Red Maria

It was surprising how many adults were enjoying it too. Writing titles of books down (like General History of Pirates) and playing the period games like Dutch Blocks. As you said it was an appropiate choice given the venue. It would not have beem for Plimouth Plantation (well except maybe in the gift shop ). The total emersion stuff is great and I salute you for it. Sometimes it's nice to be out of the 21st century. :)

Accuracy vs theatre. I am reminded that in October PRP performed at a reading festival at the Huntington. The festival was over two Saturdays and featured re-enactors from the Elizabethan period, Revoultionary War, Gold Rush and us. We were scheduled the same Saturday as the Gold Rush people. They had a very accurate encampment right down to can labels and period dry goods. We had a scaled down encampment becuase we had just done the Ojia Pirate Faire the weekend before. Who had the best turn out? Who had the most comments and compliments We did! (Comments like "I didn't know that about pirates!" "those guys rock!") Why? Because we brought books! (Both children & adult books) Not period bound but books that each of us had in our libraries at home and wanted to share. We also had storytelling from the afore mentioned books and games which were period. Becuase we chose to let a wee bit of the modern world in we were able to make the world of the Golden Age of Piracy come alive for young and old. This was after all a Reading Festival . None of the other encampments brought books of any sort at all. The other two groups, The Elizabethan court and the Revolutionary War brigade that performed two Saturdays afterwards, as good as they were, still did not get as much positive feedback as we did. Sometimes you need to be as period as possible. Sometimes you need as it is said in theatre 'drop the fourth wall' and let the audience in. :)

Came across this online. Just incase like me you don't get Newsweek. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3769863/

Glad you were impressed Billie!

Here's some goodies I found in the Library's online catalog. They are all 17th c. : Public General Acts 1659 An Act for impresting of seamen. June 28. 1659. Ordered by the Parliament, that this Act be forthwith printed and published. Tho. St Nicholas Clerk of the Parliament England and Wales. Parliament, Aug. 10, 1645 An ordinance of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, or the speedy raising and impresting of men, for the defence of the kingdom. : Die Jovis, 10 August, 1643. is this day ordered by the Commons assembled in Parliament, that this ordinance be forthwith printed and published: ; H: Elsynge, Cler. Parl. D. Com Everett, George, Shipwright Encouragement for seamen & mariners. In two parts. Being a proposed method for the more speedy and effectual furnishing Their Majesties Royal Navy with able seamen and mariners. And for saving those immense sums of money, yearly expended in attending the sea-press. In order to prevent those many mischiefs and abuses daily committed (by disorderly press-masters) both at sea and land, to the great prejudice of their Majesties, and injury of the subject. By George Everett, Shipwright London : [s.n.],|cprinted in the year, MDCXCV. [1695]

This is a bit off topic but one year at the annual plant sale I was in charge of the hierloom tomatoes. I was there to help people as I am quiet a grower of tomatoes. One of the varities was called 'Black Seaman'. A lady scrutinzing the various varieties looked at me with gravity and asked with all seriousness "Have you tried 'Black Seaman'? I looked at her agasht and said "That's an awfully personal question!" She look at me a moment blankly. Then it dawned on her what she had asked me. She started to laugh. The I said "No I haven't. But I will take one home and let you know next year what it is like". By now she was really losing it laugh wise and took not only the 'Black Seaman' but several others as well.

I wasn't mentioning anything about him as a person! Just his performance as an actor. Otherwise I think he's a jerk. What a person play as an actor isn't indicative of what kind of person he or she is in the real world. And I hope Mr. Rush gets his due come Oscar time. :)

Russel Crowe didn't play a pirate in MC/FSW. He was a British naval officer. He was chasing pirates who inturn chased him! Still a fine performance. Both are playing seaman of some sort. :)

Go Johnny Go! Go go Johnny Go!

I forgot to add that if you can't afford to buy this book, you can proably get it from your local library through an ILL (Inter-Library Loan).

I have a book at my desk titled "Enter the Press Gang: Naval Impressment in Eighteenth-Century British Literature" by Daniel James Ennis, Associated Universities Press, 2002 ISBN 0874137551. There is a chapter on the historic aspects of press gangs as well as chapters on how it was depicted in novels and on stage. There is even a chapter on press gang ballads. Maybe you can get it on an ILL.

I was thinking Walt Whitman meself. But that's an insult to the memory of a great poet. I agree there are still too many ways for GW to screw this up yet.

OZ Just got in the Library a book titled "Pirate Wars" by Peter Earle Methun, 2003 ISBN 041375880x. On page 172-173 there is a bit on articles with endnotes refer to other printed material. Here's an excert: "Pirates of the Gold age bound themselves on an oath to obey what they called 'Article of Regulation' and these were taken very seriously. since 'if we once take the liberty of breaking our articles and oath, then there is none of uscan be sure of anything'. The book is about $35,00. I put is as a rush cataloged and charge out to me.

O.Z. The Wonderful Wizard of.. I asked on the academic piracy list I am on if there was book with various pirates articles. Sean Miller of the Daring Douglass sent a link to his site which has various ship articles for sale. They include: Black Bart, John Phillips, & George Lowther. There is also one of dubious origin for Brethern of the Coast. http://members.fortunecity.com/thedaringdo...e/articles.html You can by the set! :)

I am surprised no one has pointed out the other 2 things from the ride that appear in the deleted scenes. The first is the town mayor bring dunked repeatedly in the well (in perfect timing to the ride ;-) ). The other is in the tavern scene where the fat lady is chasing the pirate. Same dress and all!

Since pirate crews had no established heirarchal authority like the navy or merchant vessels they had to have some method of keeping order to prevent totally anarchy (as oppose to the semi-anrachy they were used too ). The articles establish rules (more like guidelines ) to ensure the smooth running of the ship and establish methods for dealing with problem amonst the crew. As far as arguing a point with the captain is concerned ... these are pirates afterall if you disagree with the captain you can vote him/her out! Zorg as far as the articles Cpt. Flint mentioned they are on the last page of Rabble Rousing about half way down topic title Pyrate Artikles by Dan Servern dated Feb. 14, 2003. Could of sworn I sent them to you. Forgot to add there is a nice section on the Below Deck feature on POTC DVD. It's in the Captain's quarters.

I thought some of you might like to see a review written by a friend back east who does extensive maritime (among other types) re-enactment and acts occasionally as technical advisor on films. It's a bit long but interesting THE QUEST FOR THE HOLY GRAIL OF NAVAL FILMS? Another Look At Fox's New Feature, MASTER & COMMANDER From the View Point of A Maritime Historian & Veteren Film Industry Professional By Capt. Thomas Tucker, PORT ROYALE MARITIME COMPANY Quite a few of my shipmates have recently been using the term "Holy Grail" of naval films to refer to the ideal naval/salty dog movie that they hope to see someday produced and shot by the Californio Dons of Hollywood. What has caused all of this fuss as of late is the new Fox film based on the Patrick O'Brian Nelsonian period novels. If might also point out before gong any further is that when our British cousins over across the pond produce a naval, historical maritime flick, we don't get so worked up, except in eager anticipation. And why? Because we know from years of experience that these will be historically educated films, well done, not so much with electronic wizardry, but due to a proper look, and good solid historical details and I should say a good story. We expect it. If there is any such thing as a "Holy Grail" of naval films, the Brits have a lot of Grails! But when an American film maker says they are going to make a great historical film, we hold our breath. And for good reason. We have been conditioned to be on guard and expect to see some ignorant or poorly made feature. I always made a note to my mates that on the History Channel, it is the Brit made pieces that are quality, while our home grown American representations of history are so poor. But it is because they have educated film makers and crew who know their stuff. Maybe our film makers are just as much victims of our bad educational system as the rest of us? That is something to ponder. Anyway, Now I did not attend any of the opening night showings of MASTER & COMMANDER due to having a costume I needed to finish to deliver to Charleston that weekend. I instead had planned on going with fine mates to see it while down there in one of my favourite ports of call that evening before attending the naval logbooks lecture at the Charleston Museum. But after arriving home, and even before going down, I found my e-mail box full of film reviews, especially noteworthy were Captain Vic Suthren's and Framk Rodrique's really excellent observations. As some of you know, Capt. Suthren is a noted British Navy and professional historian in general, former museum curator, Chairman of the Canadian Endeavour Foundation, etc. And of course Frank Rodriques who is a well known expert and practitioner of maritime sail making. Now having been asked to give my own impressions as well, I will endeavour to do so. But first let me say this, I am not a buff of Patrick O'Brian's novels. Yes, I do have a couple of his historical books and am well read in them, but I have little time for even historical novels in my work. So that should qualify me to be an unbiased observer of this film based on his works of fiction. Now as some of you are well aware of, I have spent the major part of my professional career in the film industry, but also as a historian, technical advisor and consultant. So I can evaluate period film productions from both angles. Now from the standpoint of a professional film maker, I will have to agree whole heartily with Vic Suthren's assessment in that area, "With the opening sequence of 'Master and Commander' one is struck by the effort which has gone into this film as regards properties (costumes and artifacts) set and scene design, and the use of CGI (computer-generated imagery). In material terms, 'Master and Commander' sets a new standard in the depiction of the Napoleonic era at sea, and particular as regards the nature of gun action and the effect of round shot on both ship and people." Actually overall I would rate it both in quality of production and in it's basic historic look and portrayal as very good. So much so that I actually enjoyed myself thoroughly and was quite inspired and moved by the story. And with very little in the way of distractions as would be caused by anachronisms. More on this later though. But also as our mate Vic has pointed out so well, it is hardly the "Holy Grail" of naval films either. "It is in the use of all this wizardry that the film does not live up to its billing as the most authentic presentation of the Royal Navy at sea in the age of sail ever produced, " But the same can be said about PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN, there was so much talk about the historical expertise of the film makers, etc. For those of you who know anything about The Goldn Age of Piracy, I need not say more. And I will not ask Capt. Suthren to comment on the portrayal of the Royal Navy in this flick, the language might get a bit too salty for some!! But at least it was so bad that I got a good laugh out of it. And knowing what to expect before hand, I went to the $1.50 theater to see it so as not to put too much tin in the Producer's pocket! But getting back to the film under review, I must applaud Vic Suthren's critique as well thought out and detailed, the work of an educated eye with a lot of experience to go with it. I could not agree more with his analysis. I would also concur with Frank Rodriques' comments about the quality of the canvass work, here you have the expert opinion and eye of the sailmaker brought to bear on this film. And I could add my won two coppers worth also. But let's talk about why this film came up short of being, as some have put it, the "Holy Grail" of naval films, and I would like for a moment to forget my historical background and speak from the perspective of one who has worked for years in the movies. I did my first film back in 1969 while in college, and believe it or not while president of the Dan Diego Young Historian's Society, a part of the San Diego Historical Society. It was the year of the state Bicentennial {1769-1969} and we got it in our heads to do a historical drama about the early history of the city. I had already made some films for college film fests so I ended up leading the way along with some others, including a young film major from the local technical college. I had just spent a couple of years before this working in a field school of archaeology on both historical and military sites in the Virginia Tidewater where I grew up most of my young life. So as you can see I have had a foot in both the historical field and the film industry since my young days in school. I also worked in the field of marketing and advertising for a number of years, including video and photography, and did my first large feature film back in 1991 with Last of the Mohicans. My work has included everything from featured extra, extras casting production assistant, various crew positions such as a set dresser, swing gang, prop man, art dept. coordinator, advisor and as a dept. head as the Set Decorator, Set Armourer, Weapons Safety Supervisor, Propmaster, Re-enactor Coordinator, and in project development. So then, how does the film get it's overall look, especially the fine details that we are here discussing? It is mainly the work of the Director and the Production Designer or Art Director. These two are the artists you might say who paint the picture on film. The Director of course is the main artist, the Production Designer his prophet. Under the Production Designer is the Set Decorator, the Propmaster, and the Art Dept. head and then their crews. The Set Armourer is somewhat independent, and sometimes a part of the Prop Dept. The artillery usually comes under the special effects guys or pyro-technicians. The Set Armourer is in charge of procuring and supervising the use of small arms and the blank ammunition. Sword work is supervised by the Stunt Coordinator or Fight Choreographer. The Set Decorator is in charge of everything that decorates the set, furnishings, wall hangings, the items you see laying about, usually stuff like Frank's hammocks and other things that are not actually handled by cast or extras. Now the items used and handled by the cast are the area of the Propmaster. {usually defined by what the actor or extras can hold in their hands,} And let's not forget the Costume Designer and his or her wardrobe crew. And now remember, most of these dept. heads are doing a lot of their own research into the period items, plus getting research from the Production Designer. So its a big, complicated operation, a Grande organized bedlam from which some pretty good films emerge at times, movies like GLADIATOR, produced by a giant in quality film, Ridley Scott. Or The BOUNTY which film I just went back and looked at the other night and am still amazed at the quality. But hey, it's a Dino film so naturally. Also remember most of those doing research have no historical background or education, so it can be a mess and its amazing how close they get at times. Unfortunately not much though. By the way, where does the "Historical Advisor" fit into all of this? He or she, sorry ladies, is somewhat of an outsider, a non film person who might be involved with every dept. from development trying to advise them all in their procuring of props, set dressing, wardrobe, and weapons and sometimes consulting with the Production Designer in getting an overall proper period look. At least that is the ideal, but not always the case. Too often the Historical Advisor or Technical Advisor is just on set or at the location, and if they are proficient, right there with the Director ready to lend their knowledge, usually only if asked to do so though. In a more ideal situation the Tech Advisor is brought in {especially on TV films,} during pre-production. That is when the production company shooting the film goes on location, sets up the offices, prop and wardrobe warehouses, etc., and gets ready to shoot. Usually on features, movie theater films, the Tech Advisor is involved from the get go and so if a lot looks wrong, then it might very well be the Tech Advisor's lack of knowledge that is at fault. One thing I know from experience, the Director and Production Designer always like to go and have the Set Decorator and Propmaster have a "show and tell" session at the warehouse to get the head pohbab's approval of the toys for the production! I have experienced this as both a prop man, Propmaster and as a Tech Advisor. Another typical experience I have had though is being over ridden by the Director, or I should say by an actor. We were shooting an American Revolutionary War drama for network TV and the Wardrobe Dept. had just brought out the actor on set for his scene, and besides being dressed in the most pitiful excuse of a uniform of I ever saw {I had had no luck with that dept. except they did let me redo the hats so as not to make the film look like A Tale of Two Cities,}he had this big Fu Manchu mustache to boot. The Director upon seeing this turned to me and said, "Tom, is that mustache right for this?" to which I replied in the negative. Well, to this the actor said, 'I like my mustache,' so the Director gave in to the actor. Oh well, it looked good with the silly outfit anyway. So I can understand how a Tech Advisor can have to stand by helpless as the look of or the material culture of the period is murdered before his or her very eyes! On the other hand props, weapons and set dressing are picked up and reviewed by the team way before filming starts, and if a Tech Advisor is on hand, especially in a feature film, it would be rare for a Director to over ride the advise to put something out of place in front of the camera. Remember Steven Speilberg's film, AMISTAD? And remember the close up done of the cutlass Dijimon Hounsou's character was using to kill his tormentors? The stated time period of the story was in the 1830s but they featured this 1860 pattern US naval cutlass with some sort of paint job on the brass basket guard!!!! and it was continually featured right up to the african's capture by what i assumed was a U.S. Revenue Service ship with what looked like soem sort of soldiers on board, they were not marines I can tell you. Now if a Tech advisor has been on hand, even if only during shooting, this should not have happened. But hey, look at the scene with the little cannons firing WW2 high explosive rounds and the scene with the British troops running like a pack of wild pigs, trying to form really quick and firing a volley, with the camera close on their French muskets! Brother. Fire the Tech Advisor there. But in all fairness, the overall look of the film was good, the story was good and I thought portrayed the lesson of history and mind set well And the sets were good and the wardrobe excellent, the majority of the time. The best Production Designers who have won Oscars have said often this was part of their formula for success; you never feature anything that is out of place, it is a distraction from the story and breaks the attention of your audience if they notice it. And this is just considered good film making, not anything to do with being historically accurate per se. One other thought about the historical integrity of this film and the Tech Advisor. If the script writer just follows the information contained in the O'Brian novel, seeing how O'Brian is such a good naval scholar, then the terms, life at sea, etc should be portrayed right, without any thanks to a Tech Adviosr! But now getting back to the historical side of this matter. I would like to add to this something concerning the very title of the film, and this is the only two coppers worth I am gong to add, why would a Master and Commander be dressed in a Post Captain's uniform?? I have criticized this from the first day I saw a picture of Russell Crowe in his uniform. Knowing the mindset of some in Hollywood, it was just cool to call him that and the uniform was more cool looking too! And maybe I'm wrong in making that assessment, but who knows? As for the "Holy Grail" of naval films, it could come about, if some film maker gets a vision to do such, to actually make an educated historical film for a change. I give Peter Weir credit for trying at least to do this, from a historical standpoint, plus making this a quality film especially when it comes to the technical part of the film maker's art. The cinematography was also excellent, the scenes awesome, and the music wonderful and well suited to the time period and story. I want the soundtrack! Personally, I did enjoy the film, actually I found it quite inspiring to some degree, if not to pursue even more so the work of preserving our British naval heritage. So let's give him credit for what he has done, which will only be of benefit to us all in arousing the public's attention to this aspect of history in a well done and quality production. Yes, its far from perfect in it's presentation of the material culture and a bit of the social aspects of the British Navy of the time, but its not that far off either. But getting back to making the "Holy Grail" of naval films, to do this a competent team of advisors will have to be assembled to go over every aspect of the production, but the results would be amazing. Mr. Weir has left this film wide open for a sequel, and from what I heard of it's box office success so far, it might happen which would be a rare thing for a period film these days. So hopefully Mr. Weir will assemble that team of real experts this time, cut any fantasy out of the historical material culture and give us a not only technically great film, but one that is true to the history of the period in every detail. Yes, the usual Hollywood period film can be pretty bad, but then there is the far side of the world of film making, the rare producers/directors like Ridley Scott {Gladiator}and a few others who specialise it seems in quality productions. I'll wrap this up by telling you a story, a short one. Once while working on a TV film about the War of 1812 we did a major battle. The Directors and Producers decided to fantasize the battle and it was not only boring, but unbelievable and stupid. The Tech Advisor {and it sure was not me} went along, all he knew anything about was Civil War reenacting anyway. But as I said back then, the real story is usually always more interesting then anything you can make up. That is why history endures and is the greatest drama ever told!

Show off!

Zorg Was that the cutlass I used the last time I spared with you (3 yrs ago!) when I was out in your neck of the woods?

I just came across this in the book I mentioned in another topic ""Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of the Florida & the Caribbean, 1500-1800 v. 2 Personal Artifacts" pg.270 "The matchlock, the earilest form of firearm was already in use in Europe at the time of Columbus's first voyage to the Americas. By 1550 matchlocks had outstripped the crossbow as the primary military weapon in the New World" There are some illustrations and photos of 16th c. matchlock triggers etc.

They are coming up used as *cheap* as $48.00 and $50.00 on wwww.bookfinder.com Not cheap but I guess it's only a year old.

This just came into the Library: "Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida & the Caribbean, 1500-1800, v. 2 Personal Artifacts" By Kathleen Deagan Smithsonian Institution Press, 2002 ISBN 1-58834-035x A marvelously detailed account of personal artifacts with loads of illustrations and photos. Everything from amulets & charms (there a great mermaid charm), jewelry, bells, buttons, buckles sewing equipment, personal firearms and more. A great deal of pirate booty was taken from the Spanish including personal items so this book would be a good reference tool for any pirate.

The furry one maybe nautghy sometimes but you can't cuddle with a snake at night in bed. At least I wouldn't want to! :) As far as decorations are concerned how about garlands of varoius pirate flags? Like Calico Jack's and Blackbeards?

Nice pics! All of you did a great job on the Land Shark. Pat yourselves on the back.

Thanks! I'll check them out tonight. I also printed up the ones for "Dogma Special Edition" and "Two Tower" extended edition. Good site! :)