|
Post by HMS Lydia on May 19, 2014 23:43:13 GMT
I find it very difficult especially to condone the fact that O'Brian never seems to give his character insights as to their own faults. While I am the first to admit Horatio darling can be a bit much with his endless introspection, it does end up being a more self-aware man and one who tries to improve himself (though admittedly with varied results). I think the movie rather downplayed this aspect of Maturin, which was very much appreciated (I couldn't dislikePaul Bettany if I tried). Lydia
|
|
vixie
Midshipman
flirting with the new Laser Vago!
Posts: 29
|
Post by vixie on May 20, 2014 10:32:25 GMT
I have read and reread the series, and certainly recognise that there are moments when O'Brian writes brilliantly, with sheer genius of scope and tempo playing out, and moments when he lapses with his characters, plot or narrative. He was a brilliant writer of 18th century historical fiction. I assuredly have my favourites (and I think that forever more Diana Villiers will be the epitome of a literary heroine for me - independent, vivacious, practical yet loving, and not without fault.)
However, I must respectfully disagree with my friends here about Bettany and O'Brian's Maturin. I never found O'Brian's Maturin to be a completely likeable character, but more often than not, and possibly a reflection of the author's own personality, he drove the plot with his introspection. His was an aloof introspection that one would expect of an Elightenment naturalist: a cool, calculating observer using his knowledge of classical philosophy and Newtonian scientific method to order the world around him - a true product of the age and his background. Certainly not without flaw; at his worst, wallowing in self-pity and addicted to laudanum, and at his best, being the most loyal friend to Jack, he was never a morally superior creature. As for self-awareness, he did display an amount of it in the books, but was more of an observer of others, less interested in himself, a kind of device by the author at times through which the audience could view the world of the Napoleonic Age.
I thoroughly enjoy the books, and I loved the film. The film was not like the books, but had enough of the material from most of the books to excite the appreciation of any O'Brian fan. Crowe was okay as a kind of Jack, but Bettany did not do the character of Maturin justice in my opinion. He overacted the softness and sensitivity of the man where the Maturin of the books had a definite hard edge and was a person not to be crossed, by sword, pistol or matching intellects. Sure he had to learn his way around a ship, and did so more slowly than a foremast jack, but he could hold his own in intelligence games, excellent at holding his emotions in check, was no weakling - physically strong enough to be a bully if need be - and was no one to be challenged to a duel recklessly - who can forget the steps outside Government House in Sydney? I could tolerate Bettany's portrayal, but it fell short of what I thought could have been accomplished with that character. What I found unforgivable, though, was the way he hoisted that 'cello onto his knee and strummed it like a guitar in the last scene. O'Brian's Stephen Maturin never would have done that.
(If I had been the director, I might have considered the cinematic quality of including those cocaine-addicted rats in the movie!)
|
|