Corsarios de Florida

I caught this movie on TCM today and found myself throughly entertained. To my knowledge this was my first ever viewing. The cast was simply superb.....practically everyone. Fredric March was so dashing and effective, I had never realized what a talent this guy was. He even pulled off a French accent flawlessly....whoa! This version of The Buccaneer is simply far superior to the 1958 film which I've seen a couple of times. There was real magic in Hollywood during the 1930s, I'm not sure that town has ever totally recaptured what they had back then. This movie definitely belongs in there with the A list that includes Gone With the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, Captain Blood, Beau Geste, Tarzan, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Gunga Din, King Kong and all the rest. The script was by a GREAT historical novelist named Harold Lamb. This was a huge bonus for this movie. The story sticks fairly close to history and has a terrific pace. My only complaints are relatively minor....the battle at the end didn't quite live up to my expectations(though it probably did realistically portray the excitement and confusion of the participants) and Lafitte could have simply told the truth about the ship Corinthian which was sunk on the orders of another Pirate, not Lafitte. This was the reason Lafitte got chased away from New Orleans (according to the movie at least) Great movie, great leading man, great writing, great cast, great direction, great sets.....a classic. Oh yes, the actor portraying Andrew Jackson was dead on.....not that I have actually met Old Hickory mind you!

NEWS! This title has just been released in a shoddy copy on DVD. Wait until TCM shows it instead. I watched this film a couple of times while working on my own script. The War of 1812 is pretty much forgotten, except in Canada where it is part of the national identity. This is one of only three films that I know of in that setting.

Jeanie Macpherson writes well. From the Burning of Washington to the treachery of people in high places (Senator Crawford may be fictional, but cowardly generals, smugglers and spies plagued the Northern Frontier earlier in the War--aka TREASON), the plot twists result in scenes of true emotional power. The ending is brilliantly foreshadowed so that the audience sees it coming like a runaway train. And the dialogue? Pay attention to the scene in which the pirates do not want to fight with the U.S. but with the British: March is given electric lines to speak. The only thing that I did not like was Dominique You's character. He is a bit too cartoonish.

Fredric March gives a very good performance as Lafitte, but Franciska Gaal is wonderful as the dutch girl who loves him.

The battle scenes hold up quite well today. This is obviously made by the same director as the magnificent The Crusades and Cleopatra. Its pace is also quicker than the first half of The Ten Commandments (1956).

DeMille was at his peak in the 1930s.

An excellent action movie with good pacing and development. There is never a dull moment. The movie shows more of Laffite's business dealings than with his pirate actions. In actual fact Laffite was quite a businessman that the governor did want captured and did put a price on his head of $500. Laffite did respond to that but not for the $10,000 the movie stated. One must never accept a movie's version of history but "The Buccaneer" does a quite credible job of drawing you into life in 1814 in New Orleans. Laffite was offered $30,000 and other inducements by the British and the Americans did not believe him (this was very accurate). His base in Barataria was destroyed though at a later time. When the battle was over he did go back to sea as a pirate. His days in New Orleans were indeed over. So, sit back and enjoy a movie that is good entertainment and is also pretty good history. This movie is proof that you can learn history from the movies.

This a classic swashbuckling film....seemingly a film very typical for Cecil B. De Mille. Fredric March is superb in his role as Jean Lafite....also interesting to see Anthony Quinn as early as 1938. Do enjoy this piece of cinematic artwork. One must also remember that historically Andrew " Old Hickory " Jackson was eventually a U. S. President. Personally...I feel that March, Errol Flynn and Burt Lancaster (The Crimson Pirate) are the actors that best typified " Pirates " in classic Hollywood. Although today credit must be given to Johnny Depp in both of the Pirates of the Caribbean pictures which I thoroughly enjoyed and which of course reminded me of the above-mentioned actors and their films

This film was pretty much what I expected from Cecil B. DeMille. In almost all of his films, you have a huge cast (this time in the thousands), elaborate sets and props, a rather silly romance and a desire for action and expense over realism and historical accuracy. Many love his films, but I find most of them time-passers.

As for the romance, this film features two for Jean Lafitte (Frederic March), though the dominant one involves Franciska Gaal. She's rather a comic book-like figure--more a caricature than a believable person and this is pure DeMille, as is the romantic dialog. At least it was much better than the lines uttered in THE TEN COMMANDMENTS by the Princess, but this isn't saying much. DeMille just had no ability to convey real people and real romance--he was more the epic action and spectacle sort of director.

Action-wise, there are some very long and well made scenes, though oddly, the naval sequences were awfully tepid. The battle scenes on land were handled much better and the costumes looked very nice.

Historically speaking, this isn't a bad film but it does contain many inaccuracies. Apart from glamorizing Jean Lafitte (who was a smuggler and total jerk), it seemed to exaggerate his importance to the Battle of New Orleans. While he did "rat" on the English by telling the Americans of their invasion plans, most accounts place the number of troops he sent to fight to be just a few dozen at most (though they were gunners--a welcome addition). Also, the fact that this battle actually took place a month AFTER the peace treaty was signed wasn't mentioned--as communication was such in 1815 that the British and Americans could not let the troops know that the war had ended for several more weeks. This made the outcome of the battle unimportant (but certainly not to the soldiers involved) and would have taken away from the excitement of the film, so it was simply omitted.

While I am complaining, I should also point out that the film never seemed to end. While it logically should have ended when this battle concluded, it continued and greatly lessened the film's impact and made me fidgety.

Overall, there's a lot of action (I'd give this an 8), some dopey romance and dialog (I'd give them a 3), some good and bad historically speaking (I'd give it a 5) and the movie was overly long. Overall, I think a score of 5 is merited. A decent time-passer but that's about all.