Hawaii

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

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.

James A. Michener's mammoth novel, "Hawaii," is the subject of this suitably mammoth film, one with a lot to recommend it. Julie Andrews proves that she can handle a dramatic role as well or better than musical roles. Her Jerusha Bromley Hale captures our sympathy the minute she comes on screen and sustains it for the rest of the film. Likewise, Jocelyn LaGarde, a real-life Tahitian princess with no previous acting experience, gives an equally good performance as Alii Nui Ruth Malama Konakoa, for which she was justifiably nominated for an Oscar. There are also good supporting performances from Carroll O'Connor and Gene Hackman, both just a few years away from stardom when this picture was made. Russell Harlan's cameras capture the islands at their most beautiful, and Elmer Bernstein's haunting, evocative score is one of his best.

The one fatal flaw in all this is the actor playing the central male character, Reverend Abner Hale. While Max von Sydow was always good in the great Ingmar Bergman films ("The Seventh Seal"), in most of his English-language films, with the sole exception of "The Exorcist," he always came off as something of a well-dressed stiff. It's an image he upholds here. Perhaps it's the fact that he's working in a language not his own, perhaps it's just the hopeless nature of the lines he's saddled with, but his is an Abner Hale who could transform the staunchest Christian into a Druid. He, quite simply, generates no sympathy. Plus, as many of the best clergymen seem to know, you can win more converts by stressing the kind, loving qualities of Jesus than by belching out fire and brimstone. It seems to me that, for Andrews's character, choosing between this mannered stiff and Richard Harris's vigorous sea captain shouldn't have been much of a choice at all.

But this shouldn't drive you away from "Hawaii." For all the good points I mentioned, it's definitely worth seeing at least once.

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 ****

By this point, the mid-1960s, the old-style biblical epics had more or less died out completely, but epics of other kinds were still reasonably popular. This story of missionaries in the first half of the 19th century, adapted from a James A. Michener novel and made a year before the abandoning of the Hollywood production code, is in fact a polemic against rigid adherence to Christian scriptures. At its centre is an overly pious and sometimes hypocritical preacher, the kind of mind which would have believed in all those unswervingly self-righteous bible flicks of the previous decade.

But Hawaii is not some flagrant and roughshod denunciation of church and faith. The picture was adapted (quite liberally) from its source by acclaimed screenwriters Daniel Taradash and Dalton Trumbo, and it has in particular Trumbo's tendency to treat all his characters with respectful and human portrayals, in spite of what antagonisms they may have towards each other. Thus while Max von Sydow is seen at turns as a callous fanatic, a trumped-up fool and a general negative influence, we first see him as a shy yet well-meaning youngster, clumsily trying to woo Julie Andrews. In these early scenes he is somewhat endearing figure, and even though most viewers will not condone much of what he later does, this first impression sticks with us, preventing us from completely despising him and allowing us to believe in his wife's devotion to him.

Max von Sydow was an excellent choice for this role. Admittedly his Swedish accent is a bit of a non-sequitur, but he is perfect at bringing out both the sympathetic young lad and the unshakable preacher. His performance occasionally seems to border on the hammy, but this is acceptable because it fits in with his strength of character and the earnest manner with which he takes up his ministerial duties. Julie Andrews is great too. After having made her name with the more or less fantasy figures of Mary Poppins and Maria von Trapp there's a strange kind of poignancy seeing her suffer the strains of being a more realistic wife and mother. She seems sadly underused here however, although apparently she was the main victim of the cuts in the edited version I have, which is a real pity. Richard Harris and Gene Hackman bring their forceful presences to make some of the more powerful statements in the dialogue, while Jocelyn LaGrande makes a terrific impact with her full-of-life performance. Although she spoke no English and learned her lines phonetically, it's incredible the way she communicates meaning and emotion around those words.

Hawaii was the first large-scale picture directed by George Roy Hill, and by and large he handles the broad canvas well. Of note is that fact that he gives a constant life and rhythm to the island, often featuring a few figures working in the background or framing a character with gently swaying foliage. Hill was of course a child of the New Wave and this is evident in the occasional zoom or whip pan, but his touch is generally quite light and minimalist. Unlike some of the other younger directors around at this time he favours long takes with few close-ups. The only trouble with this is doesn't seem to quite have developed the knack of subtly making a point within the frame, sometimes using the camera to force our attention on something. An example is when Iliki runs to greet Richard Harris's ship, throwing off her western dress, a moment which seems rather contrived and clunky by the way the camera pans down onto the discarded garment.

Hawaii is a far from perfect picture, being neither quite the stunning extravaganza that epics are generally meant to be, nor the stirring human drama it also seems to aspire to. However, it has many moments which come close to both goals, and most importantly has a very honest humanity to it – something so many epics lack – and this allows it to speak its message directly without ever threatening to alienate its audience.