Master and Commander

[Captian Wolfy Wench]

Ahoy Royaliste!

I be readin yur posts on the soundtrack. Who be the composer? Might be one of the great ones? Horner, Zimmer, Williams?

Endkaos, you are indeed correct. Hans Zimmer, James Horner and JOHN WILLIAMS *cough* are very much THE great ones... but you forgot Danny Elfman! ^^ But I digress. No, the score is made by three people: Christopher Gordon, Iva Davies, Richard Tognetti, according to Amazon.com. Never head o' any of them.

I just saw Master and Commander yesterday, and I loved it! It was not jus' the call of the sea that got me, it was the visuals, the story, the narration of a life at sea, and especially the characters and their relationships. I love history. :) I have been meanin' to pick up the books, bu' now I'm going to have to, eh. I hope not to drown in nautical terms and lingo I'm not familar with.

Captain Wolfy Wench

[Andre LeClerc]

It was just under 200 a day before overtime (which 

Mario

Hmm, 200 per day is not bad pay for reenactor pay--or did you go in as extras?

I worked with Riley Flynn before he died on most of his horse films including Ride with the Devil--Two for Texas-Rough Riders--Postman--etc, and the most we made was on the Postman, and hell, we was in the saddle for damn near five months around the country, I think our pay that time was 200 per day, 75 for horse and equipment, and stunt bumps were 50 dollars, if I remember---so for a pirate film and grub, 200 was not bad?

Seen Master and Commander, and havin been a Partrick O'Brian book fan for years, I liked all the hang me down set dressing on the set---once you got past the fact that the screen play covered two books and parts of others, but hey, what the hell, it was a great sea story---and it seems the equipment was correct?

I have a friend in Old Towne in Califonia, and was parts of the scenes on the Star of India? He was telling me how they built three separate sections of the Surprise and used each part in differents setups?

Until later, a good Maturin/Aubrey film.

Andre LeClerc

semi-elected master of

the St. Vitas Dance

[endkaos]

[Endkaos, you are indeed correct. Hans Zimmer, James Horner and JOHN WILLIAMS *cough* are very much THE great ones... but you forgot Danny Elfman! ^^ But I digress. No, the score is made by three people: Christopher Gordon, Iva Davies, Richard Tognetti, according to Amazon.com. Never head o' any of them.

Wolfy Wench,

Never heard of them either, but I hear that music plays less to the story in Master and Commander. Most of the meaty scenes are sans music to enhance the desolation and solitude of Tall Ships at sea. I be stuck with yungins all weekend and still haven't had a chance to see the film. Hoping for Thanksgiving weekend to provide an opportunity.

[Mario]

Hi Andre,

The contracts were special ability, but my colleagues and I ended up serving as stunt trainers to the extras and performing in principal fights as well. So 200 was okay but not really great. Anyways, I'm in the final cut so I'm happy. The other guys didn't make it from what I saw.

Mario

[TalesOfTheSevenSeas]

I thought some of you might enjoy this email, from one of our pirates who just returned from England and had an interesting conversation with a costumer who worked on M&C and POTC:

"...I had coffee and a long conversation with one of the costumers for "Master and Commander" and "Pirates of the Caribbean". Her name is Kirstie Buckland, and she comes from a family in Wales that has been making knitted hats since the 17th Century. She supplied all the knitted hats for both movies. Kirstie is also acquainted with the head costumer for M & C. During our chat, she detailed the battle between the costumer and director and the Hollywood producers over authenticity. The Hollywood crowd had their own ideas, but the forces for authenticity stood to their guns and finally triumphed. The result was what may well be the most authentic historical movie ever made. Most of the costumes--with the exception of the knitted hats--were made in Italy. The shoes were copied from an original pair recovered from a ship that sank in 1806. The straw hats were hand-woven. The striped shirts were made from a repro fabric that was copied from an original sample that came from an old prison used to house convicts transported to Australia in the late 18th Century.

Kirstie brought along some examples of her hats. I was so impressed that I ended up buying one of her thrum caps.

I also went to a vendor's fair for reenactors. This fair was in Coventry, up in the Midlands, and getting there required a two-hour train ride, followed by a half-hour wait in the rain in a block-long line to get into the exhibition hall. Once inside, I found myself in the midst of a crush of shoppers that for density equaled the London Underground during rush hour.

Most of the products offered for sale were repros from the late Saxon period through the English Civil War, with a few offerings from Roman and Napoleonic period vendors.

I ended up buying a pair of hand-knit English Civil War stockings. I've been on the lookout for a pair of really authentic knitted stockings for a long time. These weren't cheap--twenty pounds--but they look great! To see a sample, go to:

www.bandoliers.co.uk

I also bought a pair of early 18th Century shoes for my pirate impression. I actually ordered them before I went over there, since they had to be custom made. Here again, not cheap. They cost the equivalent of $175.00, but that included all hand stitching. If anyone is interested, I can give them the name of the vendor.

I also spent a considerable amount of time in various museums looking at costume exhibits. Picked up a few ideas for making a pirate frockcoat."

[Red Maria]

Hi Andre,

The contracts were special ability, but my colleagues and I ended up serving as stunt trainers to the extras and performing in principal fights as well.  So 200 was okay but not really great.  Anyways, I'm in the final cut so I'm happy.  The other guys didn't make it from what I saw.

Mario

Mario

I spotted you at least twice maybe even thrice if that was you being blown up by a hand granade.

[Matty Bottles]

Wolfy, I believe young Mr. Boyd was the helmsman. He's also the fella who tilts the burial platform.

[Deacon Frye]

... I ended up buying a pair of hand-knit English Civil War stockings. I've been on the lookout for a pair of really authentic knitted stockings for a long time. These weren't cheap--twenty pounds--but they look great! To see a sample, go to:

www.bandoliers.co.uk ...

Twenty Pounds!

Let's see, how does it go again?

"Knit one, perl two"?

[Zephyr]

saw the movie......at last.....thought the portrayals fantastic........as I'd imagined them.....Wonderful!Fantastic!.......Killick was a dear!

The story-changing never (rarely...allowing for some perhaps I've forgotten) measures up to the original books ...and who was that cherub? home alone meets master and commander? From another book? was the scene of Stephen doing his own surgery from another book? (haven't read 'em all)...seemed excessive....

curious ...ye pros...the flying splintered wood in battle ....actual or exaggerated a bit?

Loved the authenticity!!! Great sea, great storm, great ships, great crew....really wish they'd done the first book....hope they'll do more....must have been a fantastic experience for those involved!

[Red Maria]

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!

[Deacon Frye]

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 ...

Thank you for posting this Maria.

I note that Capt. Tucker didn't provide the titles for any of those accurate British films. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to ask, and whether they're available over here? I'd be most interested.

With regard to the review, I'm struck by the fact that the Capt. seems to spend more time talking about himself than about the film.

Although he does put in the disclaimer that he hasn't read the novels and seems to feel this makes him an "unbiased" observer, his concerns about Aubrey's uniform indicate that he lacks a basic understanding about the relationship between the novels and the film that was well know to the lowliest of the media hack critics. In spite of the inclusion of M&C (the first novel) in the title, the film is primarily based on the action in FSOTW, the tenth novel. O'Brian has it set in the War of 1812, with an American ship being the protagonist. The movie moves it back to 1805, with a French ship. At either date, Jack had been a Post Captain for a long while. Even without this knowledge, however, I would have thought the Capt. would know that an officer below Post Captain would not have command of a frigate. Temporarily under unusual circumstances, yes. But sent out by Whitehall on a mission of this sort, never.