MovieChat Forums > Longitude (2000) Discussion > I really like this film but...

I really like this film but...

posted 16 years ago by jordan-202
10 replies | jump to latest

I really like this film, but I feel like it is missing any positive female characters. I'm male but I found it annoying that the few women in the movie where:
harrison's stressed wife (she's nice but has no identity)
gould's nagging pissed off wife
stupid girl at dinner
gould's crazy mom
gould's girl friend with florence nightengale-syndrome (she's nice but her whole identity is to be his mother)
slave girl looking for "rich bastard"

come on; seriously. history isn't just made by men while women are the scenery... give a more balanced view!

[–] jons_k 16 years ago

Well, I know that in this day and age it's politically incorrect to say so, but the simple truth is that women in the past, even the recent past, usually DIDN'T play a big role outside of the home. Most were poorly educated compared to men of the day and spent the biggest part of their time caring for their families. They didn't have the education, free time, or permission to work on things like the longitude problem, or for that matter, much else of an intellectual nature. This was a film about what was at the time a MAN'S world, with men solving the key problems of the day. The unjustified inclusion of bigger women's roles in this film would have been ridiculous. I personally didn't see any problem with any of the women's roles in this film. Stating that Gould's mom was "crazy" just seems weird, the girl at the dinner made a simple mistake, Gould's nurse/girlfriend seems reasonable, as I have had that happen to friends of mine who returned from war, the girl looking for a "rich bastard" can be found in any bar in the world on any given Friday night, and from what I've heard about ex-wives, "nagging" and "pissed off" seems to be rather typical behavior during a marital breakdown. And before you attack me as some sort of sexist pig, understand that I've been married, happily, for several decades now, and I have three daughters, all highly educated, successful, and happily married women in their own right, and also devoted to their old Dad.

[–] jordan-202 16 years ago

jon k-

the events happen in two different periods than now; that's true.

If I could be an invisible time-traveler and go look at life in the mid-18th-century, I would see men doing things like sailing on ships and building wooden clocks, &c.

But I would also see woman taking on many and variable roles.

Just because those who had recorded life at THAT TIME were primarily concerned with the deeds of men, it doesn't mean that woman were not conducting lives of interest to us now. We have a choice about how wide the frame is... maybe it's a generation-thing that gives you the sense that it would be ridiculous to include domestic life in the story. Luckily I was raised to look to the unheard and the marginal to form historical narratives...

But film is a contemporary medium. It's view is a contemporary view. Simply because men were self-congratulatory in the 18th c. doesn't mean that we have to frame a film about them from their own view. Otherwise, Longitude should be in media of the day: broad-sides and pamphlets and novels.

But you know what, even Tristam Shandy (the book) has more women in it, many of whom are complex people, some sympathetic.

My concern is the lack of character development- these woman are only defined in terms of their relationship to Herrison and Gould- beyond that they are wooden.

[–] nimmo27 15 years ago

I've read the book Longitude by Dava Sobel and there's no women in that at all. The part about the Longitude focuses solely on John Harrison and to a lesser extent William Harrison and there struggle to be taken seriously by the scientific community which at the time i'm sure was dominated by men but not exclusivly poulated by men.

[–] et_tu_Brute 16 years ago

Perhaps you should read Dava Sobel's book 'Latitude' from which this series was based on.

Yes, the writer is a woman and I am sure she wasn't bothered by the concept of political correctness when she decided to write about some remarkable people in history. If the concept of gender equity bothers you so much, also read Ms Sobel's book "Galileo's Daughter" or any her other works. They are about remarkable people and science. For more on this go to www.davasobel.com

Without patronising anybody, this brilliant series is a 'dramatisation' of Ms Sobel's story. It is intended to appeal, entertain and enlighten a broad audience which may have dismissed a dry story from science history, as well as those of us fortunate enough to have read the book.

If we allow ourselves to be distracted by gender inequity, we may as well comment upon the actors' perfect dentures, flawless complexions, immaculately clean clothes or whatever else that we may impose on a different place in time. Why do people have to view history with late 20th century attitudes, beliefs and behaviours on a different time and place. Sure, compare and contrast past and present, but don't try and revise history to suit some politically correct agenda. What happened then, happened then. Accept it for what happened there & then and move on, else we will all end up living in fairy land.

I admire the efforts of writers such as Dava Sobel, Simon Winchester, Ben McIntyre et al who write wonderfully engaging, well-researched non-fiction (not necessary biographies) accounts about important, but overlooked characters from history.

Without these writers, and these accounts, what we will all end up with is more "Hollywood" sanitised versions of history. That reminds me, don't let me get started on "Braveheart".

ciao et cheers

et tu Brute!

Locked my wire coat-hanger in the car - good thing that I always carry spare keys in my pocket :)

[–] Mintguy 16 years ago

I'll grant you a little latitude. The book is of course called "Longitude".

[–] micaofboca-1 15 years ago

I wish readers would copy Montguy's gentle and humorous wwy or correcting somebody without creating an atmospohere of contention that brings about so many vile retorts on the net. You corrected Et tu, Bruté without humiliating him since his post is actually quite well written and nicely exposed other than his little error as to the title. Sailors have been able to calculate latitude almost since men first set out to sea at to a high degree of accuracy. This story gives a detailed explanation how easy that was in order for sailors to figure out their latitude, but how poor their methods for calculating longitude were and what the costs were in terms of ships, treasure, and men lost.
This movie isa compelling story out of what might have been a rather boring event in history. But rather the story explains why pirates and privateers were common before the 1800s, only to vanish almost completely thereafter. One thing made clear by the telling of this remarkable story is that many movies covering historical events, whether fiction or fantasy, make sea travel in the pre-Longitude era too reliable, too easy where in reality it was very difficult. It's probably the measure of the success of a technological advance that it becomes so prevalent and accepted that the difficulties faced in the days before are forgotten by the general public.
That's the great success of this movie. By completely delving into the scientific problem, rather than being concerned if there are any love interests or even any women actresses at all. The entire content of the movie is the progression of devices and ideas that gradually revealed the inevitable answer.
The answer was to create, and build a Dead-on accurate clock. When such a clock was set to, for example, London time, you could simply refer to the clock at noon local time, and determine by seeing how far away from noon the clock was how many minutes and seconds of arc one was from London. However, the clock would have to remain accurate over long periods of time, in humid conditions, and across a wide span of temperatures. When the Longitude Act was passed, clocks were not even accurate to within several minutes per day, and even an error of a couple seconds per day would cause the navigator to miscalculate a ships position by dozens or even hundreds of miles.
The movie describes Harrison's attempts to build such a clock, eventually settling upon an oversized watch. The drama sought to describe the hostility many of the astronomers on the longitude board evaluating his submission had towards him.

[–] supergran 15 years ago

I too enjoyed mintguy's gentle and witty correction, as I did your scientific and historical insight, micaofboca.
As a female, I wasn't at all bothered by the near-absence of women. I was too enchanted by the story to notice. Although, now it's mentioned, the portrayal of Gould's wife seemed very believable. I don't know how factual the depiction was, but to be the wife of someone so driven must have been difficult.
Micaofboca, have you ever seen the clocks? I've seen them several times and they are truly fascinating.

"She is tolerable, but not handsome enough to tempt me"

[–] micaofboca-1 15 years ago

Je t'aime, supergran. You are so very cool. And there's nothing that makes me happier than spending a day in the Greenwich Naval museum. Boy, I'd love to spend a day there with you, since you're such a gracious and charming individual.
Thanks for your special warmth that you exude with your kind words.

[–] JacintoCupboard 9 years ago

Allow me to freshen your response. His handle is, of course, 'Mintguy'.

[–] Jamal-Nazreddin 9 years ago

I really like this film, but I feel like it is missing any positive mongol characters.