ALL IS LOST: The Movie

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by poiu

Power to old guys. I respect anyone having a go and doing the best they can. I just don't want to be depressed by relenting negative situations and frustrations. No fun, no excitement, no charm, no nothing positive. I don't need that.

Well, that is exactly what sailing can be at times. That's why the good times nice weather, etc, can seem so good.

If you have a minute, check out the start of this kid's solo Atlantic crossing ( on a Contessa 26) that he figured what be soooooo fun. He just had to get passed the bad stuff then..........

Solo Transatlantic [complete] - YouTube

[JMR324]

Originally Posted by satdiver

Please enlighten me to an experience you have had scuttling a boat at sea and tell me all the technical errors you made in the process from calling a Mayday to deploying a life raft. And then make that comparison to the movie errors.

If you viewed every scene the crew and I made (if we were being filmed I'd say you'd find a ton of errors of the 9 day process.) We sat in a raft for over 4 days with a hole in the middle of it.

From absolute well trained experience I can say this movie did it's job. One of the few times I saw holloywood did something cool relating to my interest.

You have got to be joking..... I almost thought you were serious from your eariler post....

You really need a list of all the things technically wrong??

I would really like to stay and "enlighten" you and all your "well trained experience" however, the river next to my house is flooding, my basement is now 5' deep in water. I just need to run to the second floor and get a quick shave in before I go close that basement door. Tomorrow, I'll try to start pumping the water out... Why rush...
I'm a former Navy sailor... You really think this movie "did it's job"? What pray tell, do you think it's job was??

I have been on a sailboat out at sea taking on water... Enough water to reach the top of the seat cushions and "no one" performed as incompetently as he did... Filming every second of what we did or not...

I unfortunately found myself rooting for one of the cargo ships to run him over... That was the only thing that didn't happen to him....

A pathetic movie.

We all hoped for a good sailing movie... This wasn't it.

...and by the way... He wasn't "trying" to scuttle his boat.

[Doodles]

Originally Posted by JMR324

You have got to be joking..... I almost thought you were serious from your eariler post....

You really need a list of all the things technically wrong??

I would really like to stay and "enlighten" you and all your "well trained experience" however, the river next to my house is flooding, my basement is now 5' deep in water. I just need to run to the second floor and get a quick shave in before I go close that basement door. Tomorrow, I'll try to start pumping the water out... Why rush...
I'm a former Navy sailor... You really think this movie "did it's job"? What pray tell, do you think it's job was??

I have been on a sailboat out at sea taking on water... Enough water to reach the top of the seat cushions and "no one" performed as incompetently as he did... Filming every second of what we did or not...

I unfortunately found myself rooting for one of the cargo ships to run him over... That was the only thing that didn't happen to him....

A pathetic movie.

We all hoped for a good sailing movie... This wasn't it.

...and by the way... He wasn't "trying" to scuttle his boat.

I don't know how many times it has to be said but apparently some need a reminder. This was NOT a sailing movie! Not a training movie for wannabes .. Go to YouTube if that's what you were expecting. The movie critics got it why can't some of you "sailors" see the difference between an artistic film and a documentary about how to single-handed sail an ocean? Just because there is a sailboat in it does make it a sailing movie!

[JMR324]

Originally Posted by Doodles

This was NOT a sailing movie! Not a training movie for wannabes .. The movie critics got it why can't some of you "sailors" see the difference between an artistic film and a documentary about how to single-handed sail an ocean?

As an "artistic" film... It still sucked!!

[tightgroup]

Originally Posted by Seafrontiersman

While I observed a number of technical errors and mistakes on the skipper's part (otherwise the title would be Robert Redford goes sailing) I recognize that the movie was a work of art, whether you liked that art or not and I found it refreshing when compared with the usual drivel Hollywood puts out.

No gratuitous swearing, no hip-hop music BS, no obligatory White racist beatdown, no lesbian scene, no bashing of Christians/Conservatives. No overt attempt to make a Straight White Male seem stupid, weak, or evil.

I liked it!

Well said!

[tightgroup]

Originally Posted by poiu

Power to old guys. I respect anyone having a go and doing the best they can. I just don't want to be depressed by relenting negative situations and frustrations. No fun, no excitement, no charm, no nothing positive. I don't need that.

Yes we all need for Hollywood to take care of our depression. Cotton Candy and make me feel good BS.. Reality is a bit more difficult to swallow..
Maybe that is why this film is controversial, because it struck close to home..

[Blue Skye]

I enjoy Redford and whether or not the movie was poor, he was great as usual IMO. Some freak out, some don't. My imagination tells me Redford is pragmatic in real life, so maybe he's not a sailor, but the director allowed him "free range". I'm ex Army guy and watch many military movies that fail to capture the realistic side but still find value in entertainment. Lighten up saltys!

[tightgroup]

Originally Posted by JMR324

As an "artistic" film... It still sucked!!

Wow I bet that you also criticized Pirates of the Caribbeans for its naval technical issues.

Art is in the eyes of the beholder! Maybe you did not like the movie but others did, and that is the beauty of our democracy..

[womensetsail]

Well all I have to say is we are two women sailors and we would have repaired that hole much better than he did. And where the hell was his PFD? He never put one on....

I don't like movies that don't give you enough information. Why was he out there - an old guy alone, and obviously not very strong or prepared for such a deep water excursion. Why? I wanted more information.

The movie was well done from an artistic perspective...however....

[satdiver]

Originally Posted by womensetsail

Well all I have to say is we are two women sailors and we would have repaired that hole much better than he did. And where the hell was his PFD? He never put one on....

I don't like movies that don't give you enough information. Why was he out there - an old guy alone, and obviously not very strong or prepared for such a deep water excursion. Why? I wanted more information.

The movie was well done from an artistic perspective...however....

If they gave all the details I don't think anyone not interested in sailing could sit through it. Remember this was a movie for the masses not a movie for just sailors.

I still dive the Mark V diving rig (for fun) and have one of the few that are in inspected working order. Although I never worked on a movie set I loaned my suit when they were filming Men of Honor.

Although I was not a particluar fan of the film from a writing standpoint. If you ever trained a competent diver to dive one of these rigs it would take at least 60 minutes of the Movie to explain how a free flow rig works (basic) and are set up. While they never showed the many preparations we take as Navy divers in Men of Honor I thought they did a great job at faking it.

Would you really like the movie to showed our multiple chamber runs and work up dives while we are preparing to go deep. Maybe a few of the sailors smoking cigarettes next to the HeO2 compressor with silent coms pressing down a few divers to 500fsw. Maybe the LST stuffing his face with ribs while the divers are sleeping for six hours and solving complex tables. Even worse the toilet cam where they watched me poop in the sat chamber at 1500fsw. I loved my moms face when I showed her the video of me sucking what looks like a huge condom up my nose to swallow ind inhale to check my chest compressions at at 1800fsw. It would be a 5 hour Movie if they called it NEDU instead of Men of Honor.

Most people don't care much about the details. And I'm not speaking for sailors. That is people in general. My family knows about my exploits in my sinking experience and all they cared about was what it was like after we got a hole in the boat. They never went into great detail in questioning and in fact asked more about how I felt than what we tried to do. Although it's embarrassing my average boating cousin does not know what PFD stands for much less EPIRB.

If you ever spent any time on the water you'd know most people don't know what no wake zone means. But now you expect hollywood to explain all this in a 2 hour movie.

[Doodles]

Originally Posted by womensetsail

..

I don't like movies that don't give you enough information. Why was he out there - an old guy alone, and obviously not very strong or prepared for such a deep water excursion. Why? I wanted more information.
..

From interviews I've read with the writer and director it was their intention not to give you much information. That's why there was no back story. You are being asked to do your own interpretation and make your own projections, making it a very existential film. This can make a lot of people squirm especially if you like everything tied up in a nice package.

The ending is the best example .. did he live or die? There is a lot of debate of this and how you feel about it will say something about you and that's what they wanted to happen. The movie will make you think if you are open to it.

[SaltyMonkey]

The shaving scene was an affirmation, a symbolic representation of mans quell for control over God and the elements. The Russian formalists would understand the concept as a dualistic representation of two different objective pairings - one between the pain of the oppressed and the other being the weight of the oppressor. However, the deconstructionists and perhaps the new historicism take would be a different reading of the scenes, especially the eating scene which they would view as probably a reference to the last supper.

Obvious there is a political subconscious undertone to the shaving, which we might mistake for finality. The marxist viewpoint would probably interpret each of his physical acts as a means of production that would not necessarily place him in a higher class order. Subconsciously, his political position cannot be overcome, and he will always be stuck in the oppressed.

In other words, it was a close shave.

Jacque Lecan and Judith Butler would agree.

[Doodles]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

The shaving scene was an affirmation, a symbolic representation of mans quell for control over God and the elements. The Russian formalists would understand the concept as a dualistic representation of two different objective pairings - one between the pain of the oppressed and the other being the weight of the oppressor. However, the deconstructionists and perhaps the new historicism take would be a different reading of the scenes, especially the eating scene which they would view as probably a reference to the last supper.

Obvious there is a political subconscious undertone to the shaving, which we might mistake for finality. The marxist viewpoint would probably interpret each of his physical acts as a means of production that would not necessarily place him in a higher class order. Subconsciously, his political position cannot be overcome, and he will always be stuck in the oppressed.

In other words, it was a close shave.

Jacque Lecan and Judith Butler would agree.

As usual, I think Salty has summed it up nicely. And I'm with Jacque and Judith.

[Captaintim1]

Thomm225...

Thanks for sharing the video of the Atlantic crossing. The first minute made me laugh because I'm sure most of us have been there...in the cabin...saying out loud "This F@%king sucks"

[satdiver]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

The shaving scene was an affirmation, a symbolic representation of mans quell for control over God and the elements. The Russian formalists would understand the concept as a dualistic representation of two different objective pairings - one between the pain of the oppressed and the other being the weight of the oppressor. However, the deconstructionists and perhaps the new historicism take would be a different reading of the scenes, especially the eating scene which they would view as probably a reference to the last supper.

Obvious there is a political subconscious undertone to the shaving, which we might mistake for finality. The marxist viewpoint would probably interpret each of his physical acts as a means of production that would not necessarily place him in a higher class order. Subconsciously, his political position cannot be overcome, and he will always be stuck in the oppressed.

In other words, it was a close shave.

Jacque Lecan and Judith Butler would agree.

Well said! I was thinking while the tankers were passing him was supposed to be symbolic of the occupy movement and the big corporations ignoring the little guy in the life raft just needing to get some food, water and shelter from the sea.