I jusy got through watching it for about the 6th. time and I “think” I caught a mistake.
Right before the major and final battle scene, they tell the “starboard” gun crew to unship the rear wheels from the guns to gain elevation so to take the main mast. During the filming the French ship sails up the port side of the Surprise. I thought that at first they said Larboard but they diff, said starboard anybody else catch this?
Jake
I’m watching it right now and I swear they said Larboard. Maybe on my 10th or so viewing I’ll catch it. Addictive movie, almost as much so as the books.
Quick question: why is it Larboard and not Port? I assume it was changed at some point? Probably something an ex-Navy man like me should know, right?
-Devin
Found this on the net.
Larboard,
now called port (q.v.). (Starboard is from Anglo-Saxon steorabord, the steer-board, or right side of a ship.) Larboard is the French bâbord, the left-hand side of a ship looking towards the prow; Anglo-Saxon bœc-bord.
“She gave a heel, and then a lurch to port,
And going down head foremost—sunk in short.”
Byron: Don Juan (The Shipwreck).
“To give a heel” is to sway over on one side. Here it means a heel to the starboard side
Great movie.
Critically praised
Few went to see it.
One Navy man to another…
I heard this question asked years ago by a midship. I was told Larbord was the left side of a ship if you were looking forward. Somewhere it was changed to port. This way, no matter if you were looking fore or aft, the left side was the left side. Must have been once the English & French got over fighting eachother and started sailing together, somebody keep getting confused. [:D]
Great, now I have to sit and watch the whole movie for a tenth time to check on what was said. Thanks Jake…
I think I caught one related goof in the movie. (It took some effort. In terms of historical accuracy it’s a terrific flick.)
My understanding is that in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, helm orders were the reverse of what they are today. The standard system for giving helm orders was keyed to the movement of the tiller. When you swing the business end of a tiller to the left, the vessel’s head turns right - and vice-versa. In sailing ship days - and, I believe, right into the twentieth century - sailors used that system regardless of whether the ship was actually steered with a tiller or a wheel.
When Russell Crowe says “Hard astarboard,” the ship moves to starboard. If he wants it to do that, he should be saying “Hard a larboard.”
If I remember correctly (the usual caveat: I may not) the old system was still in use in 1912, and caused some confusion in the hearings over the loss of the Titanic. The first officer apparently said “hard astarboard” when the iceberg was spotted, with the result that - quite correctly - the ship turned to port.
A few years later (I don’t remember the date) the profession agreed to start using the words “right” and “left” in helm orders. I think I have all this straight; maybe a Navy veteran can correct me.
I’m reminded of a funny flub in another of my favorite movies, “Das Boot.” In one of the early scenes, as the U-boat is on its way out of France and about to submerge for the first time, the captain is on the bridge making some profound remarks to the war correspondent. The captain then turns around to leave the bridge and barges straight into the navigator, who’s right in the middle of taking his noon sight with his sextant. The scene then ends abruptly. Danke schon, Herr Kaleun.
Just caught it again on cable, and it sure sounds like he’s saying larboard, both when he orders the rear wheels unshipped, and then later.
Possible confusion between larboard and starboard is the very reason cited by the US Navy and the Royal Navy in their orders mandating the use of the word port. I could get you the exact dates if you wanted but if memory serves the USN order was issued in the mid 1840’s, the RN order somewhat earlier.
Al
He definiteley said “larboard” in the movie, I just love that movie. However I just wished that the makers of the movie had followed one or two specific books instead of taking bits and pieces from a dozen of O’Brians books.
I was never a huge fan of O’Brian, I thought “Master and Commander” rather dull and rambling, and “Far Side of the World” had too many plots and charachters, with what should have been a climatic ending turning out to be dissapointing. I commend the writers of the movie, they turned, what seemed to me, a very complex pair of novels into an exciting 2 hr movie. My historical critque would have been that they left the enemy ship an American, like in the book.
I’ve always been interested in the story of the Frigate Essex, which was loose in the Pacific causing alarm to the British Whaling trade, so two ships, Pheobe 36 and Cherub 18, were dispacted with orders to “sink, burn, or take her a prize”.
Sounds like scottrc has about the same reaction to O’Brian that I do. Let’s get ready to circle the wagons, though, scottrc. Something tells me we’ll hear from the O’Brianites before the day’s out.
OK. I don’t feel like the only pilgrim in an unholy land anymore. I have worked very hard to enjoy the O’Brian books but got caught up in all the subplots and drawn out language. I thought something was wrong with me. I made a point to read the first five books on one deployment several years ago. I got through them but felt like I missed something. Agree that he has a way of setting up a scene that can keep you turning the page but once your past, it slows down again. No disrespect to fans. I think O’Brian is a wonderful author. It’s just nice to know I’m not alone out here.
Chrisstedt - We drifted into this region yesterday on another thread - the one that starts “Nice model on E-bay” - wherein I took the liberty of blabbing some of my own primitive ideas on the O’Brian vs. Forester issue. You are, as a matter of fact, far from alone in having your doubts about O’Brian. Wooden Boat magazine took up this topic a couple of years back; by the time the exchange of readers’ letters was over, the O’Brianites and Foresterians were practically throwing things at each other. I hope that doesn’t happen here, but if any of the O’Brianites can enlighten me as to why they like those books so much, I’ll be grateful. If Chrisstedt is missing something, so am I.
Some “small” models of the ships of Master and Commander, and ships of the era. [;)]
Umi, thanks for sharing.
I know that webste well, when my wife asked me a few months ago what kind of boat I was saving my money for, thats what I showed her.[:D]
She thought bass boat, ski boat, or fishing boat, the type of boats that a normal, middle age male would spend $6000.00 on.
I’m not normal[8-]
Well, as in all things, tastes differ.
I’m on the fifth book of the Aubrey-Maturin series, and I’ve only read Flying Colours of the Hornblower series.
The bottom line for me is that I like O’Brian’s characters better than Forester’s. Hornblower, himself, was difficult for me to like.
I also like the humor in O’Brian’s novels.
That’s not to say I won’t read another Forester novel.
Regards,
I’ve read all 21 novels of the aubrey/mautrin series. and have read 2 of the hornblower series. O’brian got me started on the mamoli USS Constitution Kit - but that is neither here nor there.
while both were enjoyable as a pure read, I’m in with Lufbery’s assessment.
Back to the original question: Just saw that scene AGAIN (what do they do, run this movie twice a day?) and it was definitely larboard.
As to why few went to see it; it has to be the lack of a love story. Really, if they didn’t have that plot to Titanic, do you think it would have made all of that money? It’s sad that M&C won’t see any sequels because of keeping it accurate, but then again, if they had gone the money route and had Hillary Duff as a love interest, I wouldn’t have liked it. But, of course, Pirates of the Caribbean DID have that, and I enjoyed that movie.
-Devin