It's not fair, I know, but when "Mountains of the Moon" concluded, it occurred to me that David Lean could have made a magnificent epic from this material.
As it is, director/co-writer Bob Rafelson has done well by it, but the film falls short of achieving the greatness he was obviously striving for.
Yet, how could he go too wrong with such an inherently fascinating story as this one about 19th-century explorer Richard Burton and his rivalry with former friend John Hanning Speke.
The film's shortcomings begin early, however. The first scenes introducing Burton and Speke start up without enough foundation, and those early moments are a bit confusing.
It does become more clear as we follow Speke and Burton, who are as opposite in their personalities as two people can be, after they meet and join forces for an ill-fated expedition in Africa (which provides the film's most brutally violent moments).
Eventually they are reunited for a fully equipped and funded Royal Geographic Society trip to find the source of the Nile river, the "mountains of the moon" as the natives call the remote inland area they seek.
The bulk of the film's first half chronicles their adventures and Burton's digressions as they head toward their goal, then the second half of the film focuses on the collapse of the relationship between Burton and Speke as their very different reasons for exploring become apparent.
Though the film's first half is obviously more flamboyant and provides more excitement, I found the second half much more interestingly dramatic. Though the entire film attempts to focus on the tenuous, perhaps homoerotic relationship between these two men, it is when they return to civilization and go their separate ways that the most compelling probing of their respective characters takes place.
And while Patrick Bergin and Iain Glen, the unknown actors chosen to play Burton and Speke, respectively, do very well, there's something missing from Bergin's interpretation of Burton. There's an essence, a power of screen presence that just doesn't come across here. Something that would certainly have helped make this larger-than-life adventurer seem more credible.
Burton was, after all, one of history's most diversified characters — an earthy intellectual with obsessions in many areas, ranging from the exploration of unknown geography to the collecting and translating of Eastern erotica.
And though "Mountains of the Moon" is certainly a rarity among modern movies in its scope and subject matter, the real question is not why make a movie about Burton at this point in time, but why haven't dozens of movies been made about Burton before now?
Despite its shortcomings, Rafelson, whose earlier work has been more confined stories — "Five Easy Pieces," "The Postman Always Rings Twice" — is to be congratulated for tackling a character who has too long eluded the movies. And for largely succeeding.
There are many memorable episodes here, ranging from the tribe that spits a liquid in the explorers' faces as a symbol of friendship, to Burton and Dr. Livingstone (I presume) showing off their scars in a form of oneupmanship. And there is, as moviegoers will see, a startling twist at the end, for those who don't already know, with regard to the discovery of the Nile's source.
Mention should also be made of Fiona Shaw's memorable turn as Burton's wife; she's his match in every way, and Rafelson allows us to see it without overstating the fact. (Shaw is also in the current "My Left Foot" as Christy Brown's doctor.) And of Paul Onsongo and Delroy Lindo as two African natives who play important roles in the second expedition.
"Mountains of the Moon" is rated a deserved R for extreme violence and profanity, as well as sex and nudity (in fact, if ever nudity seemed gratuitous, it is in two scenes in this film with Burton and his wife).