Re: "Master and Commander"


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Previous # Next ] [ Start New Thread ] [ TarBoard ]

Posted by Laurence Monkhouse on April 01, 2004 at 18:18:09 from 217.137.109.160 user Laurence_.

In Reply to: Re: "Master and Commander" posted by Ike Stephenson on April 01, 2004 at 14:14:21:

Authenticity pretty good. Jack Aubrey himself is now surely how we will always imagine him to be. But I doubt whether such large holes could have been blown in the side of a frigate by anything smaller than a 74. And Surprise under Jack Aubrey did survive a yardarm to yardarm engagement with a 74.
Plot much more doubtful. I know that film is a different medium to a book, but I cannot overlook the fact that they lost almost all of Stephen Maturin's character, which - by its contrast with that of Jack Aubrey - is the key to the whole series. Maturin really doesn't come out as more than a resident naturalist.

I'm not convinced by their explanation of why they couldn't have done one of the books - for example 'Master and Commander' itself or 'HMS Surprise'


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
Eel-Mail:

Existing subject (please edit appropriately) :

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

post direct to TarBoard test post first

Before posting it is necessary to be a registered user.


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TarBoard ]

Courtesy of Environmental Science, Lancaster

space