BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Gareth
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 07:55 PM

Terribus

In 1812 one man for every 200 inhabitants of the British Isles was serving in the fleet.

Yes the press, the magistrates and the 'quota men' produced a large proportion of the crews, hence my previous comments on training.

What must be not forgot is that the basic naval diet was ptobably better than that of the industrial worker at the time, and the discipline no harsher.

BTW - "Spanish Ladies" forebitter - Yes, but also a Pilots "Rutter" or memnonic (SP)

To test this plot the points or landfalls on a chart.

My first post on the 'Cat was on this pint.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Gareth
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 07:41 PM

Concur Walrus - also recomend C S Forester's "The Age of Fighting Sail" aka "The Naval War of 1812"

The big American Frigates were in a class of thier own, with regard to the 'Spar Decks', Scantlings and sheer size.

But then Humphries had to live with his political restrictions, a similar situation arose with the Kriegsmarine "Pocket Battleships", constrained by treaty to under 10,000 tons.

Admitedly they were armed with 6 X 11 inch guns in two turrets. But I wonder if they would not have been more effective as commerce raiders with 4 X 8 inch guns, and the freed tonnage used for extra stores and fuel ?

Turning back to the big USA frigates - never underestimate the effects that the two year enlistment program, and good pay had.

A USA Commander such as Decature, or Rodgers, did not have to spend the first months of a Commission training his crews in basic seamanship. He could concentrate on Gunnery, not basic evolutions.

With the notable exception of Phillip Broke (HMS Shannon), those frigates and Razee's on the North American Station, were undermanned, and undertrained - And as the "Gurrierie" and "Macedonian" showed, not trained to play (and a quote from O'Brian) "Long Bowls with the Enemy"

The "Java" was a different case, being used as a transport, and newly commissioned.

Or have I trodden on some toes here ?

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: The Walrus
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 07:29 PM

"...Sailors in those days must have been either pressed or mad. I can't inmagine anyone of normal constitution WANTING to go to sea..."

Wasn't it Dr Johnson who said something about "No man becomes a sailor who has the wit to be in prison, for being a sailor is to be in prison with the added risk of drowning"

I wonder if he realised that the fleet pressed from prisons?


Walrus

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: The Walrus
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 07:24 PM

DonMeixner

"...Just a thought here. Are Frigates in the American navy of this same time period significantly diferent from the Royal navy? My information says yes. So there may be some confusion here in this thread because of two diferent navy's definitions..."

Don,

The US definition of a frigate was similar to that of he navies of Europe, however, as I understand it, there was certain internal political opposition to the USA having ships-of-the-line.
The situation was resolved after a fashion by a Mr Humphries, who designed a class of 'Frigates' (acceptable to oppponants of a l-o-b navy), which were among the biggest in their class anywhere in the world ('Constitution' class?) and capable of being 'over-gunned' (given more guns than their nominal rate) if the need applied.
In order to fight ships of this size, the Royal Navy had to have bigger ships (74s?) 'Rezeéd' - cut down to single deck ships for use as frigates - these, of course, would still not have the speed of a purpose built frigate, but at least they could live in a fight with one of the Huimphries ships.
Other American frigates were of a more 'conventional' size, and fought actions without the advantge of size, and with various degrees of success - depending on the qualities of their captains and crews on one hand, and of their opponents on the other.
I recommend "The eyes of the Fleet" by Anthony Price, as worth a read.

Walrus

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Amos
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 07:01 PM

The American navy is famous for contributing the deathless expression (from ship-borne cavalry) "Aww, frigate and the horse it came in on!"

A

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: DonMeixner
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 06:33 PM

Just a thought here. Are Frigates in the American navy of this same time period significantly diferent from the Royal navy? My information says yes. So there may be some confusion here in this thread because of two diferent navy's definitions.

Don

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Les from Hull
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 01:19 PM

I know what you mean, EBarnacle, but a frigate carries its guns on the upper deck. The gun deck has no guns.

A 28 would usually have 24 9 pounders on the upper deck and 4 3 pounders on the quarterdeck. In the 1780s the smaller guns were replaced by carronades. By 1807 there were only about half a dozen 28 gun frigates in active service.

Kim C - ship's fiddler was a very unofficial position. The only musicians were in the Marines (fife and drum). If someone could play a fiddle the first lieutenant may use him when hands were ordered to 'dance and skylark' (for exercise). Perhaps Barry Dransfield could have been transferred from the Bounty film!

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: GUEST,Kim C no cookie
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 12:32 PM

Well, all right, then. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 12:18 PM

I don't think there's any evidence of sailors thinking it unlucky to kill an albatross, prior to Coleridge.

And even in the Ancient Mariner, the first reaction of the sailors when the bird is shot is that it was a bird of ill omen, and that shooting it was a good idea. It's only when things go wrong with the voyage they decide it was unlucky to shoot it.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 12:13 PM

Hi Steve,

Rum disappeared from the RN late 1969, or early 1970 if memoryserves me correctly. I know they had taken the decision on its going, when somebody thought "Hey this is going to end, so we'd better think up some excuse to "Splice the main-brace" the birthday of one of the Queen's old Aunts (The one who lived at Carisbrooke Castle) was selected - for at least 30 minutes she was the most popular old dear alive in the Fleet.

After it had gone, while on Diving Course at HMS Vernon, we were asked to look at the screws on one of the Royal Corps of Transports LCT's at Gunwharf Quay next door to Vernon. After we'd finished we were sitting in crews mess onboard waiting for the boat to come back and pick us up (we were still in our diving gear) when one of the crew asked us if we'd like a drink. He then produced a demi-john three-quarters full of issue rum. We were amazed, his comment - "Oh yeah, we still get this stuff issued but it dosen't get drunk as nobody onboard likes it. Pearls before Swine - what a mess we were in by the time the time we did get picked up.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 10:58 AM

As regards the alcohol intake, in those days nobody drank water: it was likely to be teeming with nasty things like amoebas (the dysentery kind). Even schoolchildren drank small beer -- not very strong, but reasonably antiseptic. And a pint of rum could make even the greenest of several-years-in-the-cask water potable!

And of course, everyone drank too much if they could, anyway.

When did the RN stop the rum ration? Early fifties? The army had a rum ration in the First World War, too: If the sergeant steals your rum/Never mind!.

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: EBarnacle
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 09:55 AM

As of 1794, which Surprise most emphatically predates, as Aubrey served in her whilst a mid, the smallest frigates were 28 gun vessels, according to "The Frigates," James Henderson, CBE. Vessels of 20 and 24 guns were rated as post ships and were often sloops of war with a couple of guns added so that they were worthy of the dignity of a posted captain.

The actual number of guns, as mentioned above, does not truly relate to the rating. A 28 gun frigate, such as Surprise, had 28 guns on the main gun deck. The other guns were not counted in the rating.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 09:28 AM

One thing about the manning of warships of the period and the attractiveness of a naval career.

For Officers - Old established order of inheritance in the UK at that time:
- Eldest son inherits the lot
- Second eldest son goes to the Navy
- Third eldest son goes to the Army
- Fourth eldest son goes to the Church

For those on the Lower Deck, they were either volounteers, or pressed from shore or prison. In the early part of of the French Revolutionary Wars and Napoleonic Wars, somewhere between 60 & 80% of the Royal Navy's sailors were pressed. Why did people go? and what kept them there once they had been taken into a ship. Naemanson mentioned conditions ashore, conditions afloat in comparison had little to recommend it - hard living conditions, poor food, little or no opportunity to leave the ship, harsh discipline, strong likelyhood of death or injury. One advantage the RN had over the Army was the opportunity for prize money. Able Commanders with a reputation had no real problem recruiting. If such Commanders were fortunate enough to sail under independent orders, then officers and men stood to gain quite hansomely. Another lure, not so insignificant at the time, on offer from the Royal Navy was drink - lots of it - the daily allowance per man per day would absolutely stagger you - it certainly did them.

In the RN Museum in Portsmouth Dockyard there is this cartoon dating back to the late 1790's. The scene is of a British warship cleared for action, the captain notices a sailor knelt in prayer beside his gun. The Captain asks, "Are you a-praying for victory Jack" To which the sailor replies, " I'm a-prayin' Sir, that the distribution of enemy shot matches that of the prize money - the major share amongst the officers."

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: DonMeixner
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 09:03 AM

Kim it was a Marine who shot at the "Albatros". (Was it an Albatros?)

And as I haven't read Far Side of the World yet I don't if the whole Prize ship incident takes place in that book. (I just started the series with Master and Commander.) But do you all recall in "Captain Horatio HornBlower" Hornblower gives the Natividad to a Spainish despot thinking at the time they are at war with France and an ally of Spain. He only learns the opposite after the Natividad sails for El Salvador and Hornblower has to recaputer his prize.

The movie of "Captain Hornblower" probably is not as good as it could have been but the naval gunbattles were the best filmed until now and I think they still hold up well.

Don

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Kim C
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 08:32 AM

It may have been one of the Marines trying to shoot the albatross - I wasn't paying that close attention. But I had forgotten, until Howard reminded me, that according to seafaring tradition, it's bad luck to kill an albatross.... and sailors are a very superstitious lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 06:06 AM

Charley and others are perfectly correct when stating that chanties were not permitted onboard Royal Navy ships. The ships were worked either to direct verbal orders (As in the orders "two, six, heave) or to pipes (Bosun's Calls).

The "Rum, Sodomy and The Lash" thing was a Churchillian quote dating from the early days of last century when he backed Jackie Fisher's naval reforms. These reforms were bitterly contested by Beresford who stated that they (the reforms) were counter to the best traditions of the service (The Royal Navy). To which Churchill responded that the best traditions of the service are founded on "Rum, Sodomy and the Lash" and as such should not be viewed as being of any significant value.

I have not seen the film yet but will definitely go first opportunity I get.

"Spanish Ladies" pre-dates the French Revolutionary/Napoleonic era. I believe goes back to the mid 1700's and the time of Admiral Hawke.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 04:31 AM

I often have this image popping into my mind's eye of a ship's crew fot Nelson's time crowding round the "Rum, Sodomy and The Lash" section of the notice board, and saying things like "Oh bugger, he's put me down for sodomy again!", "Anybody want to swap their 'lash' for my 'rum?"

Mabe I should get out more!

I understand thet Capt Cook relaxed the rules on singing on his Australia-seeking voyage. One of his captains, William Bligh, wouldn't have it, though.

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Naemanson
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 02:41 AM

"Sailors in those days must have been either pressed or mad. I can't inmagine anyone of normal constitution WANTING to go to sea."

Life back then was hard no matter where you were. Life at sea was at least regular work and there was the opportunity to be proud of what you were. When ashore a proper Man O' War's man would be decked out in fine togs and have money in his pocket, a far cry from the thieves and beggars in the streets of the towns.

However, having said that, sailors in those days must have been either pressed or mad. I can't inmagine anyone of normal constitution WANTING to go to sea.

*Grin*

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: LadyJean
Date: 25 Nov 03 - 12:59 AM

In Master and Commander, O'Brian has the crew singing a chantey about Jack Aubrey, and his love affair with Admiral Hart's wife. Dear Jack is a flaming heterosexual, which is a good thing, because, as O'Brian also explains, sodomy was a capital offense in the Royal Navy.
O'Brian's sailors will eat anything, including alabtrosses. They don't read Coleridge.
"Master and Commander The Far Side Of The World" was a movie. I approach a movie made from one of my favorite books with extreme caution. I remember the Bakshi Lord of the Rings. But it is obvious that Russel Crowe loved the books too. I wondered how people who didn't know them would react.
Stephen is an introspective soul. O'Brian tells us what he's thinking, and that is what makes him truly interesting. But people like that don't work well in movies. I was glad that they did Stephen as well as they did. I was afraid he would come off as some foolish caricature.
The ending was deliciously O'Brian. The action heating up when you least expect it. I'm re reading the books now. Dear Jack, dear Stephen it is nice to see you again.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 11:47 PM

Kim C. - wasn't it one of the marines, not the crew, who was trying to shoot the albatross?

~ Becky in Tucson
-- Hey, this is the biggest thread-starting success I've had in my Mudcat career... an easy one, though. ;o)

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Melani
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 11:25 PM

SPOILER ANSWER--DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE!!!

Stephen expressed concern for the wounded men aboard the prize with no doctor but Higgens, his mate or whatever. Jack said he met the French doctor, and Stephen said he had died of fever six months ago. Remember the dead French captain?

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Nancy King
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 11:12 PM

By the way, O'Brian fans will be interested in a couple of articles in the current (December 2003) issue of Smithsonian magazine. One, titled "The Real 'Sea Wolf'," is about Thomas Cochrane, on whose remarkable naval career and exploits O'Brian based the character of Jack Aubrey. Cochrane captained a smallish vessel called "Speedy," comparable to Aubrey's "Surprise." Cochrane had many sea victories, but got into trouble on land. Sound familiar?

The other article is about O'Brian's life, which, it turns out, was not quite what he led people to believe.

Interesting stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 10:53 PM

Oooh they had one, I'm sure.. (a fiddler, that is)

What a fun flick!! I loved it muchly.

Got a giggle when the carpenter's mate kissed the figure head. Couldn't help thinking that the most common wound, battle or no must have been to the head. Bumping into all that huge oak beam stuff below decks.

Film made me wish I was back there then. Sailors in those days must have been either pressed or mad. I can't inmagine anyone of normal constitution WANTING to go to sea.

Yet, what an adventure it must have been for those who did love it, what a time.

I recommend the film. It is far too short.

CB

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: GUEST,Les B.
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 10:51 PM

Saw the film and enjoyed it, although I thought "Pirates of the Carribean" more entertaining. This film certainly captured the violence that must have been common during a naval battle. I liked both Jack & the doctor, and can imagine they had a very complex relationship in the books.   

OK - those of you who haven't seen the film - don't read any further.
SPOILER QUESTION ABOUT END OF MOVIE !!!!

What did the doctor say to Jack about the French doctor and the French captain that caused Jack to cancel the shore leave and pursue the French boat again ???   I had a hard time with the dialogue in the theater I attended. I got the general idea, but didn't understand the details ?? Thanks for any clarification.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Kim C
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 10:26 PM

Shouldn't they have had a ship's fiddler, though? And Aubrey don't count.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Nancy King
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 09:32 PM

Well, I thought the movie was just fine. Certainly not an adaptation of one particular book, but rather an amalgam of incidents and situations from several books in O'Brian's series. That seems reasonable enough to me, as the series is really just one long story, very episodic, with a core of characters continuing over many books plus others who appear for shorter times.   I thought the photography was great, and I liked the music, too. I do agree with artbrooks that some of the dialog was hard to hear.

I agree with O'Meara and artbrooks about the portrayal of the Maturin character – much too one-dimensional, and they left out any hint of his intelligence activities, which I think was one of the more interesting aspects of the books. But I can understand why all that was left out. I do think they made a bit too much of his complaining to Jack about going ashore. I don't remember them getting into quite such an argument about it in the books, though he was clearly disappointed on many occasions. Maybe they felt they had to make a big deal of it, to emphasize the irony of Maturin being the one to locate the enemy during a bird-watching foray.

LadyJean, just to set the record straight, in the books Maturin chewed coca leaves (as in cocaine), not cocoa, from which chocolate is made. For a long time in the books, he is also addicted to laudanum, which is the alcoholic tincture of opium. The addictive side of his personality in the books is just one more aspect that made him such a fascinating and complex character, which didn't come across in the movie.

I don't recall any shanties being used as work songs in the movie (though I think a couple of might have been sung when the men were at leisure), and that is correct – shanties were not sung on naval ships. In the books, the only time shanties were used for work was in "The Thirteen-Gun Salute," when some Orkneymen used a distinctive chant which fascinated Aubrey. At that time the Surprise was sailing as a Letter of Marque, not a Naval vessel, so Jack let them continue. (We discussed that episode in this thread).

Anyway, if you like action, see this movie! And if you think sailors had an easy life, this will set you straight.

Cheers, Nancy

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 08:14 PM

There are no chanties in the movie, in the sense of songs sung while working to maintain a rhythm. The sailors do sing while off watch on at least one occasion...it may have been Spanish Ladies...and one of the lieutenants gets in trouble for joining in.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Naemanson
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 06:47 PM

Since the comment about the Surprise being a frigate with only 28 guns has come up again I feel it only fair to point out that she was old when Aubrey got her. POB makes the point in the story that the she HAD been a frigate but now was considered too small to be a frigate considering that "modern" frigates generally had many more guns and were larger.

About chanties in the Royal Navy. Charley is right about them being banned. In the books you start to hear about chanties when Aubrey gets part of his crew from a fishing port and the Surprise (and Aubrey) are ostensibly no longer in the Navy. There are a couple of comments about how the men sing while working the lines.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: GUEST,Kim C no cookie
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 05:47 PM

My friend Howard said he had only one complaint, and that was that a seafaring man wouldn't go about trying to shoot an albatross.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Les from Hull
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 05:34 PM

Just got back to this thread.

A 28-gun ship would be a frigate still in this period, although most frigates being built for the Royal Navy were 32-gun or more. No 28s were built after 1783, although several were captured from enemies.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 01:26 PM

When an Australian talks about "making every English man stand tall" I think it's probably safaer to interpret this as tongue in cheek rather than as nationalism.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: JedMarum
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 01:03 PM

excellent analysis, Melani!

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Melani
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 12:48 PM

As an avid reader of all twenty books, I don't see how even the most dedicated O'Brian fan could find anything wrong with it. Both Jack and Stephen had some very weird contradictions, which is part of their charm, but makes them difficult to portray in a movie format. Jack was really, really good at fighting a ship and taking prizes, but tended to be a doof ashore, the sort that starts to tell a joke at dinner and messes up the punchline, etc. Stephen was brilliant, but weird and distracted, focussed so much on his own interests that after ten years at sea he just about knew the bow from the stern on a really good day. A little of this was brought out when he asked "What is the weather gage?" and Jack offered to explain it to him "again". And Russell Crowe played Jack very straight, leaving out that contradictory touch of silliness. When Russell Crowe talked about Nelson asking him to pass the salt, he clearly knew it was funny. In the book, Jack was perfectly serious in thinking it was the most wonderful thing that ever happened to him, while everyone else quietly giggled.

I think they did a really good job of portraying Stephen as a duck out of water (or maybe an eagle in the water? out of place, anyway) without bringing out his more unattractive side, which would have made him too hard for the audience to like.

Just for the record, I've seen it twice (had to go with different groups of friends), and will be seeing it again with family on Friday.

Charlie, isn't "Spanish Ladies" a forebitter?

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 12:05 PM

Same GUEST again or a different one this time?

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: JedMarum
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 10:19 AM

I saw the movie last night with my wife. We both enjoyed the film very much.

I agree with O'Meara on the portrayal of Maturan, but, like artbrooks - think they did as good a job as they could. Maturin, or at least the Maturin/Aubrey relationship is complex. The film could hint at the characters, but could not go into the detail without subverting the "made for hollywood audience" plot. The good Doctor really is the hero of the series, in my estimation - at least in night of ow he interacts with Aubrey and the adventures. Had they cast Crowe as Maturin, we'd have had a movie of a different sort.

I believe they really did a good job of telling their tale, showing a taste of the history and capturing the spirit of the books. It makes for a quite enjoyable movie!

Now - as for the story and its similarity to the books? It is truly an amalgamation of several stories. There are quotes and subplot taken directly from Desolation Island ("That makes two times now he's gotten behind me ... there won;t be a third"). I don;t remember Aubrey tangling with worthy French adevrsary, but perhaps I missed it. I believe the fractured skull operation that Maturin performed successfully was in Master and Commander - but not sure which novel got them to the Galapagos ... anyway, the story line was satisfactory.

As for the homophobic comments by Savage? The man is an ignorant loud mouth. He doesn't understand the era. He doesn't understand the literature. There are such undercurrents in movies, now and then - but you miss the point if you find 'em in this movie.

Very good movie. And my wife is NOT a POB fan, but she enjoyed it. You do not have to be a POB fan. This movie will appeal to all.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 09:45 AM

Gay men, or at least paederasts, do feature in one or two of POB's books; Aubrey talks about a fellow-captain, and opines that p's in general are not the best captains, as they will have favourites (i.e. sexual partners) among the men, causing unrest among the rest of the crew. Can't remember which book; there are one or two other mentions too. But neither A nor M appear to be opposed on any general principle.

I take it we can be confident the next one won't be called 'Master & Commander II'?

Guest, did you see 'Pirates of the Caribbean'? You might enjoy it more than'M&C'!

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 09:09 AM

O'Meara: I agree with you entirely on O'Brian's Maturan. However, I think it would have been very difficult to develop that Maturan properly in 2+ hours, with everything else that was going on. I expect that he would have come across as a buffoon, which he certainly wasn't, if he had been portrayed, as you put it as personally sloppy, always wearing an ill-fitting wig, having to be helped by the crew to get aboard or depart the ship, and to get into the rigging on those rare occasions when he tried it. As it is, I think the writers did a reasonably good job with the character, within the time and format limitations.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 09:00 AM

About the gay thing folks. I haven't seen anything in the reviews but innuendo. Swash buckling movies, dating back to the Errol Flynn era, have been adored by a certain cultish group of gay men. It was certainly that I was alluding to, though I'm sure the humorless fans of the film breast beating in this thread likely didn't get the joke.

Like I said, for you history re-enactors and O Brian fanatics, I'm sure this is a great way to spend a Saturday afternoon at the movies.

For more discriminating film goers, buyer beware.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 08:46 AM

I saw the movie last weekend. It is an excellent movie, extremely entertaining and exciting. Crowe managed to get Aubrey as right as any actor could, and was indeed heroic, just like in the books. I recommend the movie to everyone.

BUT: I was very disappointed in the portrayal of Maturin! Aubrey and Maturin were equally featured in the books. Maturin was absolutely incompetent at sea, and Aubrey was just as bad ashore. Aubrey was wysiwyg, but Maturin was a deeply complex and layered character. I actually believe more time was spent on Maturin than Aubrey in the books. I understand a movie can only contain a limited amount of material, but Maturin was not just a sidekick like Gabby Hayes in the Roy Rogers movies.

Maturin was personally sloppy, always wore an ill-fitting wig, had to be helped by the crew to get aboard or depart the ship, and to get into the rigging on those rare occasions when he tried it. None of this appeared in the movie, but could have been easily portrayed. Instead he was portrayed as well-dressed, and simple and at home in the high rigging.

OK, that's my quibble.

O'Meara

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Charley Noble
Date: 24 Nov 03 - 12:20 AM

LonesomeEJ-

Sea chanties were uniformly prohibited about Royal Navy vessels, not to mention U.S. Navy vessels of the period. Such vessels had huge crews and the need for coordination was lessened. The officers generally viewed sea chanties as subversive, which they generally were.

The songs we'd expect the officers to sing were naval ballads and drinking songs. The sailors might sing some ballads and drinking songs when they were off-watch, and most certainly when they were "kicking up Bob's-a-dying" ashore.

O'Brian was not clear on this point in his earliest books in this series. He would occasionally make reference to "Adieu, Spanish Ladies" and songs of that type.

But I'll be curious to hear what the sailors are singing when I finally get a chance to see this film.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble, still having fun in OZ and greedy for more

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 11:37 PM

One complaint I have is that not enough chanties were sung by the crew. There is, however, one occasion when the men sing one. I believe it was Rounding the Horn but I'm not positive.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 11:28 PM

The critic as homophobe?
Fact is, boys of 12 and 13 often served as midshipmen in the English Navy in the early eighteenth century. They were put in the same dangerous circumstances as their elders, and were expected to perform as men. The Captains of such ships must have found themselves adopting the entertwined roles of Father, Commander, and Teacher when dealing with their young charges. One can only hope that the tenderness and humor shown by the character Jack Aubrey was the rule and not the exception. As for Aubrey's love for his friend and their musical duets, anyone who frequents this website should have an appreciation for that kind of interaction.
I believe the filmmakers did a fine job of depicting life aboard a British warship in 1807. Anyone who wants to find a gay thread line in the story would have a picnic with the relationship between Queequeg and Ishmael in Moby Dick and would miss the point just as surely as they miss it here.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Naemanson
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 07:32 PM

Well, I am not enough of a pedant to let a few inconsistencies with historical acuracy put me off. Nor am I going to worry about whether or not they slavishly followed the story line in the books. Knowing hollywood I figured that was not going to happen. My major concern was that Hollywood would miss the flavor of the books, the relationship between Aubrey and Maturin, the need to hold aloof from the rest of the officers and crew and Aubrey's appaarent (rarely spoken) gratitude in his friendship with Maturin.

Those who see a homosexual relationship between them are painting a former century with a modern brush. And they have never had a truly close nonsexual friendship with another person. In an age where one held the world at arm's length for safety, a world not too far removed from the savagery of the "dark ages", a world with carefully ordered and stilted codes of behavior, the chance to have a close friend on whom one could rely was one of the great opportunities of the world. Believe it or not, sex does not necessarily underlie every relationship.

O'Brian understood that and shows it in his books. For Jack Aubrey women were for marrying and sex. Men were to be fought, used to run his vessel, and in only one instance, for confiding in. He had some men who served him through the majority of the books, men who looked up to him as the epitome of the naval officer. And Aubrey treated them as the employees they were. In the last book, when one of them gets killed, Aubrey notices and then orders the body tossed overboard. Later there is a single reference to his emotional reaction.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Gareth
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 07:10 PM

Ahhh ! Why do Irish Myths confuse everything.

Click Here for Nelsons Childhood

Lord Wellington was birthed in Merrion St., Dublin,
hence his famous quotation on being accused of being Irish (and I hope I have it right) "If I was born in a stable, Sir, that would not make me a horse"

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 06:38 PM

Perhaps Norfolk, where Nelson hailed from, might be counted as Irish since that's where the song the Wild Rover comes from...

..............


And is this GUEST who keeps on bobbing up in this thread the same one all the time?

................

I can never understand why some people worry so much about historical accuracy in relation to fictional films. Beyond a certain level it can become a fetish.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: MartinRyan
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 06:06 PM

UncleDaveO

Nelson had no Irish connections as far as I know.

There were certainly Irish officers in the Royal Navy of the time - of necessity Protestant, as Catholics would not take the Oath of Allegiance, generally. In fact, I think there was at least one ship (using the word loosely, deliberately!) where all/most of the officers were Irish. The captain was a Packenham - ancestor of the Longford family whom some on this (Eastern) side of the pond will know.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 04:22 PM

Question: Does anyone know whether Nelson was "Irish" Irish, or was he one of the Irish English or Scotch-Irish?

If he was one of those, it's not too surprising if he was down on Ireland.

Indeed, at that time it seems extremely unlikely to me that an "Irish" Irishman would have been allowed to advance to the officer class, much less to the senior officer ranks.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: Penny S.
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 02:54 PM

Thank you for making my mind up to go next week.

Star Trek connections - this could be via an alternative navy set of books. I've been told that Hornblower by CS Forrester was an influence.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 01:40 PM

Filming was done mostly in Mexico and New Zealand, and a couple of specific locations (ie the Galapagos). The same tank used to film "Titanic" was used to film the studio scenes with the replica ship seen in this film. The thing cost $135 million to make (the most expensive film Weir has ever made--by comparison, "Truman Show" cost $60 million).

I would expect that most Mudcatters who are stalwart O'Brian readers would worship the film. However, that isn't much of a recommendation to those who aren't part of the cult, who have dramatically different standards we are using to judge the film.

It seems a bit silly to make this into a pissing contest (one against, all the rest for--yea! we win!). It is important when evaluating art or entertainment, not to equate one's own opinion of the film as "the truth" about the film.

As the old Chinese saying goes, there are always three truths: your truth, my truth, and the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Master and Commander FSOTW reviews
From: DonMeixner
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 12:12 PM

Wow, Respect bumps up another notch.