Tip the ship's grog over the side.
Stop their grog?
Nagle was drunk when he insulted Hollom. Did you know that?
Stop 30 years of privilege and tradition. I'd rather have them three sheets to the wind than face a mutiny.
You see I'm rather understanding of mutinies. Men pressed from their homes, confined for months aboard a wooden prison...
As you got to quickly in class today, there is much more to this movie than its fitting into a simple genre, be it action or epic or war. Perhaps this is why it proved to be a relative failure at the box office. Peter Weir asks a lot of his audience. To get to the stirring battle at the end, one has to first stop at the Galapagos Islands. There is no doubt that this is a Russell Crowe vehicle, with him at his most macho; yet his Lucky Jack Aubrey is a much thornier character than his signature role as Maximus in Gladiator, filmed 3 years earlier. You said it in class today. This is a film about tradition and its place in our life. It critiques manhood itself in the guise of a film that seems to offer little judgement but only observation. It is a lot more than a grand sea adventure, though it is that too. As Avik said at one point, it raises the same questions that Dead Poets Society does. How the heck does that happen?
1. What is your reaction to the film as a whole, now you've seen it in its entirety? Like? Dislike? Why? And like or dislike, what moment in the whole movie stayed with you (a different moment, though, than the one you might have written about yesterday)?
2. Avik, Jenny, Sara, Virginia, Gabe, Kira, Emily, Emi, Mary Emma, Brooks, answer the following: What do you think the film is saying about tradition through both Jack and Stephen? What side do you think the film takes? Is there even a side to take—do both Jack and Stephen ultimately agree on the place of tradition?
3. Katherine, Katherine, Katie, Coles, Sohail, Sam, Carolyn, Molly, Jack, Madeleine, answer the following: If the film is a critique of manhood—we think it is—what do you think is the critique?
4. Why the Galapagos? Why have the ship stop at this crazy place? To what thematic purpose do you see this serving in the film?
Write 200-300 words. We'll talk about these questions for about 30 minutes, then begin The Last Wave.
Finally, here's a clip from the film, the truly beautifully directed assault on the Acheron. Imagine filming all this on a set as claustrophobic and tight as the ships the film takes place on? No blue screen here.
"For England, for home, and for the prize." Doesn't quite have the same ring as "I only have one life to give for my country" does it?
ReplyDelete1) I liked the film for the same reasons I listed in the previous post. I liked how it didn’t focus on the blood and gore as a lot of action movies do, instead focusing on the characters. I also like the asthetics of the film: the costumes, the sweeping shots of the ship at sea. On a different note, one of the things I will most remember about the film is when the blonde-haired Boyle gives Dr. Maturin the beetle. My attachment to this scene comes partially from a place of sentimentality, but I also think it was one of only a few parts of the film that one man did something overtly kind and tender to another. Most of the other kindnesses were hidden with jokes and macho-ness.
3) I think the movie gives a very dynamic view of traditional manliness. On one hand, traditional manliness can be a good and constructive thing. It brings the men closer together in battle and makes them want to be braver. The men bond over the traditional and manly things they do together (drinking, for example). It is nice to see this retreat into manly activities gives them some sort of solace on the ship. However, the movie also gives a critique of manliness. This critique is most obviously manifested in the suicide of Hollum. Hollum wasn’t a very manly man, and because the crew was so hooked up on the tradition of manly men they resented him for it. It was Hollum’s feelings of hopeless and alienation in failing to meet these expectations of manliness that he committed suicide. So, while manliness is something that can bring them together, it can also cause men to be harsh and cruel.
4) The themes of tradition, macho-ness, pride and duty were all things that jumped out at me as I watched the film. However, I didn’t really think about the significance of the Galapagos Islands till you gave the prompt. But I guess putting the Galapagos Islands in the movie was important because it was the only time that the ship’s crew got the opportunity to release themselves from duty and relax. During the rest of the movie, the men are held down by their jobs and obligations to maintain honor. The Galapagos shows the contrast between duty to England and the captain and freedom to do what you want to do. This temporary freedom from job obligation and the joy that came with it showed how much the men were sacrificing when they were on the ship.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHaving seen the whole film, my view has certainly changed quite a bit. At first, it seemed like an accurate depiction of life on a ship and war in the early 19th century. Captain Aubrey seemed like the perfect person to have on your side; a great leader, someone who will look after your needs, motivate you, and reward you accordingly, he seemed to be a great person. However, as the story progressed, he became more and more questionable. Most notably, he decided to whip Nagle, which basically told the crew that they couldn't trust him as much as they thought. It may have been in order to keep traditions alive, but it seemed to me as if he was just trying to scare them. And even though this was supposed to be protection for Hollom, it ended up alienating him more than he already was; it made him seem like he couldn't stand up for himself and wasn't able to protect himself, and therefore he shouldn't be fighting in a war. For me, to see a character change this much so quickly was disturbing. People change, I know, but they don't usually change so fundamentally in the time he did. The most memorable scene to me is when Hollom kills himself. The way the scene was shot was incredible, and the shot of him sinking was very memorable. This scene really shows that even though Aubrey meant well when he whipped Nagle, it ended up leading to Hollom's death.
ReplyDeleteI think Weir is trying to show that people care a lot about status, even though it makes life much more difficult. For example, near the beginning of the film, Hollom starts to sing with the crew, even though he is of a much higher status, and they all stare at him (because he's singing and because he has a beautiful voice). Aubrey tells him not to sing with the crew. He isn't supposed to sing with them because he's ranked much higher; it's considered weird that he would sing with the lower status people. Also, how the crew drinks grog and the highest people drink wine shows that there is an obvious class system. This list of examples goes on. But no matter how different they are and how separate they must remain in day-to-day life, when they are fighting, they are all together. Aubrey fights alongside the lowest people. This shows that when men have one goal, nothing else matters but to achieve that goal. However, once it is achieved, the class system is back again.
I think the ship stops at the Galapagos to show the tension between Maturin and Aubrey. This relationship is probably the most important in the film, as Maturin and Aubrey are best friends, and Aubrey often looks to Maturin for advice (though he rarely follows it), and, like any other good film, the friendship must be tested. The Galapagos islands are also fascinating to Blakeney, and when he goes exploring for Marutin, he learns that there is more to the world than war. He becomes interested in cataloging the different species. This shows Aubrey that his crew really benefits from a break, that they all need some time on dry land just having fun. They give him a sense of what his crew wants, because they can't tell him, or it would be considered disrespectful to counter their captain's opinions.
I like this movie more for the relationships between characters. Although the last battle between the HMS Surprise and the Acheron was exciting, I was more interested when the characters were learning how to survive with one another. A movie like Master And Commander could have easily turned to an action packed blood bath, but I felt as though Weir had just the right mix of action and interaction between characters. Probably, my favorite relationship was between Dr. Stephen and William. My favorite scene in the second half was when William states that he wants to become a “fighting naturalist”, and Dr. Stephen says, “They don't combine too well I find". I though that is was a good example of what war does to people, especially people who are caught up in a battle they’d rather not fight. I believe that the Galapagos Island was an important destination because it was the only time that the ship returned to land, and this rest allowed the crew to rekindle and defuse and tension. In my opinion, most of the men seemed very happy while resting on the island. I also believed that the island gave the men an opportunity to find something that they might not have, like the beetle or discovering the battle strategy of disguise that they later used against the Acheron.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the movie explores the standard of men and what this society believes will determine what makes a man. Jack Aubrey is presented as the gallant leader of the HMS Surprise, having fought beside Nelson; Captain Aubrey is most likely the kind of man that the crewmen hope to be, especially boys like William and Peter. However, Captain Aubrey demonstrates some of his faults, like his eagerness to run into an expedition, or his obsessive pursuit of the Acheron in an effort to maintain his pride and reputation. I believe that Peter Weir doesn’t only use Captain Aubrey as a critiqued illustration of manhood, but also uses the crews as a critic of the social idea of ‘manhood’. In my opinion, the group as a whole seemed to be destined to destroy one another, with such a gap between the two social classes of men, I was ready for them to be at each other’s throats, and in some ways the men did (although it was one against the rest). Although there were a divide among the men on the ship, everyone was held to a certain standard, and although the crew may not be harmonious, a level of order and respect was expected. A low rank must respect his higher-ups, and a man with a rank must keep the other men in order and not regard them in an equal manner. Joseph Nagle and Hollom both face the consequences of not upholding their character as men, and are two acute examples of what happens when the status quo is not upheld. In conclusion, I believe that this film does critic the notion of manhood, and thus also examines what kind of a society enforces the social norms of manhood and the effect that this standard has on the populace.
1. I liked this movie in its ability to be about war without glorifying it or making me feel like war was the only thing that existed or mattered. I felt like instead of giving me the action/war movie plot I feel I often see, which is "Mr. Mega Macho Hero goes running off on his own in an insubordinate move because he knows better than anyone else and even though it was the stupidest thing and lots of people died it ended up winning them the war/fight/prize/whatever oh aaaaaand now the one female in the movie reveals her purpose for being there as she gets together with Mr. Mega Macho Hero in the end." Perhaps this is a slightly cynical view of action movies but it honestly made me kind of happy that there were no women in the movie because often times when there are women they are a thinly disguised "prize" for Mr. Mega Macho Hero. But anyways, rather than give me that usual action movie plot, I really liked that it showed the in between moments. They're chasing after the Acheron and they do technically have to be ready at any moment, but in the meantime, they drink and tell jokes and play classical music and sing and have fun and build relationships and I thought the movie was very successful in being more than just your usual action movie. Some of the scenes that really stuck with me were between the Doctor and Blakeney, as well as the Doctor deciding to pull the bullet out of himself because first off it was hardcore and also it supplemented the things we learned about his character from his scenes with Jack.
ReplyDelete2. I don't know that the movie takes a side. Both Jack and Stephen have strong beliefs and Stephen certainly isn't afraid to challenge Jack, who is ultimately his superior despite them being friends. Though Stephen is trying to avoid violence in Nagle's punishment, I don't think he's necessarily arguing that all tradition be thrown to the wind, simply that tradition. He tells Blakeney that he doesn't find "fighting" and "naturalist" go together very well and it seems to me he just doesn't like violence. I don't think he's necessarily portrayed as right or wrong, simply making decisions based off of what he knows to be right and true for him. And the same thing of Jack. Jack had to make the decision to cut the mast and kill Warley, Jack has to keep the crew and the ship running in an organized manner. Jack is making decisions based off his history and what he knows to be right and true. For all we know, he could have been whipped for being insubordinate. Though I don't agree with it, for him, that's the way the world works. Later in the movie there is maybe a bit of meeting of their beliefs in tradition when Jack sees the stick bug Stephen and Blakeney collected and decides to disguise the ship, but I don't think that his change in view that way applies to Nagle's punishment. That's a way to win, to give them the upper hand, where as Nagle's punishment was to ensure the ship ran the way it needed to. I don't think the movie itself makes a judgement, though, I think that's left up to the viewer.
4. I think the main reason of the presence of the Galapagos is to facilitate certain scenes, such as Jack going back on his promise or finding the stick bug that helps them win. I'm not sure what purpose the island itself serves otherwise, as opposed to some other island or place, but maybe I missed something.
1. I overall really enjoyed the movie. One moment that stuck with me from today was the scene where Maturin is forced to perform surgery on himself in order to remove the musket ball. The character development towards the end of the movie was very good, and I especially liked Maturin's scenes. When he was forced to leave behind his discoveries in order to tell everyone about the French ship, he really showed how far he's come.
ReplyDelete2. I think the film is saying that Jack is very attached to tradition and the navy's ways. He is very attached to his ship and kind to his men, and he seems like he loves the life he's living. He also is very attached to the rules that the Navy has followed for a long time. Stephen, on the other hand, is interested in being progressive and serving the best interests of everyone, even if it isn't traditional. The film indeed seems to show us a view of the men like a documentary instead of showing us which side we should take.
4. The Galapagos is a very odd place, one that no one on the ship has ever really seen the likes of before. It is 'on the far side of the world'. It seems like there is a big relation to the islands themselves and Maturin's character. They are kind of strange and out of place, with characteristics that are different from everywhere else. In this way they are progressive like Stephen.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. I really enjoyed Master and Commander’s fast paced plot and that many characters beyond Capt. Aubrey and Dr. Maturin had character development and were just as important as the leads. I, personally, felt more attached to Blakeney and Hollum than to the captain and doctor because they were much more innocent than Capt. Aubrey and more naïve than the Doctor. I felt more of an emotional connection with them because of their vulnerability. I normally stay away from action films because the choppy action scenes with quickly transitioning viewpoints get on my nerves. I strongly disliked the scene with the finale attack on the Acheron It’s very confusing to watch. I couldn’t figure out which ship was which as swords flashed at lightning speeds and blood splashed from crewmembers I could not identify. The scene in which Dr. Maturin spies the Acheron while looking for the bird stays with me most. That is the moment when the doctor is forced to chose between his dreams and Capt. Aubrey’s. Perhaps he feels a debt to the captain for taking him ashore.
ReplyDelete2. Captain Aubrey seems to have more traditional values than Doctor Maturin. He tried to separate himself from the crew and tried to keep power in traditional hierarchy of crewmembers. He critiques Hollum when he supposedly lowers himself by singing with the other men and has the man who disrespected Hollum whipped to show who has the power. The doctor repeatedly tries to show Captain Aubrey that being so traditional about the hierarchy on the boat causes problems among the crew. It creates anger towards the captain. The movie seems to favor the doctors views and eventually, so does Captain Aubrey. There’s a greater sense of comradery within the crew when they work together to transform the boat into a whaler than earlier in the film, most notably after a crewman in whipped.
3. Had Captain Aubrey agreed to let Dr. Maturin get off the boat and walk the island, he would not have been shot. This leaves the captain with a feeling of guilt and regret. A series of choices and consequences leads the Englishmen to their victory, directly affected by their impromptu camp out on the island. The species of insect only found on the Galapagos gives the captain an idea to camouflage the identity of his boat. The Galapagos’ unique wildlife and its shape provides the perfect location for characters to have fantastic discoveries and is also enjoyable for the audience because it’s visually appealing.
It is not that surprising that this movie did not do well commercially. If it not for watching it in the class and discussing it, I would not have payed attention to the themes going on. It's hard to say of I would have enjoyed in outside of this class; it depends on how much I really thought about the movie and the deeper meaning, but I did, in fact, like the movie. At the end, I wanted to put my fist in the air and cheer along side Captain Jack Aubrey and his crew. As the camera panned out from the inside of the boat where Lucky Jack was playing the violin with the doctor, the frame showed the ship sailing after the other one, a contrast to the scene from the very beginning. In the beginning of the movie, the boat is shown all alone with miles of sea around it and a dark fog over the water, but at the end there is another boat up ahead and there is a warm sunset glimmering on the water. I really liked that last scene, but maybe it was just cause I was so happy for the crew to be safe.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the movie is a critique of manhood. Society pushes men to be strong and tough with little ability to empathize or feel. Hollum is not like that. He is different than most the other men on the ship: frail, a good singer, not stern, feels pain when crew members think he is cursed. He ends up commuting suicide because he feels so different and hated. Jack Aubrey fills most of the typical manliness criteria on the other hand, but he plays the violin. He is also much too adventurous and daring, luckily he was able to pull through with the win though. I wonder what Weir meant by having him be both this macho man--maybe too macho-- as well as violin (of all instruments) player.
I did not realize the Galapagos were of any real importance until brought up. Much of the movie is about tradition and keeping the boat organized and running efficiently. By going to the Galapagos, a fairly unknown place for the British, they did something new. The doctor was able to heal, as well as, study the animals and plants on the island. One thing he found was the bug that disguised itself as a stick so predators wouldn't know what it was. This discovery led to the plan that may have been the reason they captured the French ship. This also has to do with the idea that everyone has a role and a job on the ship. Because the doctor investigated this island, he helped Jack Aubrey complete his orders.
1) I actually found that I enjoyed the movie more at the second half then I did at the beginning. This is a typical reaction for most movies that I watch because I get to see progression in the plot. What I enjoyed most about this film is the progress made in Russel Crow's character. At the beginning he is an egotistical captain with one goal in mind- trying to capture the Acheron. With the doctors help, whether he wanted it or not, the Captain soon discovered a less military instructor side of him. I think for this reason my favorite scene is right at the end when the captain and the doctor are playing a song together. This scene occurs right after Captain Aubrey discovers that the French Captain is still alive, yet the he just sits down and proceeds to play the fiddle after giving orders. It shows how far he has come and how much the doctor has helped the captain.
ReplyDelete2. Tradition is a major theme in this movie, as it is in almost all of Weir's works. It can be seen right from the start when the men are getting the ship ready for the day. Everyone is very ordered and ready when asked. As Jack says, its been this way for years and it wont change with him. The Doctor on the other hand is the opposite of his captain. He believes that change is a good thing and too much control is tyrannic. I believe that Weir presents both sides but does not choose a side. He leaves that to the viewer to decide. I don't see any common ground on the two friends beliefs when it comes to tradition. Aubrey sticks to his ways just as the doctor does with his. Weir truly leaves it up to the viewer to see who they agree with.
4. The Doctor always wanted to go the Galapagos. The Island would be the best place to continue his research as a naturalist, not a fighting naturalist. The Galapagos represents everything that Stephen wants, evolution. He wants to change tradition and metaphorically "evolve" the way society is around him. Everything evolves on the Galapagos so why shouldn't they in society?
1) I liked that as the director, Peter Weir decided to take the film in a more complex direction than just all out non-stop war. Even though I do enjoy war and action movies, I found that I enjoyed watching the moments in-between battles instead. One moment that stuck with me from the part that we watched today was the scene in which Captain Aubrey decides to lash Nagel for his disrespect towards Hollom, despite the fact that his drunkenness was a factor for why he did in the first place. When Stephen challenges Aubrey’s decision to carry out such a harsh punishment for such a small error, it made me like Captain Aubrey less. To me, that scene meant that he was no longer the perfect man or the hero of the story. However, it did provide a more realistic portrayal of what might really happen.
ReplyDelete2) In the confrontation scene between Aubrey and Stephen, both men speak with different perspectives on tradition. As we said in class today, Stephen might represent a more Paideia-like philosophy by serving the best interests of everyone, while Aubrey is more Woodward, more rigid. However, that does not mean that Stephen is one to abandon all sense of tradition, but that he’s more open minded to being progressive. I like that Emi pointed out Stephen says that a man cannot be both a naturalist and a fighter, as it shows that he does draw the line somewhere. I don’t think that the film necessarily takes a side on the issue of tradition, but that both can be correct depending on how you’re looking at things.
4) The importance of the Galapagos could be that it provides the crew with some freedom and rest while the doctor recovers from his wound. Before they had stopped, the crew was nearly run to the ground. Following Peter Weir’s theme of tradition, the Galapagos is important because it is not the traditional English country. In terms of plot, Stephen’s research on the island leads Jack to the Acheron, where he finally captures her (or so he thinks).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. I like this movie even more after having seen the rest of it. I thought that it had a satisfying ending, and twists are always fun. It gives the sense that this guy is just going to be sailing around doing this type of thing forever. To me that’s a little depressing, but I guess that’s his thing. The scene in which Dr. Maturin has to perform surgery on himself was definitely memorable. They didn’t show very much. It was mainly the reactions of the doctor and the people helping him. However, it was enough to make a really tense scene. Also, when the assistant put the cloth scrap over the hole in the shirt, I thought he was just being a weirdo. It made more sense when the doctor asked if he had gotten all of it.
ReplyDelete3. On the one hand it seems that their manliness pays off. They function well together for the most part when it really matters, and they win in the end. However, their attitude has some unintended consequences. Hollom’s suicide could’ve been avoided had the others not alienated and looked down upon him so much. Then again (and this isn’t very nice), as soon has he looked really nervous and unsure of himself about seeing the ship at the beginning, I thought to myself, “This guy is going to die.” I would’ve liked a nice twist like all of the confident manly characters end up dead and he survives or something. Also, for some reason when he jumped into the water I was wondering (hoping?) that in the final battle they would be one canon ball short of winning and then lose because Hollom took it with him. Then there’s Aubrey’s manhood in particular. His pride and his sense of manly duty lead everyone into a perilous journey. He’s responsible for many deaths because of what could be seen as an obsession. However, like I said in the last blog, he ends up successful so he’s a genius not an ass.
4. It seems to show some sort of karma. Jack makes the decision to give up on his obsession and go back to the Galapagos to save his friend. This ends up being the only reason he is successful. A. Because the Acheron happened to be floating around there and B. because the little stick insect gave him the idea for the only way to beat the superior ship.
1. I liked the film because it shows life on the ship, which I didn't know much about. I was surprised at how structured life was on the ship. Watching the film it showed the different roles that each person played, and how they all came together at the end fighting against the French. There was a big difference between the officers and everyone else. There were many relationships that I liked, but one really interesting one was Dr. Stephen Maturin and Blakeney. They seemed to have a really close relationship, for example, when they were going on a journeys to find rare species that they have never seen before.
ReplyDelete2. Jack and Stephens views on things are different especially when Stephen wanted to stay in the Galapagos. Stephen was a naturalist, and liked to look wt how the environment changed, while Jack on the other hand wanted to go fight. When Stephen and Blakeney were looking around they found a species that was disguised as a branch. Later on they showed Jack the species, and that's when he got the idea to be disguised as a whaling ship to sneak up on the French. I think that Jack and Stephen both balance each other out, and work as a good team.
4. I think that they stopped in the Galapagos to really create a conflict between science and the military. The idea that they're there, and that Jack promised Stephen that he could go take specimens of these new species. But then Jack says "this is just a hobby of yours" to Stephen and he is implying that it's not important compared to what Jack is doing.
1. I liked this movie, it engaged me and it was interesting. I wouldn’t watch it again or on my own time, but I liked it! I personally liked this movie, because as Katherine said in class today: it’s a war movie, but it doesn’t feel like a war movie. I’m not big on blood and gore and loud noises and the other aspects of war that immediately come to my mind, but even though this movie was filled with all that, it wasn’t about all that. It was about the people on the boat and how they interacted with each other.
ReplyDelete2. I think this film criticizes manhood’s (stereotypical) attachment to pride. Very often in literature, we come across the classic archetype of a hero: perfect in every way and will indubitably save the day and all of the townspeople will shout Huzzah and name a city in his honor. However, every now and then we are able to unearth a flaw in this perfect character, sometimes fatal, other times not, and oftentimes this flaw is a greedy sense of pride. I think that Aubrey made a great captain. He led his men into battle time after time again and finally ended (sort of) in success. He was calm and composed for the majority of the story with his crew and kept a well-ordered ship. But his attachment to the Acheron really went out of his line of duty and into a personal vendetta against this French ship. However, pride does not only poison Aubrey. I would argue that even Stephen has a sense of pride when fighting for a chance to go to the Galapagos. Who wouldn’t want hundreds of progressive scientific discoveries that would forever change the face of evolution as we know it attributed to them? I think that however, Stephen’s pride does not prove to be as frustrating throughout the plot as Aubrey’s. Hollum’s lack of pride proves to be fatal for him and he just becomes a nervous wreck, falls apart and commits suicide (to put it bluntly). I think that Weir argues that to be truly manly, you must find a balance in your sense of pride, not letting it consume you, yet not becoming a sniveling self-hating whisper of yourself.
3. The Galapagos were a big part of this movie because of Stephen. If they had stopped at the Galapagos, he would have been able to make many of the great discoveries that Darwin made! Well, in the movie, he actually made them but never got any credit or notice for it because of the rushed getaway. I kept rooting for Stephen to go back and make his discoveries, because it really showed the transition into a more scientific age. For me, this almost represented the whole science vs. religion debate we even see nowadays, like creation vs. evolution. I don’t think that Weir intended that representation, but now looking back on Aubrey’s many references to God (or his deity of England) versus Stephen’s deep want to explore the Galapagos, it really comes up as a plausible theme. I think at the heart of the movie though, it represents moving forward and breaking tradition. In reality, the choice is to explore a new island with thousands of new species and make leaps and bounds in science, or go back for a third time to attack a damn French ship faster and stronger than the Surprise. Behind that? The option to stick to tradition; the navy, or continue on with the new ideas of the time; science.
I like the film as a whole the same way I liked the first half of it. I was more able to let myself absorb the movie since I was used to it, so I was able to see the themes and the character development more clearly. I think the film's critique of manhood is that it doesn't allow for human error. Aubrey feels like he has to be right all the time because everyone expects him to. That puts pressure on him to be perfect, but it also puts pressure on the crew to obey his decisions and not challenge them. The hierarchical system on the ship perpetuates these expectations of manhood. The film is a critique rather than an observation because Dr. Marturin and Hollum both show the system's flaws, though in different ways; the doctor questions Aubrey's authority and forces him to show his intolerance for dissent while Hollum takes his own life because he doesn't fit into that ideal of manhood. Dr. Marturin is separated from that hierarchical system because of his intellect and scientific pursuits, so he is allowed to be less masculine than the others and he is allowed to question Jack's decisions without fear of being flogged--he is the one rebel Jack can afford to have on board. These two characters also show that the hierarchy favors power and control over trust and friendship--Aubrey discourages Hollum from singing with and bonding with the crew and he almost loses his own friendship with Marturin in favor of his duty. A moment that stuck out for me was the moment Marturin gave up his findings from the islands because he realized that the pursuit of the Acheron was more important. I think that is a turning point for him and he understands Jack better afterwards. The decision to go back to the Galapagos in the first place is an important moment for Jack because for once he realizes that the interests of his friend are also important. In a way, the film justifies Aubrey's right to place the interests of the war over the interests of his friend because Marturin never actually gets to collect his samples from the island--the Acheron pulls them away again just before they get to the Galapagos.
ReplyDelete1. I am indifferent when it comes to this film. There were a lot of choices that Peter Weir made that I thought were different and unexpected, but there was lot about the movie that felt slight. For instance, the fact that the ship was called the HMS Surprise and in the final battle between them and the French, their victory comes from being like “suuuurprise, you frogs!!” And there were a lot of questions about religion this film asked, loaded questions given that Aubrey is the one leading all of these men, his “disciples,” while also trying to deal with his own power. The comment Stephen made to Blakeney when they were talking about the insects being different from the typical species due to adapting to their surroundings, asking “did God change them, or did they change themselves?” I think this question could be applied to these men on ship and the importance of manhood and strength. Did God want them to hard and cold individuals, or did they change themselves due to their surroundings and their situation. I think for them to have to dedicate so much of themselves to a cause, to a violent cause where death is likely, I think it’s necessary for them to change the way they feel things and close up the part of themselves that understands vulnerability so they don’t end up traumatized or mentally unstable. I think that may have been what got Hollom in the end, that he wasn’t able to ignore the parts of them that were weak, and the other men could live with themselves because they were successful at focusing on the power they needed to possess to get through their mission.
ReplyDelete2. Aubrey says at one point “men must to be governed.” The film is saying while tradition and order can be repressive and hurt people (Nagle), but it is very necessary to accomplish something. If Aubrey had not kept his crew in the traditional way, it could have led to chaos that prevented them from putting their all into the final battle. But by breaking tradition, with Stephen collecting all these species that broke the norm, he would have been celebrated for breaking the patterns. I guess the film is saying that the two camps of tradition and anti-tradition co-exist, and there is no one set way in the world.
4. Thematically, the Galapagos is a place of change and individuality and a place that breaks tradition. Nothing there is any where near being typical, which challenges Aubrey’s way of keeping things the way they always were.
1. It is hard to walk away from this movie without having enjoyed yourself. If I had watched it without an intentional mindset, I would have liked it for the simple plot and action alone. However, the understanding we have reached in class on a deeper level, gives me an added appreciation of the film.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen and Jack both understand the importance of tradition completely, for their prescribed occupations require it, but their views on the matter's place on the Surprise vary greatly. To Jack, nothing could be more important upon his ship. It keeps the machine running, and it makes the things that give "Lucky" Jack his nickname possible. Nevertheless, such practices, as Stephen points out, make tyrants. Stephen, on the other hand, holds ethics, morals and practicality far above tradition, making him a much more human individual but not necessarily a leader of Jack's caliber. The film leaves us, in the end, with no choice but to accept Jack's interpretation of tradition's role because it is clear nothing else would have worked.
4. The Galapagos Islands are the only land the crew set foot on in the entire movie. They view it as a strange, and wonderful place full of odd beasts. There is a great deal of irony here, for the odd creatures of the island are portrayed as peaceful, harmless, even loving creatures—much more godly than the men at war. So as the British naval men look down their noses at these creatures, they fail to see their own inferiority. The Galapagos are much more than this, as we discussed today in class. They are means for this observational movie to criticize.
1. I thought the movie was very good and, as I said before, very well constructed, but I thought that the plot had a certain note of the general futility of most things done in the movie. It especially seemed to demonstrate the futility of Captain Aubrey’s actions. I thought this because at the end of the movie the battle is over, but things are still left in a way unfinished. Aubrey gives the order to go after the French ship again, and even though he is just doing this basically as a precaution, it still seems to show that Aubrey will never really finish chasing down some ship or fighting in some battle. He will probably die in battle which means that his life will never really change at all. This further indicates that the movie is not really traditional in the sense that the main characters do not really go on some sort of quest that brings change. Usually the hero of any movie or book goes through some sort of change, but none of the characters in this movie changed at all in their pursuit of the French vessel. This indicates to me that said pursuit is not very far out of the norm for most of the characters. Yes, people die and various people are sad about said deaths, but the whole movie is really just to show the workings of a ship and the interactions of the people who instigate said workings. My Dad has read all of the books and this is one of his favorite movies. From what I have heard from him the books are also like observations about the goings on aboard a ship.
ReplyDelete3. In the film Aubrey is the person who symbolizes manhood and manliness. He is obsessed with honor and tradition and following his orders (to destroy the Acheron). At many points during the movie this causes the crew to question what Aubrey is doing. All of the deaths in the film are directly or indirectly caused by Aubrey’s original decision to follow the Acheron. That is probably how the movie critiques Aubrey’s manhood. On the other hand, Aubrey’s pursuit of the Acheron leads to its capture and that is good. I would say that this movie is not decided on its view of manhood. The film basically tells us that manhood can lead people to bad decisions, but without it many important things would not be done.
4. I would say the Galapagos Symbolizes the opposite of the ship. When everyone is on the Island for Maturin’s surgery they are relaxed as opposed to how they are on the ship (always working). In summary of that, the ship is a symbol for war and the Galapagos Islands and a symbol of peace.
1. I enjoyed the film. I like how different it is from other movies in the same genre. The characters were very interesting, and definitely three dimensional. I liked Jack's character, even with his flaws (and especially because of) his flaws. I love the relationships in the film, particularly Jack's relationships with Stephen, the French captain, and Blakeney. I think Weir did an excellent job at presenting themes through these relationships, which was part of why the film was so unique, in my opinion.
ReplyDelete2. As we talked about in class, I think that Jack roughly embodies tradition, whereas Stephen represents change. But I also think that these men accept a little bit of both. While Jack runs his ship in a traditional manner, just the way he was taught, and passes down the tradition to 1st Lt. Tom Pullings, he also stops at the Galapagos for his friend and disguises his entire ship to fight the French. And, although Stephen doesn't blindly accept all of Jack's and England's traditions, he does seem to accept class barriers. Additionally, many of the times he advocates for change, it's for himself, not for the sake of change. As we have said previously, I don't think the film really takes a side. I think the idea is that it presents a conflict, and we, as viewers, have to formulate our own opinions. Also, I think Weir may be suggesting that there is no right answer. That's the case in many of the struggles the men face, like when the crewman is blown overboard. Sometimes, the best you can do is pick "the lesser of two weevils."
4. The Galapagos represents change, as we discussed in class. As Stephen knows, there are many animals to be discovered there that would lead to major scientific developments. The island is also very mysterious and going there is an adventure. For Jack, fighting on the seas is the norm. Taking a break on an island is an adventure and a change.