master and commander - SPOILERS

[Susan]

Can someone please explain to me the ending of this movie? Put a SPOILER alert so nobody complains.

The reason I ask is because the last quarter of the film a couple came in, sat in the row ahead of me and decided to talk loudly the entire time..by loud I mean conciously talking OVER the cannons blasting so they could hear eachother...and through all the quiet times. Whats worse is it was entirely in another language...and constant like they were having a debate. Then the woman began bouncing so much in her chair (creating squeaking and flying up in the air) that I literally thought they were having sex over there. All efforts to shut them up failed, and ultimately it led to utter distraction so that I really couldn't focus on the film anymore.

I'm confused about the way it ended, them saying the doctor died on the island? In fact from the time they battled the enemy by hand combat I lost track of everything. I'm trying desperately to find a place on the net with spoilers...let me tell you i'm really p**sed off.

[)ules]

SPOILER ALERT!
As requested, basically what happens is this. They manage to disguise themselves as a disabled whaling ship, see, and the Frenchies come up alongside them and that's when they spring the trap, letting loose with their guns and boarding the ship. When they've finally taken the ship, Captain Crowe (nice ring to it, eh?) comes across a scene wherein the ship's doctor has just failed to save the captain's life. Boo hoo. But the doctor tells Crowe that the captain wanted him to have this, a sword which he then gives to him.
So they take the survivors prisoner and claim the ship as prize, Crowe names his first mate the other ship's captain and they plan to rendezvous...somewhere, I forget. The point is, soon after they are under way Crowe learns from his doctor that the OTHER ship's doctor actually died some time ago. This means that, ta da, the "doctor" who handed Crowe the sword must be the enemy Captain himself, that clever Frenchman! Or something like that.

[Susan]

Ahhhh! Thank you SO much for that! The scene on the boat is where I was telling the couple to shut up and they proceeded to yammer and squeak. (i've never seen anything like it honestly) so you can imagine how frustrating the ending was for me since  i hadn't been paying attention. For some reason when they said the doctor had died I thought they meant Crowe's doctor and he was sitting there as a phantom image playing the bass..lol   I really appreciate the recap, it puts things into perspective.

Overall, even tho I'm not a fan of russell crowe, I really enjoyed this film. It wasn't swashbuckling or overly action packed. But I thought it was interesting to see what that kind of confinement did to men at sea...the superstitions and how it made some men and broke others. We don't often see these type of movies, they seem to come along every decade or so.

[raj]

Got to see the movie over the weekend, for free (thanks to a niece who is an assistant manager at the theater).  Well done movie, very realistic depiction of life aboard a ship in 1805, now I dread watching Captain Blood, it just won't be the same.  

The only problem was that my six year old nephew kept asking my sister questions about the movie.  Grrrr, I just wanted to sit back and be absorbed by the film.  

Wonder when they'll do a sequel.

[ulthar]

On a military vessel, there are no 'mates.'  First Mate's etc are only on civilian ships.  Tom Pullings was First Lieutenant in the movie.  In the book series by Patrick O'Brian, after being promoted to Captain, Pullings went on to become a very successful, and highly respected naval officer.

The handing over of the sword was symbolic 'change of ownership' of the ship.  That was pretty much the only way the battle was formerly ended without total destruction of a vessel.  If the French Captain had been killed, the next in command would have surrendered; if he was dead, the next, etc.  The only way for the battle to end without such a surrender would be to destroy/sink the ship (a therefore kill all aboard her that did not surrender).

As the remaining alive crew of the French vessel would have been put into the hold as prisoners while the prize ship was sailed to port (to be legally declared a prize and the prisoners ransomed to the enemy) and the prize crew actually sailing the ship was typically a skeleton crew, it was not uncommon for the prisoners to attempt a revolt to re-take their ship.  This would only work if/when the two ships parted company.

This explains in a bit more detail the ending of the movie.  By being still alive, the French Caption was a prisoner, still dangerous and still capable of rallying his officers and men to revolt.  In the final scene of the movie, we see the 'Surprise' sailing to the prize ship with the weather gage (advantage of wind) and at quarters (battle stations).

[raj]

I assumed that the whaling crew (30 was the number, IIRC), with no ship of their own was also onboard the French vessel, making a successful revolt just a bit harder.

Also, did they repair the main mast on the French ship?

[ulthar]

The whaler crew was onboard when they took her, but I am not sure if they took them off - I would think so.  As many of the SURPRISES were killed in the action and Jack was already short handed, he would have 'pressed' the whaler crew (in effect, drafted them).  I don't think he could press the Master (Captain) of the whaler, though.  If any of them DID stay on board, that would have been that many fewer actual SURPRISES to go as prize-crew.

The two ships would have kept in company while basic repairs were done, but 'fixing' the mast would have been a 50-50 deal....they PROBABLY were repairing it with a jury-mast underway on the way back to port if the French frigate had the spars and rigging to do so.  In the movie, we don't really know how much time passed before Jack changed course to hunt them down, so we don't know how much time passed to effect ANY of the repairs necessary, including stepping of jury masts, yards and rigging.

Since the movie closes with the 'Surprise' closing on the prize ship with the wind on her port quarter, I concluded Jack knew right where to find her.  From that, I infer that an uprising by the prisoners, if planned, has not occured yet as it is doubtful the French Captain would have kept the same course if successful.  Also, that Jack caught them relatively easily suggests the prize was not sailing very fast.

As a final thought, and this is just conjecture, Pullings was a very experienced officer - he had fought with Jack for many years in many engagements and had taken many prizes into port (Jack was known in the service and in the English public as "Lucky Jack Aubrey").  Also, the prize crew, though small in number, would have been rated Able Seaman or higher so that their few numbers would not greatly hamper handling the ship.  So, I would be very surprised if the French crew were successful as breaking out and gaining control.  But it did make an interesting ending.

[Neville]

I'm with you, Susan. This movie kicked ass! It looks like many people hate it, because it doesn't have enough action or it is too slow. Personally, I found the whole thing fascinating. I keep telling these people that being a realistic approach they can't spect 140' of ships battling other ships. Then they flip their middle fingers to me and they start talking abour "Pirates of the Caribbean" or, even worse, "Cuthroat Island". Arrrrrrrrgggggghhhhh!

[Eirik]

Might the French Captain have deceived Russel Crowe about his identity simply to reduce the ransom that would have to be paid for his release as well as the embarassment to the French fleet of having a captain captured?  Seems a captain's ransom could be more than the whole rest of his crew.  Just a thought.

[ulthar]

Well the real question there is one of honor.  In that time period, there was NO dishonor in surrender when your ship was defeated in honest battle.

Over the series of books, Jack had befriended several French Captains - though they would fight to the death if need be.  It was a wierd thing that's a bit difficult for us to think about now in our 'modern' cultural context.

To deceive in the way depicted was, on the other hand, dishonorable.  That behavior would garner that Captain not only disrespect from his enemies, but also from his contemporaries in his own nation.  His ship was beaten - the subterfuge after the fact would be considered cowardly.

[raj]

My thoughts exactly, which is why that ending was a bit of a surprise to me.  Though possibly because the Surprise itself was disguised as a whaler, the French captain thought they were being deceitful and so he could do that as well.

[ulthar]

Well, for my part, I really enjoyed both movies.  Pirates was fantasy with some interesting period dialog and some good effects.  M&C was historical drama, attempting to tell a story that to a greater or lesser extent, really happened (though a bit differently than in the movie).

Someone on another forum (one not typically with movie topics) commented that M&C 'caters' to a demographic different from most current Hollywood creations.  I love b-movies, but cannot stand most of the drival that passes for 'real' A-Movies from Hollywood these days.  I'll not waste my money on crap like "The Fast and the Furious" and similar movies that on their surface purport to tell some kind of story, but just seem to substitute erroneous special effects (I have posted earlier about the falseness of virtually ALL Hollywood explosion effects), gratuitous sex and/or low-brow dialog for substance.

I am a voracious reader, especially of naval and warfare history.  M&C is based on Patrick O'Brian's historical novels that, in turn, are based on real people, real ships and real battles.  It's a different sort of movie, seeking to find an audience from people that don't typically go to movies.  The target audience of M&C was NOT males 18-35 in general (with Jerry Springer-esque snappy dialog, cheasy he-man wannabe battle/fight scenes, lots of nude women/sex or college frat party-esque easy going 'fun'), nor was it a romance to get dreamy eyed women in the seats.

I put M&C in a similar genre as "Saving Private Ryan," "Gladiator," maybe "Shindlers List" and similar movies.  They are historical drama desiring to actually, Heaven Forbid, tell a story.

[Susan]

Neville - you know I haven't even seen "pirates of the caribbean" yet. I was going to get it on pay per view when i was at a hotel on halloween night but i locked myself out of the bathroom and spent that time having the hotel staff take the doorknob apart. Guess it was fate. And sometimes how I feel about an actor's movies and such has an effect on the way I receive a movie, but as arrogant and overrated as I think Crowe is, I liked this film. I have a feeling that it's going to get oscar nominations in some categories



>>Over the series of books, Jack had befriended several French Captains - though they would fight to the death if need be. It was a wierd thing that's a bit difficult for us to think about now in our 'modern' cultural context.
<<

Series? don't tell me I can expect spinoffs

Master and Commander: The near side of the tub

[ulthar]

raj wrote:

>Though possibly because the Surprise itself
> was disguised as a whaler, the French captain thought they were
> being deceitful and so he could do that as well.

It is completely different now, but in the early 19th century, being deceitful about your ship was perfectly acceptable military practice ... UNTIL the (true) colors were run up and the battle engaged.  They would fly flags of nationalities friendly to the enemy to close in before engaging, disguise ships as merchant vessels, etc.  All was fair ... but once the true colors were run up and the battle started, any deception would most likely have been seen as dishonorable.

Disguising the SURPRISE as a whaler was therefore within the rules ... you'll note in the movie that once close enough and BEFORE Jack attacked, he ran up the English colors and the pretense was revealed.  He COULD have gained a bit more surprise and a few extra valuable seconds had he not run up the colors, but that would have crossed the line.  It was important not only man-to-man, but also for Jack's career in the Navy to win his battles honorably.

If anyone liked this movie even a LITTLE bit and has NOT read the books, I highly recommend them.  Virtually all 20 books in the series are really good, exciting reads (there are a few that are slower than others) and O'Brian was a master at naval battle narrative.  I would also recommend "The Golden Ocean" (also by O'Brian) which was based on Commodore Anson's voyage around the Horn (one of Britain's first) - a trip in which nearly a thousand men died of Yellow Jack and figures prominently in the historical development of Harrison's chronometer used to determine longitude.  It's a great book with a fair amount of humor.

Finally, Lord Cochran has an autobiography available (he's the real life dude upon which O'Brian based Jack Aubrey, and a lot of stuff in the books really happened), though I have not read it.  Though not detailed in the autobiography, Cochran invented biological weapons of mass destruction that were viewed to be so terrible, the English government kept their design classified into this century.  Fascinating stuff.

[Neville]

Well, I have to say "Pirates of the Caribbean" is not a bad film. It has a promising start and Johnny Depp is really funny,  but I found it too long  and it artificially filled up with unnecesary swordfights and ship action, hence my defense of "Master and commander", which is, despite its 140', almost spartan and minimalist in its conception.