14
   

Epic Films for Farmerman: the Quest for Lovable Quest films

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Jul, 2011 08:58 pm
@wayne,
I grew up reading about Horatio Hornblower, and reading the Nordoff and Hall novels about the Pacific. I was absolutely obsessed as a boy--i was also a thousand miles from the sea. By the time i moved closer, as an adolescent, humans of about the same age with strategically placed bumps had begun to absorb my attention. I did get to sail, though, with my uncle and through a yacht club where my father footed the bill to get rid of me.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Jul, 2011 11:02 pm
@Setanta,
I built all my love of the sea from the Doc Ricketts tales written by him and his buddy Steinbbeck. I never read the Hornblower series but Ive a buddy who's redcommended them.
I subscribe to Wooden Boat Magazine and I find its info really informative to a trawler (smudge pot ) sailor like me.

I liked Master and Commander for its cinematography mostly. The parallel to the scientific aspect of the voyages of "HMS Rattlesnake" was not lost / Also I love the TRavelogues of canal sojournes via pleasure craft, or sailing in the CArribean or the Chronicles of the Whitbread. (As well as Maryland NPR's own documentaries on Skipjack fishing, The SUltana, The "PRide..." These are are all well done and need no story line to keep me entertained. I always like to review how the cabin layouts are presented so that working under sail and living aboard can be appreciated

izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 02:38 am
@farmerman,
Nogbad the bad

Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 04:58 am
@farmerman,
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World combines two of the titles of O'Brian's novels, and seems to have been intended (unlike so many "Hollywood" movies) not to have a sequel. There are lines and dramatic scenes in that movie from HMS Surprise and Desolation Island, Post Captain, to name but three. O'Brian himself indulged that silliness about a missed opportunity for natural history in the Galapagos.

There were parts of the motion picture which were less than well-done. Sailors in those days didn't crawl up the rigging like so many geriatric patients, nor climb back down in the same fashion--they'd have wrapped a leg around a backstay and been on deck in seconds. I can see why liability considerations might prohibit the latter, but the former was to me inexcusable. They used the replica ship HMS Rose, and you'd think that crew would know how to run up shrouds like proper man-of-war's men.

In that particular, the Pirates of the Caribbean movies are even worse. There's no watch on deck at night (even pirates had to honor some of the tenets of discipline at sea, just to survive), and the orders they shout out from time to time, such as "Splice the mainbrace!" have no earthly relevance to what they intend to do as sailing vessels--i supsect the screenplay writers just thought they sounded good.. However, if one can get around that, the movies can be quite entertaining with just a modest suspension of disbelief, and in the matter of replicating 18th century costumes and weapons and technology, they did a first rate job. Although a few boners slip through, they even managed to write dialogue using common 18th century speech. I think you'd enjoy them.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 05:05 am
@Setanta,
Id seen trailers of the Johny Depp movies (HE acted like this really fay pirate, was that part of some character development? )and was a bit tuned out because they seemed to celebrate the CGI rather than a story.

I think one of the things that has especially turned me off to many of the epics is the CGI overtopping the entire plot and story line. We seem to do the CGI overload just because we "can" not because it necessarily adds something.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 05:08 am
@izzythepush,
Nogbad the BAd needs some work.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 05:13 am
@farmerman,
Noggin the Nog holds a special place in my childhood memories, it was the first kid's programme that actually scared me.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 05:15 am
@izzythepush,
especially with a queen named "Nookie?" are you kidding?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 05:30 am
@farmerman,
I was about 4 years old at the time.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 05:32 am
@farmerman,
That would definitely be a problem for you, then. The second and third movies rely heavily on some preposterous images that can only be computer-generated. The first movie relied on two "ships" which were actually barges, but from which filming could be done at sea, and a real vessel, a brig (brigs are not ships) called Lady Washington which is a replica ship, and was used in the role of HMS Interceptor in the movie. She is described as "the fastest ship in the Caribbean," a claim with which i have two problems--it's a brig, not a ship; brigs are weatherly vessels which swim well in almost any weather unless crewed and commanded by absolute idiots--but they wallow like pigs and one thing a brig never is is fast.

Most movie goers would never know that, so it wouldn't be a problem for them. Maybe yiou'd enjoy the first one, and dispense with the rest. The first was a stand alone, with room at the end for sequels if successful--and they were wildly successful, nearly four billion dollars.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 05:38 am
@Setanta,
Ill look for the first one and have Mrs F put in on our Netflix que
Ben Smith
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 09:52 am
@farmerman,
An epic quest, "Clash of the Titans"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXttqg0RWU8
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Jul, 2011 09:55 am
@Ben Smith,
uhhhhh, When the entire concept of the movie is summarized in its Title, I feel that theres nothing for me to do but sit there and stuff popcorn into "Mahh Booshe"
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jul, 2011 02:32 pm
Try a film called "13 Assassins". See what you think.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jul, 2011 03:38 pm
@farmerman,
I remember you saying somewhere, that you would never drink a Budweiser.

I would never drink one of these,http://media.uvinum.net/wines/budweiser-435142.jpg

I would drink one of these though.http://www.thedrinkshop.com/images/products/main/2385/2385.jpg
0 Replies
 
ragnel
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2011 07:37 pm
@tsarstepan,
Okay all you experts out there, I know I am sticking my neck out, but I really would like your opinions.

What was so wrong with Dune?

I thought the original book was marvellous - the sequels seemed to get weaker and weaker, and I doubted they could ever make a successful translation of the story to film. (Of course with today's technology this no longer applies). When the movie came out I was pleasantly surprised and enjoyed it immensely. But, it seems, I am the only person who did. All the feedback I have seen or heard merely seems to dismiss it as something of a joke.

I would be glad to see what you think (especially if you read the book).
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2011 07:55 pm
@ragnel,
I read the book only last year. So most of my understanding of the Lynch movie was that of an uneducated 13 year old who had to see the film twice at the movie theater in 1984 before understanding what was going on.

Personally, I really loved what I saw. The acting was solid and the ideas warped my fragile little mind.

The characters and the unique Lynchian atmosphere worked well with the story. After reading the book, though I agree with other critics. A new version should include more of the political intrigue that was in the book.

After reading Dune, the idea of continuing reading the rest lost all of the wind in the sails. I have no reason for such full stop other then I don't feel compelled to further read anymore of the books.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2011 08:32 pm
@ragnel,
I read about six of the Dune books. I enjoyed the movie, too, but i understand why it was such a spectacular failure. For all that it was a short book, Dune packed an enormous amount of detail into the small vessel. It could have easily been a motion picture triology, and it still would have suffered because its status as an action/adventure movie would have suffered from the necessity of providing all the detail to make it comprehensible to anyone who had not read the book. I agree that the books got weaker and weaker as they progressed.
ragnel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2011 09:56 pm
@Setanta,
Thank you both for your comments.

I agree the film would have been just another fantasy adventure without knowing all the political background and personalities involved.

(I used to think of myself as a 'Lady Jessica'. When my son began high school and started bringing his friends home he would introduce me as 'the Reverend Mother Gaius Helena'. My gom jabbar equivalent must have been pretty lethal. But what a comedown!)

When Catch 22 was released I went to see it with a friend. He laughed all the way through it while I sat staring stoney-faced at the screen. Couldn't for the life of me fathom what was going on. I was laid low with some weird disease when living in Africa and someone loaned me the book to help me pass the time. Amazing! Once I realised what the imagery was all about the book was a joy. A few years later I saw the movie again, and this time it was me rolling in the aisles.

Since then I have tried to make it a practice to read the book before I see the movie. In ninety-nine percent of cases this philosophy proved to be worthwhile. So many good stories develop from what the protagonist thinks and this is very difficult to capture on screen (without voice-overs).

Mind you, there are an awful lot of bad films made of good books. The Watchers is a case in point.






0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/09/2019 at 09:05:09