A prime example of the nearly-forgotten swashbuckling epic, "Captain Blood" is a darn entertaining, fun film that is unfortunately saddled with the production values of 1930s film-making. "Captain Blood" is not the best pirate movie of its time, nor is it the best Errol Flynn film . . . but it's still extremely good, and it contains one of Errol Flynn's best performances. If nothing else, it's a great example of a breed of movies that are no longer made -- but maybe they should be.
"Captain Blood" is basically a Robin Hood revenge-type story -- Errol Flynn plays Dr. Peter Blood, an English physician unjustly convicted of treason and sentenced to slavery in the West Indies. Relying on only courage and brains, he escapes from his captors and becomes the legendary pirate known as Captain Blood, a brilliant swordsman and seaman whose crew is comprised of several of his fellow former slaves. Olivia de Havilland plays Arabella Bishop, the dashing pirate captain's romantic interest (and niece of the evil plantation owner and slaver, Colonel Bishop, who is played by Lionel Atwill). Sparks fly between Captain Blood and Arabella as their tempestuous relationship builds, and the conflict between Blood and builds as well as the pirate captain and his crew start to not only believe that they can fight Colonel Bishop, but they can win . . . .
The story itself is very simplistic, almost to the point where it hurts the film. This is more a product of the time in which "Captain Blood" was made rather than the specific script; most films of this era tend to be a little lean on plot. Still, there's never any back story in "Captain Blood", never any reasons given as to why characters are who they are, or why they do certain things. Every scrap of dialogue in "Captain Blood" is just enough to propel the characters into the next scene . . . and nothing more. The story itself zips along from beginning to end in a crystal clear line -- no detours, no side stories, nothing else of interest but the main story. For the most part, this works -- and because the basic story is very good, it doesn't hurt the film too much -- but fleshing out both story and dialogue, even to a small extent, could've pushed a very good story into the realms of greatness. (However, there are a few inexcusable bad moments; the supposedly 'serious' scene where Blood learns that all his fellow rebels just 'happen' to be former sailors in the Royal Navy is just laughably unbelievable and stupid.)
The direction and production value of "Captain Blood" are also uneven -- again, most of this can be excused by the era in which the film was made . .. but not all of it. Most of the film was shot on sound stages, including the scenes where Blood and his crew are sailing the high seas. Some of it works -- but there's several scenes where it's painfully obvious that the "background" is little more than a painted sheet. The action sequences vary from excellent to fair -- the swordfighting, somewhat surprisingly, is on a par with today's films, and the fights between soldiers and pirates hold up nicely as well. As for the scenes involving Captain Blood's ship . . . well, what can you say? They're clearly models, but ILM wasn't exactly around to pick up the effects budget. I found it slightly disappointing, though, that some of the direction and selected shots during the action was so flat -- director Michael Curtiz (who also directed Casablanca) is one of the more stylish directors of the time, but in "Captain Blood", a few of the scenes that should've been gripping are instead are closer to dull. In fact, without Errol Flynn's flash and flair for the heroic, some of the best moments might've been boring. In a roundabout way, "Captain Blood" is definitely a tribute to Flynn's undeniable talents; he elevates this film from something that would've been mildly fun into some quite memorable.
Equally impressive -- and, again, transcending all story and production weaknesses -- is the magnificent on-screen chemistry between Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland. "Captain Blood" is the first of their many films together, and there's a certain screen magic between the two the second they first meet. The playful banter, the genuine affection, the caustic wit and the fiery on/off relationship between the two . . . well, it's nothing short of amazing. I'd be hard-pressed to think of a modern equivalent of their on-screen chemistry; it's truly breathtaking to watch. It's also good enough to make otherwise insipid, boring dialogue sound good, and enough to make good dialogue unforgettably great. Most of the actors in "Captain Blood" are good but basically forgettable; fortunately, Flynn and de Havilland are far from forgettable. Without their phenomenal performances, I don't think "Captain Blood" would be a particularly well-remembered film today.
All in all, "Captain Blood" is still quite an enjoyable, if dated, film. Well worth watching, especially for the scenes between Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland. Also, if you've never seen an Errol Flynn film before, I'd definitely recommend both "The Adventures of Robin Hood" and this film. "Captain Blood" , while definitely a throwback to an older age of moviemaking, is still a cut above most of the action films being made today. Grade: B+.
"Captain Blood" is basically a Robin Hood revenge-type story -- Errol Flynn plays Dr. Peter Blood, an English physician unjustly convicted of treason and sentenced to slavery in the West Indies. Relying on only courage and brains, he escapes from his captors and becomes the legendary pirate known as Captain Blood, a brilliant swordsman and seaman whose crew is comprised of several of his fellow former slaves. Olivia de Havilland plays Arabella Bishop, the dashing pirate captain's romantic interest (and niece of the evil plantation owner and slaver, Colonel Bishop, who is played by Lionel Atwill). Sparks fly between Captain Blood and Arabella as their tempestuous relationship builds, and the conflict between Blood and builds as well as the pirate captain and his crew start to not only believe that they can fight Colonel Bishop, but they can win . . . .
The story itself is very simplistic, almost to the point where it hurts the film. This is more a product of the time in which "Captain Blood" was made rather than the specific script; most films of this era tend to be a little lean on plot. Still, there's never any back story in "Captain Blood", never any reasons given as to why characters are who they are, or why they do certain things. Every scrap of dialogue in "Captain Blood" is just enough to propel the characters into the next scene . . . and nothing more. The story itself zips along from beginning to end in a crystal clear line -- no detours, no side stories, nothing else of interest but the main story. For the most part, this works -- and because the basic story is very good, it doesn't hurt the film too much -- but fleshing out both story and dialogue, even to a small extent, could've pushed a very good story into the realms of greatness. (However, there are a few inexcusable bad moments; the supposedly 'serious' scene where Blood learns that all his fellow rebels just 'happen' to be former sailors in the Royal Navy is just laughably unbelievable and stupid.)
The direction and production value of "Captain Blood" are also uneven -- again, most of this can be excused by the era in which the film was made . .. but not all of it. Most of the film was shot on sound stages, including the scenes where Blood and his crew are sailing the high seas. Some of it works -- but there's several scenes where it's painfully obvious that the "background" is little more than a painted sheet. The action sequences vary from excellent to fair -- the swordfighting, somewhat surprisingly, is on a par with today's films, and the fights between soldiers and pirates hold up nicely as well. As for the scenes involving Captain Blood's ship . . . well, what can you say? They're clearly models, but ILM wasn't exactly around to pick up the effects budget. I found it slightly disappointing, though, that some of the direction and selected shots during the action was so flat -- director Michael Curtiz (who also directed Casablanca) is one of the more stylish directors of the time, but in "Captain Blood", a few of the scenes that should've been gripping are instead are closer to dull. In fact, without Errol Flynn's flash and flair for the heroic, some of the best moments might've been boring. In a roundabout way, "Captain Blood" is definitely a tribute to Flynn's undeniable talents; he elevates this film from something that would've been mildly fun into some quite memorable.
Equally impressive -- and, again, transcending all story and production weaknesses -- is the magnificent on-screen chemistry between Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland. "Captain Blood" is the first of their many films together, and there's a certain screen magic between the two the second they first meet. The playful banter, the genuine affection, the caustic wit and the fiery on/off relationship between the two . . . well, it's nothing short of amazing. I'd be hard-pressed to think of a modern equivalent of their on-screen chemistry; it's truly breathtaking to watch. It's also good enough to make otherwise insipid, boring dialogue sound good, and enough to make good dialogue unforgettably great. Most of the actors in "Captain Blood" are good but basically forgettable; fortunately, Flynn and de Havilland are far from forgettable. Without their phenomenal performances, I don't think "Captain Blood" would be a particularly well-remembered film today.
All in all, "Captain Blood" is still quite an enjoyable, if dated, film. Well worth watching, especially for the scenes between Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland. Also, if you've never seen an Errol Flynn film before, I'd definitely recommend both "The Adventures of Robin Hood" and this film. "Captain Blood" , while definitely a throwback to an older age of moviemaking, is still a cut above most of the action films being made today. Grade: B+.