Hawaii

From choice of cast to quality of production, this powerful story depicts human beings, of radically different cultures, in all our weakness and all of our soaring nobility. We truly must accept the good with the bad.

Even if you hate aspects of history, it doesn't matter. This motion picture is great theater. Humanity is put on display by gifted actors under gifted direction. The script strikes home because it is so spare and poetic.

It is a pity that of the cast members, Jocelyn LaGarde, who is the perfect alii nui--Queen of the Hawaiians--gets such a skimpy bio. Under her name, all we get is that she'd been six feet in height. What a natural actress! What an open smile! What powerful yet benign reality!

Julie Andrews and Max von Sydow stay deep in their characters. The tragedy of cultures' colliding never ends. On a personal level, we get that eternal conflict again, between the classically female value of compassion and the male value of standards--you know...you must earn your father's love.

What is special must be preserved. Nationhood must live. There is much grist for thought in this sweeping drama.

Hawaii was released in 1966, and was directed by George Roy Hill, it chronicles the journey of Reverend Abner Hale (Max von Sydow) as he moves to the Hawaiian island of Maui in an attempt to bring God to the "heathens." The movie is almost three hours long and covers an extensive and tragic period of time in Hale's life showing how devastating western ideas can be to a functioning non-western society. The highlight of this film is undoubtedly Julie Andrews' performance as the Reverend's loving, accepting wife Jerusha, who suffers greatly because of his inability to love both her and God. Andrews is amazing in this film, I have watched it many times and am more impressed by her every time I see it. Her portrayal of childbirth is the best I have ever seen period. For anyone who still doubts that she can act as well as she could sing, this movie is a must, she is so convincing as Jerusha that you forget she's acting. Max von Sydow is equally as convincing as Reverend Hale so much so that he makes it difficult for many to watch the movie. Overall Hawaii is a wonderful movie, very thought provoking with an importance message, and if you can manage to deal with the infuriating character of Abner Hale, then you will most certainly enjoy it.

Bumpy, overlong drama does have magnetic sequences that stay with you. New England reverend (Max von Sydow, who never elicits our interest or compassion) sails to the Hawaiian islands with his wife in 1820 to introduce the natives to Christianity. Soapy plot taken from James A. Michener's book tries to cram too many years into 170 minutes of screen-time. The task of adapting the mammoth bestseller was probably a bad idea right from the start, and the picture is certainly a botch, but I did enjoy Julie Andrews as von Sydow's wife and the early scenes have atmosphere and tension. But Max von Sydow is a real problem: he's so overly-pious he's pathetic, which is probably not the effect hoped for. Look fast for real-life Hawaiian resident Bette Midler on the Eastern ship as it arrives to the island. **1/2 from ****

From the day Captain Cook arrived on those beautiful islands, Hawaii like Poland was cursed because of geography. Poland situated between two gigantic European powers just became a pawn in the eternal military and diplomatic chess game.

Hawaii located where it is between North America and the Orient, when sea travel improved it was only a matter of time before the big powers came a-callin'. And they came from both directions. Not shown in the time frame this film covers, but soon after, waves of Japanese and Chinese immigrants landed on the shore. Hawaii was coveted by all and America got it.

Max Von Sydow plays a young New England minister out to bring the gospel to the heathen as he sees them and has been taught to see them. His church won't send him out to the south seas without a wife, lest he be tempted by sins of the flesh, so on a short acquaintance he marries Julie Andrews. She in turn has been home pining away for whaling captain Richard Harris. When Von Sydow and Andrews get to Hawaii over the course of their story Harris would reappear.

Naturally its quite a culture shock for the New Englanders when they get to Hawaii. The film's story covers about a quarter of a century of Hawaiian history and the history of the changing attitudes of Andrews and Von Sydow.

James Michener's original novel was of War and Peace duration and I suppose the final script was as best they could get it and cover what he was trying to convey. Despite the obvious racist feelings that Von Sydow has, he's a basically decent man who does do some positive good.

His problem is that everything with him has to be filtered through the Bible. There's a lot of incest going on in Hawaii when he lands there. Reason being is that these are islands with a limited number of mating partners. Now incest is bad as we know because it does eventually weaken the gene pool. But Von Sydow hardly takes a scientific approach, how could he, he doesn't know it, he hasn't been taught it.

Julie Andrews is a far cry from the perky Mary Poppins. She develops quite an attachment to Hawaii and its people and her approach with them is fundamentally different than her husband's. It's not a bad performance.

Richard Harris is the lusty whaling captain of Andrews previous affections. I tend to think his part might have been edited down. In a recent biography of Harris, it was stated he and Andrews did not get along at all on the set. Harris in those days was a whole lot like the characters he played like this one in Hawaii.

Of course when you've got Hawaii as a subject for a camera, the photography could not be anything but gorgeous.

Hawaii covers a period not well known to most Americans except Hawaiians. And indeed they are Americans and have been since 1959. I think people could learn something from this film even with the script flaws.

This is an epic, it was meant to be an epic, and to me it still encompasses an epic. It is a story of, in my view, dictatorship. A harsh word to some I am sure, but, that is what it is. The missionary is the dictator, and what he dictates is his belief on others. Some call it brain-washing other's call it the correct way of living.

One way of living towards a different way of living. To say one is the incorrect way is not correct. The 'Christian' way of living is the 'correct' way of living for the Christian - the 'Hawaiin way of life is the 'correct' way of living for the Hawaiin.

I have not known any one religion that tried or have succeeded in forcing their beliefs on others, may be the Romans and/or Greeks (I think basically their belief structures at the time were of the same). That is the one doctrine that Christianity is about: converting. But, then as even now, they do it in a crude and callous manner. They do not let those they wish to convert - choose. They force their ideals upon others for the 'betterment' of 'their' religion and beliefs. Christians only believe that their religion is supreme and all other religions and God's must be false, and they succeed in their ego's.

This picture touches such matters. It shows from both sides. It shows how the Christians conquer their objective and how the Hawaiin's react to such conquering.

There is no 'good' in this epic yet at the same moment there is no 'bad'. It is just what it is - a story to be told.

The actors play well in their roles, Julie Andrews acts the same in my opinion as all the rest of the movies she has been in. Gene Hackman I think was good and Max Von Sydow who has played various roles (my favorite being the lawyer in Snow Falling On Cedars - and the worst being in Flash Gordon) plays this role to ease and temperment.

Tho, I do not agree with some aspects, as I am sure others do not as well as I have read in previous comments, this movie is well made and well put.

There is a story and the story is told.

Hawaii then, and Hawaii now - is it for the betterment? Or is it just a part of life where some nations conquer, some nations claim things that are not theirs for the betterment of their beliefs and the betterment of human kind?

6.5/10