Just Re-watched "All Is Lost"

[jimp1234]

Didn't like the movie. Not so much because of the sailing discrepancies, but because I didn't really care that much for Redford's character. The yiddish word "schlump" comes to mind. A man struggling to survive in a hostile environment, try the Martian. Ok, Redford at 70 something is no match for stud muffin Matt Damon, but for some interesting "old guy" movies try "the World's fastest Indian" with Anthony Hopkins or "The Grey Fox" with Richard Farnsworth or one of my favorite old guy kicks A** movies try "Heist" with Gene Hackman. As a sailing movie "Adrift" wasn't bad.

[AndyEss]

Burt Lancaster as the old guy in "Atlantic City" with a young Susan Sarandon is quite good - he has enough in him to get out of his run down apartment and be someone again.
I think it was Burt Lancaster's last movie.

[Sojourner]

I spent almost all of that movie scoffing But I could have fixed all of the problems in a way many of us might understand (only conceptually I hope):

Lose the exposition diary, it makes no sense and makes him seem selfish. He's motoring in calm waters at top speed trying to get somewhere fast instead of just sitting around like we might do waiting for wind. Hits the container while downstairs tending to something we don't get to see yet in his cabin. All the rest of the movie goes as it did. At the end, we find out his wife passed away on the passage, perhaps due to a mistake he made as a sailor, wrapped up in a sail in the berth they had shared around the world. She died because of his mistake, he is downstairs with her when he hit the container, he was trying to get her home.

All is lost.

Roll credits.

[OldManMirage]

I didn't see it mentioned here but if you want another movie that sailors love to pick at try "Dead Calm" with Nicole Kidman and Sam Neill from 1989.

We watched for the first time at a dock party. There were about 8-10 liveaboards at Lamb's and we used to have a "movie night" now and then. This was the one that kicked it off.

I won't give away anything, but it definitely requires that "suspension of belief" for a sailor ! Lol

[GILow]

Originally Posted by WingRyder

...
Most discussions I've read, sailors seem to be critical of the characters poor decisions. I will leave alone some of the technical errors, but I wanted to discuss why I think most people are missing the point.

I think that Redford's character is a man who is solo sailing, not for the adventure, but to escape his miserable life. "All is lost." He had given up on life, long before the trouble even begins.

....

Any thoughts?

Excellent and insightful interpretation thank you. Like many others I was lost in the technical failings of the movie and missed what you have observed.

I expect to see your future movie reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I’ll tag you as a Top Critic. [emoji846]

[bailsout]

He is not saved. That hand reaching down for him well below the surface is his vision of Rapture of the Deep. That’s why the title isn’t “Almost All Is Lost” and you never see him break the surface. I liked the ending which allowed for a little controversy and discussion.

[Capt Gill]

I, for one, will be watching this film again. Like many respondents to this thread I too got caught up in the sailing aspects which distracts or takes (the sailor types) us away from contemplating the main focus of the film as in "Can't see the wood for the trees" - I'm not going to debate whether or not there's a main focus, it's not my point. Thanks WingRyder and MartinAdelaide for your insights, I'll rewatch the film with less attention to the technical details, should be easier the second time.

[Cpt Pat]

If the movie were about sailing, which like the OP, I didn't believe it was, then the subtitle should have been: "Dumbass on a boat." Who carries an expensive sextant but not an EPIRB? Of course, an EPIRB would've spoiled the sea survival story. To illustrate, we have the recent story of The Dingbats who drifted around the Pacific for months and never activated their EPIRB. That would've spoiled their book deals and TV appearances. (http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...hs-192907.html)

In a nutshell, my interpretation was a lonely, depressed guy who needed the sea to tell him: "Dude. You're gonna die!" to shake him out of his funk. Sailing my little boat off a lee shore singlehanded in 30 knot winds and 10 foot seas gets me outa any funk every time. The sea says to me: "OK. I'll take your challenge. Sail or die!" There's nothing like a little survival experience to remind you why you want to survive.

[senormechanico]

Speaking of dingbats, any news?

[ZULU40]

I think the technical sides of things get pretty much 'Lost' in most films with some form of hardware management at their core.

The movie 'Fury' which is about an M4 easy eight medium tank is another good example. They had the Tiger firing on the move which they never did, its actually written into the Tigers manual. They had the four Shermans attacking the Tiger while the Tiger eliminated the first 3 from left to right. In reality the Tiger would have stopped and rolled the easy eight first because it was the only one that could actually penetrate a Tiger with its 76mm gun.

Then the overhead shot got completely destroyed as the synchronicity of the easy eight getting around the back of the Tiger 'and' outrunning the Tigers gun traverse was completely stuffed up. Really they should have re shot the scene.

Another is Nolan's Dunkirk, which has far too much ammunition on the featured Spitfire. Which after an 'overly' epic glide makes a dramatic gear down landing on the beech.... ummm no, not on sand.

But they did at least keep the aircraft in type (one exception) with period markings on a non existent Spitfire squadron so that it would not appear to be following a particular pilot. One exception was to mark the German 109's with yellow noses which did not occur until much later, but done so for the film as they say to help the audience identify the aircraft.

[Panama Red]

I watched the movie because I was thinking about buying a Cal 39.

One reviewer claimed the boat was the true hero in the story.

If I were to be a single handed round the world sailor, the Cal 39 would be very high on my list.

[redbeard1]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

Speaking of dingbats, any news?

Boat was spotted last february, still floating.


https://www.sailfeed.com/2018/02/sea...-tasha-fuiava/

[aquadreams]

Captain Ron for the win!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huFdBaD5FU8

[WingRyder]

Originally Posted by jimp1234

Didn't like the movie. Not so much because of the sailing discrepancies, but because I didn't really care that much for Redford's character. The yiddish word "schlump" comes to mind. A man struggling to survive in a hostile environment, try the Martian. Ok, Redford at 70 something is no match for stud muffin Matt Damon, but for some interesting "old guy" movies try "the World's fastest Indian" with Anthony Hopkins or "The Grey Fox" with Richard Farnsworth or one of my favorite old guy kicks A** movies try "Heist" with Gene Hackman. As a sailing movie "Adrift" wasn't bad.

The fact that you didn't like his character because he was a "shlump" means that Redford portrayed it well. I was very frustrated with him as well. But that was the point! He was not portraying Jason Bourne, the sailor. It was a realistic portrayal of someone, very human and very vulnerable to interior and exterior forces acting against him.

[WingRyder]

Originally Posted by GILow

Excellent and insightful interpretation thank you. Like many others I was lost in the technical failings of the movie and missed what you have observed.

I expect to see your future movie reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I’ll tag you as a Top Critic. [emoji846]

LOL, I'm not much of a critic... I like what I like and don't what I don't.

But I will take this opportunity to discuss the biggest, annoying technical flaw that I had to ignore, because it was merely a vehicle to move the story forward... The scene where his boat is rolled. He is upside down looking at underwater, through the cabin top hatches... Yet not one drop is coming into the boat! I think the open companionway should have filled that cabin in a matter of seconds. Then flaw number 2... Once the boat is rolled back upright, the forward, starboard portlight is swinging open... yet a second earlier it was sealed water tight... Again though, if you get too technical on ANY movie based in the realm of REAL physics, it is pretty easy to spot ridiculousness, far greater than these. (I exclude science fiction/fantasy, as they make up the laws of nature as they go along. )