cherished British legend was being questioned to its very sanctity. So great was this outcry, that when the book was reissued in 1985 as The Last Place on Earth, it inspired this excellent PBS dramatization. True to Huntford's book, this dramatization plumbs every subtlety of the author's historical revelation. Depicted is the Great Race for the South Pole that pitted the British explorer, Capt. Robert F. Scott against the Norwegian, Capt. Roald Amundsen. Amundsen claimed the Pole in 1911. Captain Scott and his five-man party died of starvation and exposure on their return. This fine production captures the European nationalistic mood of the 1910's and beautifully enshrines the respectful eloquence of an era long past. Every aspect of this dramatization has been meticulously represented, from the period clothing to the detailed manifestation of each expedition's supply stores on the southward journey. Roland Huntford never set out to exploit the incompetence of a British legend. He sought merely to compare and contrast these two explorers in their 1911 quest for the South Pole. For the first time in his book, Amundsen, who had long been characterized as a broody and sour man, is considered an equal to Scott; and is revealed to be extremely charismatic, respectful of men and reverent of nature. On the other hand, the long revered hero Captain Scott, is exposed through extensive research to be insecure, paranoid, petty, careless and vindictive in his leadership. Scott made too many critically foolish decisions - one cannot help to at least question his fitness as a leader. This dramatization reflects the book well in contrasting the differences between the two leaders; in style, in personality, in each party's morale and loyalty, and even the difference between the ageing empire of Britain and the fledgling country of Norway, which at the time had just attained independence from Sweden. I viewed this presentation of "The Last Place on Earth" when it originally aired on PBS's Masterpiece Theater in 1985. This historical tale, and understanding the lengths to what ALL these brave men were willing to subject themselves to, is truly inspiring. I have been deeply interested in this epic story ever since. Being a mountain climber myself, I know what it takes to be prepared in case of the unexpected. And although the footage is extraordinary, one cannot truly understand how these brave men felt as they traveled hundreds of miles across a barren, inhospitable landscape, where losing one's bearings is easier than freezing to death. As excellent as this dramatization is, anyone who views it must read Huntford's book The Last Place on Earth, revised for 1999 whereby Huntford has since found much more background information to support his account.

I decided to write this review after seeing the television
dramatization of Ernest Shackleton's "Endurance" expedition.
Although I have seen "Last Place" many times, seeing "Shackleton", which is not bad, made me appreciate how
good "Last Place" really is. Ultimately, "Last Place" gives
a very good presentation of the different approaches to polar
exploration that Amundsen and Scott had. Unfortunately, "Shackleton" did not do this as well. Scott, a typical product of the hidebound Royal Navy and the class-ridden society
that made up late Victorian Britain believes that technology combined with immense will-power and "natural superiority of the Englishman" will overcome all obstacles.
Amundsen, a citizen of newly independent Norway, was much more open-minded and willing to make due with less. Unlike the British who believed they were a superior civilization and had nothing to learn from "inferior natives" like the Eskimos had clothing and food that was less well adapted to life in the very harsh polar climate. This flexibility that Amundsen had led him to adopt the clothing of the Eskimos and also led him to be more concerned about the problem of scurvey which plagued previous expeditions to the polar regions. This meant that Amundsen's men were much healthier (they actually gained weight on the journey!) than Scott's. By using dogs, there was less physical strain on the Norweigians than on the British who pulled their sled by themselves for much of the trip.
Amundsen was a meticulous planner whereas Scott had a tendency to rely on the British habit of "muddling through" and hoping that things will work out. In the end, these differences meant the difference between life or death for the two expeditions.
It is true that Roland Huntford whose book of the same name is the basis of the series has a real hatred for Scott which comes out again and again and showing a negative image of Scott which is probably exaggerated in the series, but Amundsen's flaws are also brought out such as his hiding the truth about his plans to go to the South Pole instead of exploring the Arctic as he claimed he was going to do and his almost disastrous too-early start to the South Pole which brought out his conflict with the legendary Hjalmar Johansen. Thus, I believe the viewer does come out of the series with a pretty honest idea of the truth about the race to the Pole and the very different outcomes for the two expeditions.
Beside the outstanding script and acting, the cinematography is absolutely breathtaking and the almost hurculean efforts to film this in the harsh environment of Greenland really paid off in making making one of the most impressive productions ever to be seen on television or the cinema. Anyone who is interested in history, exploration, or the psychology of men in extreme conditions will immensely enjoy this treasure.

I first watched this film when it was aired on PBS's Masterpiece Theatre back in 1984. Roland Huntford's account of the big race between Roald Amundsen and Robert Falcon Scott speaks out the truth that was omitted when Scott's diary was first published, and kept from public interest so that Scott could be claimed as a hero throughout the British Empire. Though Amundsen claimed the South Pole one month ahead of Scott, the British looked upon him as an inferior and giving Scott all the glory. I've had the opportunity as a boy to meet the real Tryggve Gran, the youngest member of the South Pole Expedition more than once, who accompanied Scott to Antarctica as ski instructor. Gran, who was in his late seventies when I met him at his home in Norway, had written several books about the South Pole Expeditions of the two men. Gran knew that Scott was in trouble from the very beginning. The filming sequence was shot in the Arctic regions of northern Canada and Greenland where the actors could experience the real effects that those they portrayed had felt. Temperatures dipped down as low as -60ºF and howling winds were prevalent. This was done in order to get as close to reality as possible. I highly reccomend this video.

I watched this mini-series in 1984 and remember how breathless I was, waiting for the next episode (Only Reilly - Ace of Spies
and Rumpole of the Bailey had this effect on me.). The film
shows the different approaches between the Norwegians team and the English team to get to the South Pole - the last undiscovered country. Their planning, their failures, their
strategies to survive are deeply emotional experiences. Amundson is the better Arctic explorer and planner...and so he wins. Scott is well intentioned, heroic, but unprepared. He doesn't make it to the Pole but gets lionized by his country as an example of someone willing to die for his country. Thrilling photography and intelligent film-making...it doesn't get any better than this.

This is a very detail-minded, yet well-paced adaptation of Roland Huntford's great book. The 7 tape series tells the story of the 2 competing expeditions of Roald Amundsen and Robert F. Scott en route to the South Pole in 1911. It was hard to imagine that the director and the actors would be able to convey a lot of the atmospheric, historic, and background information that makes the book so special, but they managed it just fine in a very subtle way. Martin Shaw gives a fine performance as Scott, as he walks the lines between arrogance, vanity, cluelessness and tragedy. Max von Sydow has the relatively small but important part of Nansen, Amundsen's mentor and idol, and the great actor once again shines in this role. The films are athmospherically dense, the cinematography, both in places antarctic and at home, is wonderful. As in the book the Norwegian side is favored for their superior planning and execution of the expedition, and the long prevailing picture of Scott as the self-sacrificial British hero is thoroughly and justly shattered.

The Last Place On Earth is a now forgotten British mini-series that's worth remembering. Based on Roland Huntford's still controversial myth-shattering biography of Scott and Amundsen's race to the South Pole, it's the kind of thing which would be done in a rushed 2-3 hours at most today, but in 1985 got more than twice that running time over seven episodes. The benefits are amazing. It may take three episodes for the rivals to hit Antarctic waters, but Trevor Griffiths' excellent script, despite a few liberties with history, chronology and supporting characters (particularly Brian Dennehy's Frederick Cook, both men prone to dramatic license), has enough room for its characters' flaws and virtues to be fully explored and quietly builds up real involvement.

Martin Shaw's Scott gets most of the flaws, though the show doesn't go quite so overboard with them as Huntford's book (to be fair, Scott's pomposity and ability to repeat disastrous mistakes gave him lots of ammo). But despite being played rather superbly with a charismatic twinkle in his eye by Sverre Anker Ousdal, Amundsen isn't perfect either, as his disastrously mismanaged false start and his jealousy and antagonism toward a more famous member of his expedition demonstrate. Although the story doesn't allow it to be explored, the final episode contains plenty of hints of the bitter man he would eventually become as his victory was increasingly overshadowed by the `glory' of Scott's failure.

Ferdinand Fairfax's direction is impressively cinematic, one episode boasting a complex uninterrupted travelling take that's almost up there with Touch of Evil if only on a technical level. There's a lot of familiar British actors when they were still little-knowns among the supporting cast - Hugh Grant, Bill Nighy, Michael Maloney, Pat Roach, Richard Wilson and one of the lesser Dr Whos, Sylvester McCoy (excellent here) among them - as well as the one-time star of guilty pleasure Song of Norway, Toralv Maurstead, looking considerably older than his years as an ill-starred member of Amundsen's expedition (for once, with the exception of Max Von's Sydow's Nansen, the Norwegians are played by real Norwegians). Per Theodor Haugen also makes his mark as Amundsen's brother, constantly left to deal with the details and itinerary of the everyday life the explorer cannot deal with and Stephen Moore quietly shines as Scott's only real friend. There are a couple of moments that don't really work - Scott glimpsing what he thinks is a cross at Cape Evans where his own memorial would later stand is shot far too literally and the very 80s rock scoring of Amundsen crossing the mountains to the plateau is horribly sub-Chariots of Fire - and none of Amundsen's team on the Polar trek itself ever become characters in their own right the way Scott's men do, but they're minor flaws. This has a 9.4 rating on the IMDB. It earned it.

Thankfully, unlike some recent mini-series releases, this hasn't been crudely cropped in fake widescreen but is in its original fullframe ratio, with all seven episodes presented with opening and closing titles over three discs. The quality isn't demo standard, but that's partially down to the original filmstock that was used (its look is typical of 70s-80s British TV), although the picture quality is noticeably sharper in the last two episodes. No extras.

The other reviews are on the mark with content: this is a superb film. My low rating is due solely to the poor production standards of the DVD set. No digital remastering here. The grainy transfer to DVD looks every bit of twenty years old. No sound enhancements either, only a single AC3 stereo channel. Worst of all, Alastair Cooke's episode introductions, which accompanied the series when it was originally shown on Masterpiece Theatre, have been eliminated, replaced with cheap graphic images of the production company's logo. Unfortunately, this is the only Region 1, NTSC-format of this important series that we are likely to get.

Finally, on DVD! This fine and factual treatment of the historic race to the South Pole between Roald Amundsen and Robert Falcon Scott is the best and most complete to date. Based on the book "The Last Place on Earth" by Roland Huntford, this handsome production gives us a non-biased and realistic look at the history, politics and personalities involved in the struggle for the South Pole. Here at last Roald Amundsen, the consummate polar explorer, gets his due while Scott and the over-rated Ernest Shackleton are placed in proper perspective. This marvelous production features a fine cast, an excellent script, and a magnificent score by Trevor Jones. Not to be missed!

I'm a fan of history, the History Channel and all things exploration on earth or the moon. The story of the expeditions to both poles of the earth have fascinated me since I owned my first globe as an elementary school pupil. I used to trace the routes of Byrd, Amundsen and Scott with my finger across the paper-covered sphere and later, I read all I could on Shackleton, Scott, Cook, Perry and Amundsen.

Years ago, Masterpiece Theater aired this seven part (six part back then) mini-series on the race to the Pole. It was based on Roland Huntford's worthy but controversial book. At the time, I was totally smitten with the series which was haunting in its tragedy and in its moral lessons about management and leadership.

I obtained this copy of the series on DVD and we found, 20 years later, that it was as fresh and stunning as when originally aired.

The music is excellent except for one overly 80's bit to cover a wordless section of skiing across the polar plateau. The South Pole has its own leitmotif, something rather like a ripoff of the Holy Grail leitmotif from Wagner's Parsifal, but what a good idea! The cinematography was for television, not film, so no letterboxing or wide shots, but the shots are cleverly framed to take advantage of the scenery and the camera angles are well conceived.

The acting is top-notch: Martin Shaw is perfect as the introspective, political man Scott, driven by his feelings of inadequacy and his Valkerie hero-worshipping wife Kathleen. Amundsen is played by Sverre Ousdal, a great Norwegian actor. Ousdal uses his face and body to express a man who is short on words but long on action and deep feeling. The rest of the cast is so eerily well-chosen that if you read the books by Cherry Garrard and the accounts of the Pole and look at the photos, you will be amazed.

The pace of the series quickens when the race between Scott and Amundsen is at its peak; and the horrors start piling on. There is no way you can come away from this series and not realize what an inhospitable place Antarctica really is. The film winds down after the shocking revelations on the fate of the Scott team, and leaves one thinking about men, their deeds and how it was when the earth still had wild places for men to be the first to set foot on.

If you love history, exploration, National Geographic, and brave deeds of men, you really have to have this series. I'd recommend it for older kids doing home schooling (it's a bit shocking for the very young...use your judgment here. Frostbitten feet and scurvy are dramatically but not overly horribly depicted and the fate of dogs and horses is something you'll have to explain to the kids as well.)


No extras on the DVD--this was filmed before VHS and DVD were available or widely distributed, so the studio did not have footage included for extra features.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

I love historical drama and this is one of the best. I am passionate about this production which I first saw in 1986. In spite of its length, I never tire of it. I've watched it many, many times. I learn and understand new things each time I watch it. It led me to read and study the book and many other books, documentaries and material on the subject. This movie is incredibly accurate, realistic and detailed. It inspires me in many ways. It teaches much about the value of meticulous preparation, the nature of honest leadership and human will.