Best movie of this year hands down!

Such a frustrating disappointment

Must See Movie...

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

I first saw this on the original broadcast dates back in the Eighties. It's a fantastic series, showing Many well known (and not so known at the time) British actors outside of their usual Genre.Martin Shaw as Scott Slyvester McCoy as Bowers. Bill Nighy as Meares Hugh Grant as Cherry-GarrardTHe whole series is view-able on you tube in something like 10 minute clips.Unfortunately the howling over the reputation of Scott as portrayed in the Book this drama is based upon seems to have overshadowed the conversion of the book to the screen. The author's work is heavily biased against Scott as to how wrongly or rightly depends on how much spin from each side a reader is prepared to accept. I would recommend enjoying the screen adaption of the book as exactly that and if you care to look deeper into the historical story, read more than the book this is based on.

So, here we go again - Scott had it harder than Amundsen, Amundsen was simply doing a "stunt", and so Scott was the more "noble".If you compare their diaries (and you can now, as Huntford did), Scott stayed in his tent on days when Amundsen and his crew did their fifteen miles (they did fifteen miles a day unless they were completely blizzard-bound - some days in their fur underwear and nothing else). And they had the same weather on nearly the same days. Scott started later, since his teams couldn't travel when it was really cold, so he was out on the land-mass later than Amundsen by nearly a month (which is why he encountered colder temperatures). Scott assumed that changing his headcount from four to five men at the last minute would make no difference in the food supply when they'd very carefully planned exactly how much food they'd need for a four-man team, with no contingency for delays. Amundsen ensured that he'd have at least double the amount of food and fuel he'd need for the whole trip.As to dogs and ponies - Scott didn't like dogs, because he didn't understand them, either how to work with them, nor how to drive them. The first time he saw dogs being driven properly was on the barrier by Cecil Meares. The scenes where Meares drives past them, and is later found relaxing, waiting for the rest of the teams to arrive are taken verbatim from Scott's and Meares' diaries. Ponies are NOT appropriate for the Antarctic environment, since they have to pull their own food for every mile they're going to walk. Dogs could eat seal and penguin, both of which are native to the Antarctic; they could also eat each other, if necessary.Amundsen had to trail-blaze an entirely new route, through and over some of the most difficult terrain the Antarctic has to offer. Scott had a map of his route up to the last ninety-seven miles. The Beardmore glacier (Scott's route) is a nice, long, slow climb to the Pole. The Axel Heiberg glacier requires planes flying over it to use their maximum rate of climb; Amundsen and his crew pioneered a route through the ice falls of the Heiberg in less than a week.And yes, there was a conspiracy to tart up Scott's diaries for public consumption. Scott's widow, Kathleen, worked with J.M. Barrie (of Peter Pan fame) to edit his diaries, making him more of a heroic figure, and cutting out the more disparaging comments Scott made about his companions.Planning is everything: Scott and his companions died of starvation and scurvy; Amundsen and his crew gained weight on their trip.I'm not saying that Scott wasn't a brave fellow or that his journey was less than that of Amundsen. I can't imagine man-hauling a 300 lb sledge for hundreds of miles. The tragedy of Scott is that, had he done his research (as Amundsen had), he wouldn't have had to, and he might have beat Amundsen to the pole.

I first saw "The Last Place on Earth" back when it was first broadcast in the U.S. Having just finished Roland Huntford's "Scott and Amundsen" at that time, I thought the mini-series was terrific.While I still agree with those who think that it was excellent, I now question the series's accuracy. My chief criticism has to do with the characterization of the two men as representing two different social classes and the characterization of Amundsen as someone who would say that his emotion upon reaching the Pole was joy in simply being alive. He was a darker, more complex, and more ambitious man than he is shown to be. By the same token, Scott was not an upper-class twit. The race for the Pole was not a class war.The other reviews have covered many of the other ways in which the accuracy of the series could be criticized. There have been many facts uncovered which were not available to Huntford and the series. But how often does one get to immerse oneself for hours in a film about Antarctic history? The pleasures of the series make me overlook its errors.I wish someone would make a film of Ted Tally's play "Terra Nova."

This series was a superb production based on Roland Huntford's book. For many years Scott was portrayed as a hero, who died on his return from the Pole. In Death he overshadowed Amundsen's achievement of being first to the pole. Huntford's book and this production, set out to dispell the legend of Scott the Hero.The start of the series, gives an insight into the direction the whole production goes. It shows Amundsen staying with Eskimos, while Scott is facing the prospect of a court marshall. There can be little doubt in reality that the British Expedition was no match for the experienced collection of Norwegian Explorers. If it had been a sporting event, it would have been classed as a thrashing. After all Amundsens was halfway back to his base when Scott reached the Pole.The different ideas of the two men is made clear. Amundsen knows he must be first to the pole. He can't afford to be second. He has told his country and government that he is headed for the north pole. He knows that no chances can be taken in a place as unforgiving as the Antartic. Scott however believes that the pole is his by rights, this is probably due to the mentality of the British at that period of time when they had the largest empire the world had seen. He takes only enough supplies to make it there and back, and when he falls behind schedule he starves to death.It portrays Scotts rivalry with Shakelton, and why Scott pushed on to the Pole, as he felt he had to do better than Shakelton. For many years Scott was considered the Greater Hero. Nowadays it is reversed with Shakelton's concern for his men, is looked on more favourable, thans Scott's reckless actions to push on to the prize.For all of Scott's mistakes, the show does not go into the bad luck that Scott suffered at the Hands of the weather. Yes, it does snow in the Antartic all the time, but the temperature in the March that year was well below the average for that time of year. Would Scott had made it back in more favourable conditions, we'll never know, but Amundsen knew it was not a place to take chances.In summing up, this was a superb production, with good acting, directing and setting. I recommend anyone who enjoyed this to read the book as well. Also to read Scott's diary, as it is a masterpiece. Maybe he was more suited to writing than to exploring.