8f21ed07   
   From: ggggg9271@gmail.com   
      
   On Friday, November 30, 2007 at 6:35:21 PM UTC-8, Seer Sawer wrote:   
   > for me there are several strikes against a movie like Master and   
   > Commander.   
   > naval movies featuring wooden ship with sails recycle the same stuff   
   > over and over. you have the storm scene with water splashing about   
   > and someone falling into the sea. you have class tensions between   
   > aristocratic and plebian types and everyone in between. you have the   
   > usual clash of personalities--the enlightened, the brutish, the nasty,   
   > the gentle, the wimpy, etc. you have moments of authoritarian   
   > ruthlessness and near mutinous rage. you have old farts and young   
   > ones. you have the thug, the saint, the intellectual, the man of   
   > action, and so on. of course, this could be said of any military   
   > themed movie but why do naval movies with wooden ships and sails   
   > bother me extra?   
   > it has a lot to do with aesthetics. maybe these ships were wonders of   
   > their age but i hate the look of them. the sails are like giant   
   > diapers hung out to dry, and main body of the ship looks ungainly and   
   > squat with a big fat ass. i hate those pecker shaped cannons and   
   > bowling balls as fodder. worse, i don't like to see pony tails on men   
   > tied with gay looking ribbons. and, the uniforms are pretty gay too,   
   > with those funny vests and stockings. i love the aesthetics of viking   
   > ships, ancient greek and roman ships, and the like. and modern naval   
   > vessels are pretty badass too. but, i never cared for the military   
   > aesthetics of european nations in the 18th and 19th centuries. the   
   > sight of all those gay uniformed, pony-tailed toy soldiers marching in   
   > unison.... sorry, not me cupotea.   
   > gimme me excalibur with its iron-clad knights. gimme the vikings of   
   > 13th warrior with long flowing hair, leather and fur, and mighty   
   > swords. gimme ancient greek and roman warriors with elemental grace   
   > and toughness. or, gimme the cowboy with horse, saddle, and rifle. i   
   > can even tolerate the pared down US cavalry in the latter part of the   
   > 19th century. the main reason i rooted for al pacino and gang in   
   > Revolution is because they looked less gay than the red coated   
   > british.   
   > this is what happens when gayness takes over a culture; it's bad   
   > shit. the european aristocracy was supposed to be a class of   
   > warriors but somehow grew decadent with excess privilege, wealth, and   
   > leisure; they hired too many gay boys to design all them fancy suits,   
   > wigs, and other tutti-frutti stuff. indeed, the most offensive thing   
   > about the tim roth character in Rob Roy was his getup. we can forgive   
   > him raping roy's wife.. but that wig and makeup!!   
   > and, Master and Commander is no different. it has solid characters, a   
   > compelling story, and many excellent moments. but, the look of the   
   > whole thing puts me off; look at russell with a pony tail tied with   
   > gay ribbon. and i don't think i'm alone in this as it sunk at the box   
   > office.   
   > but lemme try to be fair. this is a very fine, well proportioned   
   > mooie. it's not a deep work of art nor reveals anything original about   
   > the meaning of life, but who can ask for better hollywood   
   > entertainment? it's just that, very good entertainment. it's   
   > comparable to lawrence of arabia which also shouldn't be mistaken as   
   > serious history or deep art. both films are hollywood action   
   > spectacles at their best.   
   > i never liked peter weir except for Year of Living Dangerously. weir   
   > is rather like an australian steven spielberg. he knows all the tricks   
   > and knows how to manipulate. at his box office best-- and artistic   
   > worst--, he's a shameless manipulator, as with Witness. weir was   
   > never a bad craftsman but, like ridley scott and spielberg, rarely   
   > above dumbing things down for mass tastes. at times he tried to   
   > balance populism with seriousness as with the semi-satirical Truman   
   > Show, semi-psychological Fearless, and semi-sociological Mosquito   
   > Coast. but, nearly all of his Hollywood films tilted toward shameless   
   > populism. truman show, which needed to be harder edged, is essentially   
   > forrest gump with a pinch of cynicism.   
   > but, master and commander may be an exception. if the movie has no   
   > higher or deeper meaning, it is at least true to itself--an   
   > intelligent hollywood historical action movie. it works on its own   
   > terms and sticks to the rules.   
   > it's a solid piece of construction. weir is especially deft at   
   > knitting together close ups with long shots. the movie switches back   
   > and forth from sweaty furor to birdeyed views of ships lunging at one   
   > another. rarely have the micro and the macro been interwoven with such   
   > rhythmic ease.   
   > though most of the movie is about naval strategy and non-stop action--   
   > as in most such movies--, there are other welcome elements. though   
   > the captain of the ship--russell crowe--is a man of action, he also   
   > plays violin with his doctor friend and has myriad non-naval   
   > interests. this is a richer and subtler portrayal of life on the ship   
   > than most such movies. the doctor's interest in natural phenomenon   
   > adds another layer of surprise and meaning to the story. perhaps,   
   > things were not so specialized back then as they are today. though   
   > the main mission is hunting and destroying french ships, the captain   
   > is not above indulging in extra-naval affairs, time permitting.   
   > imagine today's naval ship docking on an island to gather animal and   
   > plant specimen.   
   > there are obvious tensions between priorities and interests as when   
   > the doctor fumes over crowe's reversal of the decision to explore the   
   > galapagos island. and, it's a good thing that despite all these   
   > conflicts, weir doesn't reduce them to good guy vs bad guy.   
   > in this crowded and nerve-rattling environment, people see-saw between   
   > hating one another and depending on one another. we see love/hate   
   > dynamics at their most intense.   
   > when they finally encounter the french ship and kick ass, it's as   
   > though all the pent-up anger at one another are hauled at the french.   
   > the scene is pretty jingoistic with anglos gloriously whupping frog   
   > ass, but the coda to the scene is just right. as the smoke settles   
   > and the surviving french surrender there is the unmistakable and sad   
   > realization that the french are 'honorable' sailors too; they too are   
   > patriots serving their country and trying to survive under hardship.   
   > i don't see this as weir having it both ways; rather, he's seeing it   
   > both ways. it reminded me of 'enemy below' which presented both sides   
   > as human.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)