|
Movie Review: 'Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World'
by William Spencer
12 December 2003
I went to this movie with pretty high expectations. I left mostly satisfied.
For those of you who don't know, this movie is based on a series of novels
written by Patrick O'Brien. These popular novels were noted for their
historical accuracy and also for their extensive use of obscure and
confusing naval jargon.
The movie is set in 1805 during a time of war between England and France.
Napoleon's armies are rampaging across Europe and thus the oceans have
become a battleground. The movie opens as the HMS Surprise is sailing along
the coast of northern Brazil. Its mission is to hunt down and take as prize
the French frigate Acheron, which is supposed to be a privateer -- or a
government-sanctioned pirate ship. For you trivia buffs, the Acheron was the
name of the mythical river which ran through Hades. The Acheron is on its
way to the Pacific south seas to extend the war to the British whaling ships
in that area. So, what little plot there is is established early.
The acting is terrific. Russell Crowe plays the 'master' Jack Aubrey, the
friendly and well-liked captain of the 28-gun Surprise. His 'commander' and
the ship's surgeon, Stephen Maturin, is played by Paul Bettany, a man mostly
known for being married to Jennifer Connelly. Lucky Jack, as he is known to
the crew, is brash, humorous, and daring. His foil, as it were, is Stephen
Maturin. Stephen is a naturalist of the Royal Society and a couterpoint to
Jack's personality. He plays the staid and reserved intellectual who is the
social equal of Jack and uses this to express the sentiments that would
probably never cross Jack's mind. They argue a lot.
This movie doesn't appeal to a broad audience. If you like tales of the
British Royal Navy circa 1800 then you can't go wrong. If you want a popcorn
movie and mindless distraction, look elsewhere. There is plenty of humor
here, and there is also tragedy. Jack makes jokes, and good sailors die or
lose limbs. Overall though, the film just seemed to lack direction. As I
watched it, I couldn't help but wonder where it was going. I guess the
problem for me was that I wanted to see a depiction of a major
French/British naval engagement at the end. Instead the movie takes place
far from European waters and involves only two ships. A pirate ship is
alluded to but never spotted.
The drama of the story is created by the fact that the French ship is of a
new design, borrowed from the Yankees. It has a hull design that makes it
faster in spite of its greater size. It also boasts 44 guns. At that
time ships were classed by how many cannon they carried, and also by the
size of the cannon. More and longer-range cannon equaled bigger, slower
ship. Jack must hunt down and beat a superior foe. Thus the story becomes
one of a forceful and charismatic man who must lead his men to victory
against the odds, with some good and bad luck thrown in to represent the
whims of nature.
Complaints? The French enemy remains mostly faceless throughout. I
would have enjoyed a few shots of the men aboard the French ship cursing the
English or maybe of the French captain inspiring his crew to thirst for
English blood. Nothing of the sort, however. The fact that the French ship is
the enemy is only indicated by the tri-color pennant blowing in the wind.
And the movie ground to a halt at points. Life aboard an English war ship
must have been dreadfully boring, at least for the crew. I suppose that's why
they always tried to keep the crew well-stocked with grog. The officers
drank wine.
The film is really authentic. Everything is realistic and historically
accurate. One feels well acquainted with life on board an English naval
vessel after viewing this movie. The dialogue and vocabulary are true to the
novels, and definitely lend to the atmosphere the movie attempts to create.
There is even an occasional laugh as Jack kids around with the unsmiling and
serious Stephen. It's a good movie and should be seen, as long as you have
an interest in early 19th-century naval matters. Otherwise you might find
yourself rolling your eyes and checking your watch as the films rolls on.
Movies made on the water can be hit or miss. Compare "Pirates of the
Carribean" to, say, "Waterworld."
As for racially conscious whites, Master and Commander" is safe and sound. In fact, one
might gain a greater appreciation for white culture after its viewing. The
excellence of the white race is amply represented. But I always hate to see
or hear about whites slaughtering whites, and there is plenty of that in
this film. The action is brutal and direct and one of the best parts of the
film. It's just too bad that Napoleon didn't take his war of conquest to
sub-Saharan Africa or to the Jews infesting his brief Empire. The only
non-whites featured are a couple of boolies on the HMS Surprise who assist
the cook, and the naked Brazilians who row out in their canoes to trade with
the English. One of these natives does catch the eye of Captain Aubrey, but
this leads nowhere. I must mention that nowhere in the novel does Lucky Jack
lust after any natives. There is even a long nod to the immortal genius of
Charles Darwin, as a good portion of the movie is spent on land - the Galapagos
Islands. I think this represents the firm footing that the movie was built
on.
WILLIAM SPENCER
|