It had been many years since I first saw THE SAILOR WHO FELL FROM GRACE WITH THE SEA. I had forgotten what a beautiful film it is to look at and what a perverse film it is thematically. I’ve never read the original Yukio Mishima story but considering his life and death, I shouldn’t be surprised by the content. I hadn’t read the story before seeing the film and now I’m glad that I didn’t. A number of reviews talk about how it doesn’t work in its English setting transplanted from the Japanese. That may be but with nothing to compare it to, I found the English seaside setting most effective. Now, out of curiosity, I’ll seek out the original and make my own comparison.
The inherent British class system among the boys lends itself to the events that unfold. The head boy, known simply as “The Chief” (a wonderfully disturbing performance by Earl Rhodes), comes from a wealthy and privileged background. He is all intellect and no emotion making him a Nietzschean prototype who despises the weak and seeks perfection in all forms. The other boys, who aspire to his position and wishing to curry favor, hang on his every move and go along with him in each increasingly disturbing act that he commits. One of these boys, Jonathan (Jonathan Kahn), is the central character of the film for it is his connection with The Chief and with his widowed mother (Sarah Miles) that is the primary focus of SAILOR.
Despite the film’s great beauty (lovingly photographed by Douglas Slocombe) and evocative music from Johnny Mandel (MAS*H) or perhaps because of it, the film becomes increasingly uncomfortable to watch ***SPOILERS*** as we are invited to take part in voyeurism (the boy secretly watches his mother undress in her bedroom), dispassionate violence (the boys dissect the Chief’s house cat), and a final scene that saddened me. Perhaps that’s the point. Writer-director Lewis John Carlino started his career as a playwright (THE BRICK & THE ROSE) before becoming a screenwriter (THE MECHANIC) and occasional director (THE GREAT SANTINI, CLASS). He knows how to write dialogue and how to bring characters to life. My question is…Why these characters?
There is much food for thought here but most of it is of a very depressing nature. The love scenes between Miles and Kris Kristofferson are no longer scandalous just erotic and they heighten the impact the film ulltimately has. Back in 1976 this was considered a mainstream film that many people went to see (the spread in PLAYBOY didn’t hurt) and that was all but dismissed by critics. Today it would be an arthouse indie that would garner critical awards and audience indifference (think NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN). Along with A CLOCKWORK ORANGE it remains one of the most pessimistic movies ever made. Although well done, I have no desire to see it again.
The Capsule Critic 