I'm afraid you misunderstand the point.
I'm afraid that you do not understand the genre. This is not a "morality tale." It is an amoral comic fantasy. See my post above.
The point is whether St. James contriving a murder is conceivable given his character throughout the movie and particularly following his apparent 'moral awakening' over his selfish treatment of Nita and Maud.
There is no "moral awakening." St. James has not "redeemed" himself; he is still a "scoundrel." A "moral" ending would be completely "inappropriate" in this story. He gives his boat to Ricco so that Ricco can pursue the same strategy with two wives that he did.
St. James is capable of a grand romantic gesture in taking the blame for Nita's act, all the while being quite sure that he can escape. He does not end up sacrificing himself to atone for his sins, and he never intended to. I don't remember where St. James regrets "his selfish treatment of Nita and Maud." Can you refresh my memory?
What happens at the end is not much of a murder, and St. James's life is at stake. The soldiers clearly like St. James a lot more than they like their officer, and I assume the officer was a complete bastard. In arranging the shooting, St. James does show character development, just not in the direction that you want.
There is nothing evil about St. James. He is a trickster who took advantage of a particular situation, and he clearly believed that both of his wives were happy in their roles. He was quite shocked to find out that they weren't. He is a generous man. He gave Ricco his boat, Maud his possessions, and Nita her life. He cares about all three of them.
St. James is "punished" for not understanding women by losing both of his wives. Isn't that enough morality for you? Do you have to have a "moral awakening"?
A lot of works of fiction are
not morality tales.
P. S. All of the information that we have about what happens between St. James's wives leaving him and the execution scene comes from Ricco's recounting of the story. But Ricco, like the OP, is confused about the genre. He thinks that the story is a melodrama like "A Tale of Two Cities." (St. James has a flair for the dramatic, and he does encourage Ricco in his misunderstanding.) Actually, the story is a comedy and it has an ending suitable for a comedy.
reply
share
icaredor
13 years ago
I don’t imagine Captain’s Paradise comes labeled, “Genre: Amoral Comic Fantasy.” I think you invented it the genre (or sub sub-genre) and then assigned film to it. You think, apparently, that if the film is ‘amoral’ it doesn’t deal with moral issues and hence St. James’ behavior can’t be immoral because that violates the rules of this genre. Moral behavior creates the same difficulty so his behavior must be somehow non-moral, or at least as close to that as you can bend it. Likewise, a ‘moral’ ending would be inappropriate, but it can’t be ‘immoral’ either so you try to make it as ‘amoral’ as possible by assuming the officer was a complete bastard (based on what?) and the soldiers liked St. James more (he paid them) and St. James’ life was at stake (he put himself in that position) so it can’t be “much of a murder” (ditto Absalom?).
The extent to which I misunderstand ‘amoral comic fantasies’ depends what you think the constraints of this genre are. I’ve never seen a definition for amoral comic fantasy, nor a list of films presented as examples of this genre, and, since this is a ‘genre,’ it must necessarily include more than one film. Does it include the more famous Guinness comedies from this time that are usually identified as ‘amoral’: Ladykillers, Lavender Hill Mob, and Kind Hearts and Coronets? If so, I think you misunderstand the genre.
These films aren’t ‘amoral’ because the characters are ‘amoral’ or because the films don’t deal with moral issues. On the contrary, a characteristic trait of these films is that their ‘heroes’ are clearly identified as villains. They commit robbery on a grand scale, mass murder and, most dastardly of all, lie to little old ladies, i.e., these films deal with enormous moral issues. They are ‘amoral’ because such ‘weighty, ponderous matters’ are not addressed with the ‘due seriousness they demand’ but are dealt with comically.
And to say that a moral ending to an amoral comedy is inappropriate…that depends on what happens in the rest of the film. Ladykillers and Lavender Hill Mob end with the ‘bad’ characters getting an ‘appropriate’ come-uppance. The final outcome in Kind Hearts (British version) is wonderfully ambiguous, while the tacked on ‘moral’ ending to the American release is entirely ridiculous.
Most of the fun in these films comes from knowing that what these characters are doing is wrong and that they might get away with it. Likewise for Henry Saint James. So, claiming that a film is an ‘amoral comic fantasy’ in no way excludes it from being a morality tale as well. In actuality, a morality tale is a rather perfect format for an amoral comedy. And the Captain’s Paradise is set up as a moral allegory. I would think that the allusions made by the title and by the name of the lead character provide screaming hints as to what the writers have in mind.
reply
share
ppllkk
13 years ago
Well, you've convinced me that you are serious which I certainly did not believe initially. It appears that we live in alternative universes, and continuing this is not going to produce mutual understanding.
I would like, however, to explain my use of the term "amoral." (I did not anticipate that it would be confusing.) I believe that some works of fiction, The Captain's Paradise is a prime example, invite you to suspend your normal moral judgment, and just go along for the ride. That is what I meant by an "amoral" comic fantasy. It is not that the characters are moral or immoral. It is not that there are no moral issues involved. It is that the creator of the work encourages the audience to temporarily suspend its normal moral judgment, and not focus on the issues as moral ones. Such works use a variety of techniques to convey to the audience the idea that the world of the fiction is a fantasy world that operates by its own laws and not the real world. What happens in such a world is not to be taken as seriously, particularly as morally seriously, as it would if it happened in the real world. (Sometimes films have been required to stick a moral "fig leaf" on the end of a film, but that does not really change anything.)
You don't believe that the audience is being asked to suspend its moral judgment in The Captain's Paradise. I do. You think it is a morality tale. I don't. I am guessing that the concept of temporarily "suspending your moral judgment" is completely foreign to you. It is obvious to me.
I am absolutely sure that in movies such as The Captain's Paradise, Kind Hearts and Coronets , and Keeping Mum, to name just three of many examples, the intention of the people who made the film is to create an amoral fantasy world and to explore what happens in that world. I do not believe that their intention is to deal with serious moral issues in a comic way, and I don't see any evidence of their doing that.
You see it differently, and you can certainly believe whatever you want to believe. But I would argue that all the people who think that the ending of The Captain's Paradise is great are suspending their moral judgment and taking the movie on its own terms, and you are not.
This discussion got started when you decided, in spite of the fact that there is nothing in the movie to suggest it, that St. James had undergone a "moral awakening," and that The Captain's Paradise is a "morality tale." You said that you were baffled apparently because the plot did not conform to your assumption. You might see the ending of the story as a clue that your assumption of a "moral awakening" is wrong, but you don't. You still insist that this is a "morality tale" even though the plot is telling you that it isn't.
A note, just because it amuses me. It is not just St. James who escapes punishment and starts a new life. Maud is an adulteress, and she looks forward to a happy life with her new boyfriend. Nita is an adulteress and a murderess. She completely escapes punishment for the latter, and given the way she looks, I don't think she will have trouble finding a husband. Ricco is set up with two wives, and I like to think that he has learned from St. James's mistake and will not repeat it.
reply
share