User reviews

In reviewing a film like The Adventures Of Martin Eden we have the benefit of over 60 years of hindsight and a whole career of Glenn Ford to look back on. Considering the type of roles that Ford mostly did in his career one could conclude he was typecast. Someone like John Garfield or later on Paul Newman would have been perfect in the part of the protagonist who is author Jack London.

Yet in Peter Ford's biography of his father, Glenn won the approval of London's widow Charmian. She said he quite reminded her of her late husband who died at 50 in 1916 and she even let him hear some gramophone recordings of Jack so he could play him to perfection.

What Charmian thought of the finished product we don't know because that Peter Ford didn't mention. Not hardly his father's fault but the film is nothing like the novel. Maybe at some point we'll get a true version with someone like Russell Crowe in the title role.

Glenn is a native genius, rough, unschooled with a burning desire to tell stories of and about the working masses with realism, not unlike Emile Zola in France a generation or two earlier. He goes to sea and gets to serve under a brutal captain in Ian MacDonald. One of his shipmates Stu Erwin rebels and gets 10 years in jail for it. Glenn's kept a diary, but can't get it admitted to court as evidence.

That diary is the beginning of his career, but he still wants to see justice for Erwin. Glenn's life also has time for romance with Erwin's sister Claire Trevor and ship owner's daughter Evelyn Keyes who though she likes Glenn is ultimately daddy Pierre Watkin's daughter.

Conditions on ships were as brutal as London describes them. Other than that this is not Jack London's book. Had he been alive I doubt he would have given his imprimatur to the finished product.

That being said Ford gives a fine performance in a role he never would have been considered for later in his career. He's ably assisted by Trevor and Keyes and the rest of the cast.

But this film definitely needs a more true remake and one that reflects London's rather pessimistic vision.

This certainly is as remote from Jack London's 1909 novel "Martin Eden" as the title - the novel's title doesn't promise an adventure - the movie's plot bears no resemblance to the novel - with the framing story of a brutal ship's captain seemingly borrowed from London's 1904 novel "The Sea-Wolf" - within that frame - the movie dwells on Eden's efforts to succeed at writing - but in the movie's case - it's a barely forgivable distraction from his real duty - to get his friend out of jail

the novel's fascinating recounting of Martin Eden's struggles to succeed at writing (based on Jack London's own journey) - lacks the high drama the movie has - which explains why the movie probably strayed so far from the novel - a faithful rendering of it would have been more quiet and intellectual - and probably would have drawn fewer paying customers

yet i fidgeted thru out the movie - it was too alien to my memories of the novel - i missed the early 1900s setting of the novel with its slower paced life - contrasting with the frenetic 1940's film noir milieu of the movie - and i missed the widening intellectual perspectives that Eden's' self-education brought about

in and of itself - the movie's okay - with a simple plot that's predictable all the way to the end - with an occasional fresh twist - and the actors are up to the script - but there's almost nothing reminiscent of Jack London or Martin Eden

Glenn Ford gives a rousing performance as the title character. This was still early in his career, before the actor settled into his more familiar low-key film persona. But his spirit here is well placed since Eden has to struggle against social forces far stronger than he. Based on Jack London's autobiography, the screenplay shows how narrow the literary parameters were in London's day. Fiction served mainly as escapism for the leisure class and was a long way from the kind of raw reality Eden sought to portray. Naturally, the moneyed class didn't want to read about how tough life was for the industrial workingman. Thus, more familiar types of literary realism, such as London-Eden's, were generally suppressed. This is an important part of the screenplay and offers a glimpse of the barrier certain kinds of authors faced in getting published.

The movie's central crux, however, is Eden's having to choose between staying with his working class roots, symbolized by Connie (Trevor), or ascending to the moneyed class with Ruth (Keyes). On a more abstract plane, it's also a contest between Truth with a capital T, on one side, and social position, on the other. Thus, it's also a movie of conflicting ideals.

Basically, the movie starts fast, sags somewhat in the middle, and rev's-up for the climax. In fact, the first part, aboard ship, amounts to a hard act to follow. Frankly, I could have done without some of the ritual brawling with Raglan (MacDonald), which seems added mainly for action's sake. Nonetheless, it's a revealing little film with an energetic turn from headliner Ford and a good glimpse of the literary world, circa 1900.

The story begins with a man (Stu Irwin) about to be sentenced for leading a mutiny. An idealistic crew member, Martin (Glenn Ford), stands up and announces that he has evidence which could exonerate the accused. But, inexplicably, the judge, prosecutor and EVEN THE LAWYER FOR THE DEFENSE refuse to hear Martin. This seemed odd to say the least.

In the next scene, Martin storms a fancy party being held by the head of the shipping company he and the convicted man worked for during the mutiny. He demands that the owner listens to him...which he seems reticent to do. But a famous author is at the party as well as a young lady...and they leave with Martin to hear his evidence. The evidence is Martin's own diary...which makes you wonder if the diary is important at all, as Martin could just as soon could have testified what he knew instead of insisting folks read his diary.

Martin then reads the diary and there is about a 15 minute flashback scene. In it, the captain of the ship is shown as a cruel man. He's violent, physically and verbally abusive and feeds the crew literal garbage. It's not at all surprising when the crew rebels after the captain ended up killing a young mate aboard the craft. Yet, inexplicably, no board of inquiry investigates the case (or at least it's never mentioned in the film). Surely, in 1942 a captain killing a crew member would have necessitated SOME sort of hearing!! And, with the crew insisting the captain was a murderer...well that couldn't just be swept under the rug in the 20th century! This wasn't the 1700s and the famous Mutiny on the Bounty!! And, the court refusing to hear testimony from the crew in the trial simply made no sense. But the famous author apparently never thought of any of these things and he encourages Martin to forget about everything and try writing fictional stories that make people feel happy!! Huh?!

This story apparently was INSPIRED from a Jack London novel...the same guy who wrote "The Sea Wolf". Perhaps this story, at least in its original form, might have made sense. In fact, I read a summary of London's serialized story...and NONE of this that I mentioned above was in his story!!!! The screenplay just left me asking too many questions...and the plot simply resembled Swiss cheese since it had so many holes! I am sure many watching it in 1942 also felt the same way...and despite some good acting and Columbia Pictures' polish, the script isn't even second-rate...that would be an improvement. It's simply illogical. So illogical that the love story and Martin's writing career just didn't seem important.

The quasi-autobiographical Martin Eden by Jack London is a haunting novel. The issues that emerge in the book give credence to London's likely suicide, in spite of the several protests of his heirs. The film here remains faithful to the story, i.e., a young man struck with the desire to be a writer and struggling with his own feelings of inadequacy and economic struggles. Glen Ford is great as Martin Eden, the rough-hewn genius whose work is plagiarized by a well known writer, Ian MacDonald's Raglan, and whose claims of authenticity are doubted by the woman he loves. Claire Trevor is great as the haughty rich girl, Connie and Stu Erwin does well as her brother, Joe. The film ends on a bright note, with Eden's success taken as a matter of course. The book ends on a very pessimistic note with Eden's suicide and his quest for virtue terminated. London's message in the book is a confused one, i.e., how could anyone know the real person under all that success and fame? Sadly, we must conclude London didn't know that man under his celebrity. Eden's life, like that of London, smacks of tragedy, while the film goes on with Eden living happily ever after. This film was made just before WW2. Glen Ford went on to distinguish himself in the US Navy, although he was a Canadian.

The first time I saw this movie was in the early forties, when I was fourteen years old, the part I remembered best was the line; you ask for a dime at a time, and then the fist fights as boy's and as men, life aboard a ship. And I always liked the acting of Ian MacDonald as a heavy.

Claire Trevor another favorite of mine, as the girl who was always faithful, and stuck with her man even though she was losing him.

Evelyn Keyes as the haughty rich girl as one reader said.

The girl who had everything, Stu Erwin is good too and the little boy whom I did not recognize,'till the closing credits rolled Dickie Moore. And Eden's goodbye to Raglan; he said a dime at a time and to me it looked like they parted as friendly enemies.

I had been looking for this movie ever since I got my first BETA-MAX VTR as they were first called(Video Tape Recoders)I got my copy last week and I've really enjoyed it. "Boompa" kingcody3@comcast.net

"Martin Eden" was not my favourite novel by Jack London but rather the contrary, one of the few I enjoyed and liked the least. The film is different as actually an effort to bring out all that is good in the book and give it a better conclusion. Although Jack London's widow approved of Glenn Ford as Martin Eden, I don't think Jack London himself would have approved of the way his book was altered.

It's a bleak and rather egocentric story of the struggle of a budding author who only finds adversities, disappointments and injustice in life and allows this kind negative realism to get the better of him, refusing any other way out than fighting hard against it in an uncompromising personal crusade with his life full of only reasons for bitterness as a self-consuming never-ending fuel. In the film Martin Eden himself does not commit suicide, but his admired idol and senior mentor Carl Brissenden does, when he finds himself betraying his own ideals of being true to the truth. That scene is actually the most interesting one in the film and most worth considering. The film is well made, being consistent in its rough hardcore brutality and dark and bleak realism, but there are other Jack London films as well that also focus on the rough and brutal side of Jack London's life and likewise fail to make any sucess. You can't make a success on stubbornly persistent self-centred fixation like some fanaticism of the ego, which everyone who bets on this horse never seems to learn. Martin Eden of the book ultimately commits suicide. Glenn Ford as Martin Eden in this film does not, and it might be a better solution to the story, but it is not Jack London.