MovieChat Forums > Hornblower: Duty (2003) Discussion > Better than no Horatio at all but... (a ...

Better than no Horatio at all but... (a little rant) (SPOILERS)

posted 16 years ago by calliope6
14 replies | jump to latest

Is it just me, or was this the weakest entry of the bunch?

I love any Hornblower, but would be sorry to see the series end with this limp episode. The action sequences were lame, esp. the fight & standoff below decks involving Horatio, Wolfe & Bush, and the French barn scene in which Horatio and Bush somehow drop from a hayloft and scurry around under wagons without further alerting their already-alerted pursuers. Loved the weather -- rain and snow effects were marvelous -- and the Bracegirdle subplot had some emotional substance, but it was dissipated in a lot of scampering around from ship to shore & back again, to very little dramatic effect.

In the earlier episodes, battle (or the threat of it) served as a crucible that solidified or strained relationships between characters and showed us more about them. I was especially looking forward to something like that in the friendship between Horatio and Bush. Instead alas Bush was largely relegated to the role of sidekick; a coat rack could have served as well (though granted it wouldn't have looked as good). One promising exception was his failure to shoot Wolfe during the standoff -- thus disobeying orders, albeit to save Horatio's life. This was well worth revisiting, but nothing came of it beyond Horatio's reprimand.

I'd like to think subsequent episodes would get back to the kind of character-driven drama we see in the earlier eps, but who knows. Here it felt as though the writer was falling back on formulas: Horatio will be dashing and heroic; Pellew will be concerned for him and then proud of him; Horatio will be promoted again; everyone must love him (except for the French and maybe his mother-in-law). At their final parting, Betsy Bonaparte wishes for Horatio's death (nice dark moment), but a minute later softens toward him & leaves him with a kiss. (I guess Horatio's "gift" of his steward made up for the husband. Never underestimate the appeal of a really good cup of coffee...)

And -- forgive me, but this made me crazy -- what responsible captain would leap overboard in the midst of a storm at night to attempt a singlehanded rescue? Doesn't he owe some thought to his command?

And why on earth would the lady parade around an English ship sporting a big fat pendant with the famous Bonaparte bee on it??

Anyway, just had to vent a bit. The fact is, I only saw the first episode last week and have ripped through the series in just a few days, having a totally grand time along the way. I want more! But more of what made it so grand in the first place. (Okay, more on any terms. Just more.)

[–] green_Swedish_car 16 years ago

I know what you mean.
Personally, my least favorite episode is The Fireships, but as for actual substance--well, after the Archie tragedy--sniff--things just seemed to go downhill. And that Betsy, or whatever her name was...she annoys me like none other.

I almost wish they had known this would be the end (knock on wood--I'm still hoping somebody will pick this up again...) so they could have wrapped it up a little better.

As for Horatio jumping off the ship (I don't exactly remember that, but...), I'd attribute that to his generous nature. After all, what responsible captain would grab a bomb (or shell?) and toss it over the side, risking life and limb once again to save his crew?

I own the whole series, and sadly admit I've seen the first six films half a dozen times each, but seven and eight--not so much! :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrN4lzVOXgM

[–] calliope6 16 years ago

LOL, Horatio jumps overboard during the storm scene to save (who else...) Betsy! But then I just watched Mutiny and Retribution again, and he jumps in to save Bush as well, so I guess we need to bless the impulse.

You're right about things not being the same after Archie's death. There was real depth to his character and his friendship with Horatio. The addition of Bush made for a promising trio, 3 very different personalities but all staunch souls. They were great as fellow lieutenants and comrades-in-arms. Buckland says it to Bush, after he and Archie disobey orders and help Horatio blow up the Spanish fort: "You three. You're so full of yourselves, and each other." I wish they'd had at least one more movie together as lieutenants. That situation opened up a lot more possibilities, both for action and character development. When Archie dies and Horatio is promoted to captain with Bush as 1st lieutenant, things just flatten out.

The new rank might have something to do with it too -- greater formality, no superior officer on board to juice up the conflict, and less direct contact with the men. Derring-do that's appropriate from a lieutenant seems a little out-of-place when it's the captain doing it (things like jumping overboard during a storm or pouncing on those pesky exploding shells). And Bush is reserved by nature, which added to the difference in rank means there's not a lot of give and take between them in the normal course of things. Ah well. I'm looking forward to starting the books later this week. Will be interested to see how they compare.

BTW, what is it about The Fireships that makes it your least favorite?

[–] green_Swedish_car 16 years ago

Honestly, I just think it's kind of--well, boring. I think of it, and all I can ever recall is Horatio's examination, the little fat official, and waiting out the plague. All that just doesn't seem to compare with the issues in the other films.
Although, I will say the gentleman playing Hunter (I believe that's his name) turned in a stellar performance!(The one who sneaked into the hold, or galley, or whatever because he was "so hungry!")
It was a great film, several good points--but if there's one I just don't prefer to watch as often, it's that one! :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrN4lzVOXgM

[–] calliope6 16 years ago

The portly diplomat, right? He looks so familiar -- Will have to check his IMDB filmography, as that was bugging me when I saw the ep. He's a popular character actor, whoever he is.

Forgot all about the plague quarantine. The actual fireships were great, though. But I was thinking that The Fireships was the Spanish prison ep (which of course is the Duchess and the Devil). That's what comes of galloping through the series. Guess it's time to watch them again and straighten things out.

[–] green_Swedish_car 16 years ago

The Duchess and the Devil is my absolute favorite! :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrN4lzVOXgM

[–] calliope6 16 years ago

[–] greenegg 16 years ago

The name for which you search is Bunting, who had the munchies during the ration cutting. Hunter was the bad-tempered, mutinous seaman who led the escape attempt during the Duchess and the Devil episode.

I've watched all the episodes countless times. I love the Duchess and the Devil and the Wrong War, but I think my favorites are Mutiny and Retribution. They had it all: action, suspense, camaraderie. David Warner and Philip Glenister made great foils for our heroes, with Nicholas Jones somewhere in between. The last two, Duty and Loyalty, had some weaknesses, though it's always better to have some Hornblower than to have none at all.

I would still love to start an independent production company or network that specialized in our favorite Brit dramas, including the rest of the Hornblower series. With a few exceptions, from Doctor Who to Cranford, much of the latest BBC drivel seems unwatchable. After decades as a devoted Masterpiece Theatre viewer, I scarcely ever watch their productions. How many times can you keep churning out versions of the same old Jane Austen novels, when each succeeding version pales in comparison to the previous ones?

Put puppy mills out of business: never buy dogs from pet shops!

[–] randommovies2002 16 years ago

After decades as a devoted Masterpiece Theatre viewer, I scarcely ever watch their productions. How many times can you keep churning out versions of the same old Jane Austen novels, when each succeeding version pales in comparison to the previous ones?

I strongly disagree with this generalization.

Firstly, Masterpiece doesn't really produce these projects. Usually they only provide part of the funding for programs commissioned by BBC television. However, in the case of the majority of the offerings from the Jane Austen season that aired this spring on Masterpiece Classic, the programs were commissioned by ITV.

And I would HARDLY conclude that the 2007 Northanger Abbey "pale[d] in comparison" to the previous version of Northanger Abbey done by BBC tv. (Have you seen it?) Also, as disappointing as the ITV Persuasion and Mansfield Park were, they were still better than most of what's available on US tv.

And as for the 2008 Sense and Sensibility (BBC), I found it to be at least equal to the 1995 version of S&S written by Emma Thompson, and in some respects I found it superior to that truncated version.

Cheers.

[–] greenegg 12 years ago

I never said Masterpiece Theatre directly produced the projects, though WGBH does sometimes share some production credits with its British counterparts. If you are going to parse words, then let me say MT programs. I meant British exports as a whole have declined in quality. That abysmal latest version of Great Expectations made me cringe. Don't even get me started about the atrocious attempts to re-examine the Tudors or the wretched remakes/continuations of Forsyte Saga and Upstairs, Downstairs.

I did not particularly care for the 2007 Northanger Abbey, which I found had gone overboard in emphasizing sex in a gratuitous way; some of the acting was not up to snuff. I preferred the version from the 1980s, with Peter Firth, which was not perfect, but entertaining. While Emma Thompson's S&S proved engaging, I actually prefer several of the older productions from British TV. Aside from the ever captivating Janet McTeer, the 2008 S&S left me cold. I preferred Andrew Davies' earlier work (eg Mother Love) to his more recent obsession with "sexing up" classic works. As an English professor, I find such practices abhorrent, as well as unnecessary.

I remain deeply troubled by the frustrating lack of fine drama programs in the US; however, I refuse to accept the declining quality and availability of British dramas as inevitable.

Put puppy mills out of business: never buy dogs from pet shops!

[–] randommovies2002 12 years ago

You must have realized that I posted the above four years ago? My comments were about those specific productions mentioned in my post. I still feel that the newer NA is better than the 80's version, and I'll still watch something on PBS from England rather than anything on commercial tv. (Cannot stand Mad Men type programming.)

Re: Great Expectations, I agree it was awful.

I have long believed that part of the reason quality of UK costume drama has gone down is due to the makers' desire that their version be "different" (esp. the writers!). I believe that some of the truly odd decisions one sees in these productions were done just for the sake of being New! and Different!

During the 1990's, perhaps makers of period drama felt that there was enough novelty in their versions on account of the higher production values (filming techniques, musical score, costumes, locations, etc.) than those used in earlier versions. But now there seems a deliberate attempt to make everything hip, or to second-guess the author of a classic novel, or to make a program more "accessible," or more PC by adding diversity (race, gender, sexual orientation) which did not exist in the source work. Different does not equal better.

I've also been thinking for a long time that people have forgotten what public broadcasting is supposed to be. (And perhaps the BBC has lost sight of what their role should be as well.) It seems that many poor decisions are made for the sake of attracting a younger, hipper audience. They want to break out of the "stodgy" mould. If they can bring in younger viewers it will be more successful financially.

But isn't the purpose of public broadcasting (and similarly, BBC's licence fee) to broadcast/produce art that does not appeal to the masses, is of a higher quality than commercially produced programming, and could never be created in England or broadcast in the US without public funding?

[–] sarahb2 9 years ago

Just found this thread, so here's my two cents:

It's not just you. I thought both Loyalty and Duty were very, very far below the first four movies in terms of writing and character development. There's no one to root for; in these movies Horatio is such a brass-bound jerk, barking at everyone and ice-cold to colleagues and friends alike, that it's impossible to get emotionally involved in anything that's going on.

The writing is awful. The story is full of plot holes and things that flat-out don't make sense. The lines range from cliched to ridiculous, and the tension and great dialogue that made the first four movies a pleasure to watch just isn't there.

In my opinion a lot of the reason this movie and 'Loyalty' don't work is because Horatio is just plain unlikeable. It's one thing to have a character who's reticent and stoic, but quite another to have a character who from start to finish is snappish, rude, mean, and at times just plain cruel. And Horatio is the HERO of this story!

Of course, he's this way in the books - so what we see on screen is exactly what the C.S. Forester estate wanted, and why they demanded that A&E remove Horatio's first best friend Archie Kennedy from the series. Kennedy was immensely popular but he was changing Horatio too much from the books, they argued. So A&E got rid of him, killing him at the end of HH2 and never even giving him a mention in the third set of movies. It's like he never existed.

BIG mistake. Big, fat, frigate-sized mistake.

Why? Well, for one thing, Kennedy was as I said a VERY popular character - at one point one could argue that he had more fans than Horatio did. By getting rid of him, A&E lost a lot of the audience for the third movies, and the ratings showed it.

But beyond that - in the movies Archie functioned as the way inside Horatio's head. The audience couldn't know what Horatio was thinking, and he wasn't the kind of character to voice his thoughts. So in the first six movies Archie became the bridge between the audience and Horatio, making him accessible so he didn't seem too remote or aloof.

Once he was gone, Horatio then became - well, remote and aloof. In the books and in HH3 Horatio's best buddy is William Bush, but Bush isn't the thematic opposite of Horatio that Archie was. He functions as Horatio's cheerleader and admirer, but his character is just like Horatio. In fact he spends a lot of the books just looking at Horatio and thinking, "I wonder what he's thinking?" In other words, he's no help. It's like two bricks looking at each other.

The Hornblower movies needed Archie. They needed that spark to offset Horatio's stoic gloominess, that humor and basic optimism to balance Horatio's fatalistic sourness. Archie was the humanity of the films, and once he was gone there was no humanity left - just "Oh, look at the warships, and there's Horatio jumping about and yelling at his men."

Worse - the writers never even mention Archie, not once in either movie. This makes no sense at all, especially when you consider what a guilt-magnet Horatio is. Even when he and Bush are together there isn't a single line of dialogue to hint that Horatio remembers his friend at all - you know, his friend who sacrificed his good name and everything he had to save Horatio's life. BOO, A&E. BOO.

I adored the first four movies, thought the second set was OK but flawed. The third set I watched exactly once, and have no desire to watch again. I just couldn't stand watching the ice-cold prick Horatio had become and I wanted nothing more to do with him.

My only hope is that one day Ioan Gruffudd will be able to make at least one more Hornblower movie, and that that movie will address Archie's sacrifice - ONE LINE would do it. And hire some better scriptwriters, please. See if the folks who wrote the first four films are available, they were really good...

[–] crossword_fiend 15 years ago

Problem is i think we only export the big budget prodcutions overseas, ie the costume dramas, which, i must admit, do seem to include a lot of austen and dickens. And, um, what's Masterpiece Theatre?

I'm trying to retaliate with some good BBC dramas, but i can't think of any at the moment. I think they're stronger on comedy... although apart from Gavin and Stacey, possibly led balloon and a few panel shows, i can't really think of any decent modern stuff. Oh dear, what's happened to the BBC? Even it's panel shows and stand-ups will be reduced to making knock-knock jokes and perhaps the odd "daring" quip about the economy soon. but even aside the censorship, most of its old greats weren't topical anyway; what happened to the days of One Foot In The Grave or The Detectives? Or Blackadder? Porridge? Dad's Army?? I mean, wat have we got now? Bloody "After You've Gone" and "My Family", which are basically the same thing: well known actors losing all credibility on rubbish, obvious comedy. Another thing they have in common is that they're both written by A LOT of people... much like many american comedies :P, maybe that's the key to great programmes... one or two people's idea, developed and written by them. The characters are much better because they're born from one person, and not scripted to a comedy-by-numbers type formula.

hmm...whoever started this had a rant about the actual board topic. I've just had a rant about something completely irrelevant. but ha ha, i'm going to post it anyway :P

"Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."

[–] Jean_Valjean_fan 15 years ago

"Masterpiece Theatre" is an American show which features miniseries' imported from Britain (for example, "Pride and Prejudice" with Colin Firth is distributed here through "Masterpiece Theatre").

Formerly rose-lisa
imdb DP fanclub president
Stop kicking people into the pit of death! Honestly!

[–] gloomyrival 15 years ago

I agree with you that this is the weakest of the episodes. I love the Hornblower series and am sad to see it put on the shelf by A&E, but I do think this episode is lacking in several areas. Gruffud's portrayal of Hornblower seems to be rather distant and cold in this episode, moving away from his hopeful and human persona. The role of Betsy in this is ridiculous. Her American accent is absurd, you would think they could find an American to cast for the role rather than someone that gives a rather painful rendition of an American citizen. The action sequences do seem weak and Hornblower who is the master of the ship tells the steward to swim for it at the end seems rather contrite, he could have easily pardoned the man's actions without banishing him from his country and sending him off with Betsy. She doesn't have a lover anymore, but damn, she has a great cook! So yeah, the series has lost a little of it's polish, but it's still miles better than Dog the Bounty Hunter and all that other crap A&E chooses to play nowadays.