1. Beyond the Poseidon Adventure: This is actually a 1979 sequel to the original Hackman version of The Poseidon Adventure. The story centers on a team of salvage divers (headed by the always excellent Sir Michael Caine and supported Sally Field) who head out to overturned Poseidon the day after the events of the first film. They meet up with a crew of rescue personnel (led by Telly Savalas...who unsurprisingly turns out NOT to be who he says he is. Which--duh! It's Telly Savalas!) and head into the wreck in search of left-behind riches, only to find themselves trapped inside with a bunch of survivors. From there on out, it's pretty much exactly the same as the original film--"Oh noes! We're trapped! We must climb up! Come on everyone, climb! But it's flooded! And on fire! Climb damn you, climb!" The main characters do well (come on, it's Michael Caine, how bad can it be?) and there are some fun performances from the survivors, particularly Slim Pickens as a boisterous Texas oilman and Peter Boyle as the loudmouth. There also appearance from other familiar faces, included Shirley Jones (Mrs. Partridge), Shirley Knight (the woman has 158 IMDB credits, I'm sure you'll recognize her from something), and a very young Mark Harmon (Gibbs from NCIS). Although not a stellar film, it's decent rainy-day entertainment.
2. A Night to Remember: This is the original 1958 adaptation of Walter Lord's book of the same name. This the last Titanic film to be made in black and white, and is still regarded as one of the best. (It was referenced heavily by James Cameron in his Titanic.) It's a pretty good film, though in my opinion not quite long enough--there were many characters, and sometimes the film felt like it was bouncing around between them almost randomly. Also, although they touched on some of the less-than-wholesome sides of the tragedy, there was a lot of whitewashing going on, especially with regard to the treatment of the steerage passengers. Not a bad film, and certainly one that's relatively historically important in the disaster film oeuvre. Trivia: look out for a very young David McCullum (Ducky on NCIS) as well as an allegedly uncredited 20-something Sean Connery as a nameless sailor. In addition, this was made before it was known that the Titanic broke in half before sinking, so it's interesting to see the sinking of the entire ship using the special effects of the times.
3. The Poseidon Adventure (Hallmark Channel mini-series): No, okay, just no. I gave it a chance because I like Adam Baldwin, but just no. I will give you three very clear reasons:
A. Terrorists. Yes, not a tidal wave, terrorists.
B. Special effects I am pretty sure I could have done myself with MS Paint.
C. They LEFT THE CREDITS IN BETWEEN SECTIONS! All the credits, beginning and ending! Even though both halves of the mini-series were playing concurrently on the same side of the disk!
*Bonus*: Stars Steve Guttenberg. Also Rutger Hauer and C. Thomas Howell. Is basically where B-movie stars have apparently gone to die. Poor Adam Baldwin.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Cannonball Read #13: Desperate Hours: The Epic Story of the Rescue of the Andrea Doria by Richard Goldstein
Don't worry folks, I am nearly through with my series on maritime disasters--I am slightly behind on my blogging, but there should only be two more blogs on this particular subject after this--and then we'll be on to fires! (I know, totally something to look forward to, right?)
On a fog-laden night in 1956, the Italian luxury liner Andrea Doria collided with the Swedish ship Stockholm. While the Stockholm sustained only damage to her prow (and the death of five crewmen), the Andrea Doria was essentially t-boned, taking a mortal hit to her side. Over the next ten hours, the ship would develop and ever more pronounced list, and eventually capsize in a spectacular manner. All but a few dozen of her thousands of passengers would be rescued, and this is the story of the collision, the rescue, and the aftermath.
After reading enough of these books, I am beginning to figure out what makes a good account and what indicates a bad one. Unfortunately, Desperate Hours: The Epic Story of the Rescue of the Andrea Doria by Richard Goldstein is not one of the better books I've read in this literary series. It's unfortunate, because since it took place in 1956--comparatively recently, as far as the books I've read go--there should be a lot more available information. However, Goldstein doesn't seem to have done any real digging of his own, and the information he does have seems to be poorly arranged. The narrative never truly congeals, and never seems to become more than a recounting of facts. Too many names and dates, not enough character or detail. The only thing to recommend this particular book is the abundance of photos, maps, and drawings that allow the reader to get a better sense of what he or she is reading about.
On the whole, I found this a disappointment.
On a fog-laden night in 1956, the Italian luxury liner Andrea Doria collided with the Swedish ship Stockholm. While the Stockholm sustained only damage to her prow (and the death of five crewmen), the Andrea Doria was essentially t-boned, taking a mortal hit to her side. Over the next ten hours, the ship would develop and ever more pronounced list, and eventually capsize in a spectacular manner. All but a few dozen of her thousands of passengers would be rescued, and this is the story of the collision, the rescue, and the aftermath.
After reading enough of these books, I am beginning to figure out what makes a good account and what indicates a bad one. Unfortunately, Desperate Hours: The Epic Story of the Rescue of the Andrea Doria by Richard Goldstein is not one of the better books I've read in this literary series. It's unfortunate, because since it took place in 1956--comparatively recently, as far as the books I've read go--there should be a lot more available information. However, Goldstein doesn't seem to have done any real digging of his own, and the information he does have seems to be poorly arranged. The narrative never truly congeals, and never seems to become more than a recounting of facts. Too many names and dates, not enough character or detail. The only thing to recommend this particular book is the abundance of photos, maps, and drawings that allow the reader to get a better sense of what he or she is reading about.
On the whole, I found this a disappointment.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
"What d'you think we are? Gangsters?": RocknRolla
I like Guy Richie's movies. I loved Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch. Therefore, it's not surprising that I enjoyed RocknRolla. Aside from the admittedly rather stupid title, it's not a bad little film...as long as you liked Richie's first two movies. Because to be honest, it's more or less the same thing. Not quite as good, but definitely a monstrous improvement over Swept Away.
The plot is familiar to any Richie aficionados--there are schmucks. There are unpleasant members of the London underworld. There are twists and turns and coincidences and chance meetings and some cars that smash together and some ass-kicking and a little bit of sex and some very funny lines and quite a few casualties. On the downside, there is no Jason Statham (I was surprised--I assumed there was some contractual agreement that he had to star in all of Richie's films) but Gerard Butler is a big yummy hunk of man-candy, which was enough to make me happy. The acting is pretty good, and all the performers manage to deliver Richie's sometimes unwieldy dialogue with the proper amount of snap. The plot moves along pretty well, and there is always something going on. There are also some moments of surprisingly interesting cinematography--particularly during the chase-scene with the winded Russian.
I guess I'd have to say this this sort of like a Kevin Smith movie, in that if you like Kevin Smith, you will like his movies, and if you don't, nothing he does is probably going to change your mind. Guy Richie is the same way--his movies are what they are, and if that's something you dig, then you'll probably want to pick this one up.
(I am also hoping that the notable rise in quality from this over his previous few films bodes well for his much-anticipated [at least by me] adaptation of Sherlock Holmes starring RDJ.)
The plot is familiar to any Richie aficionados--there are schmucks. There are unpleasant members of the London underworld. There are twists and turns and coincidences and chance meetings and some cars that smash together and some ass-kicking and a little bit of sex and some very funny lines and quite a few casualties. On the downside, there is no Jason Statham (I was surprised--I assumed there was some contractual agreement that he had to star in all of Richie's films) but Gerard Butler is a big yummy hunk of man-candy, which was enough to make me happy. The acting is pretty good, and all the performers manage to deliver Richie's sometimes unwieldy dialogue with the proper amount of snap. The plot moves along pretty well, and there is always something going on. There are also some moments of surprisingly interesting cinematography--particularly during the chase-scene with the winded Russian.
I guess I'd have to say this this sort of like a Kevin Smith movie, in that if you like Kevin Smith, you will like his movies, and if you don't, nothing he does is probably going to change your mind. Guy Richie is the same way--his movies are what they are, and if that's something you dig, then you'll probably want to pick this one up.
(I am also hoping that the notable rise in quality from this over his previous few films bodes well for his much-anticipated [at least by me] adaptation of Sherlock Holmes starring RDJ.)
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Cannonball Read #12: Ghost Ship: The Mysterious True Story of the Mary Celeste and Her Missing Crew by Brian Hicks
Yes, it IS another maritime disaster book. Do you think they'll ever have a maritime disasters-themed Jeopardy that I could go kick ass on?
Ghost Ship: The Mysterious True Story of the Mary Celeste and Her Missing Crew was another meticulously well-researched book from author Brian Hicks. You may have heard the story of the Mary Celeste--the ship was found floating intact in the middle of the ocean, her crew having disappeared leaving behind no explanations or clues to their whereabouts.
The story takes us from the ship's creation, though "the mystery" in 1872, and then covers the aftermath, including various inquiries into the circumstances of the crew's disappearance as well as the stories, legends, and hoaxes that were born from the tale. The author uses letters, court documents, newspaper stories, and many other primary sources to develop the story and its historical context. We are introduced to all the important characters and all the pertinent facts, and then we must try to figure out the answer to the mystery. At the end, Hicks unveils his own very convincing theory of what might have occurred on the doomed ship (Spoiler: it does not involve ghosts, aliens, pirates, krackens, or the Bermuda Triangle.)
This is a great read--Hicks moves deftly through the history, presenting convincing facts and debunking common myths while still remaining entertaining and enthralling. It's a fascinating tale of mystery on the high seas.
Ghost Ship: The Mysterious True Story of the Mary Celeste and Her Missing Crew was another meticulously well-researched book from author Brian Hicks. You may have heard the story of the Mary Celeste--the ship was found floating intact in the middle of the ocean, her crew having disappeared leaving behind no explanations or clues to their whereabouts.
The story takes us from the ship's creation, though "the mystery" in 1872, and then covers the aftermath, including various inquiries into the circumstances of the crew's disappearance as well as the stories, legends, and hoaxes that were born from the tale. The author uses letters, court documents, newspaper stories, and many other primary sources to develop the story and its historical context. We are introduced to all the important characters and all the pertinent facts, and then we must try to figure out the answer to the mystery. At the end, Hicks unveils his own very convincing theory of what might have occurred on the doomed ship (Spoiler: it does not involve ghosts, aliens, pirates, krackens, or the Bermuda Triangle.)
This is a great read--Hicks moves deftly through the history, presenting convincing facts and debunking common myths while still remaining entertaining and enthralling. It's a fascinating tale of mystery on the high seas.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Cannonball Read #11: Gangs of New York by Herbert Asbury (and added movie review)
So I read Gangs of New York a few weeks ago, but as I may have mentioned it was not very exciting and made me rather sleepy. Not that it was a BAD book exactly--it definitely had a lot of information in it that I didn't know--but though it may be informative it's not an easy read.
The first problem I had was the fact that the book was written in 1927, and the author takes for granted the reader's knowledge of events at the time. Although I know a certain amount about American history (probably more than the average person, I think) I had no idea about some of the people, places, and happenings the author referenced. I needed wikipedia at the ready to help me along in some spots. Also, the book's rather poorly structured. It's extremely tangential, and often meanders off-track completely. There is no narrative, and although it's marginally arranged chronologically, it's still tough to keep up. There are often spots that start off with "Googly-Eyes McGee*...who hung out with Limpy-Leg Jones...who was affiliated with this gang...who lived here but then moved here later...and which also included Kid Monkeyface...who was killed by Ulster Pete, wielding a steak knife, in 1903." And then it goes back to Googly-Eyes McGee, but you've already forgotten all about him. I just found it a little tiring.
However, here are 5 things I liked about the book:
1. The names of these people are crazy. They are almost worth reading the book just to see the kind of things people called themselves.
2. There were certain facts about America's history that I wasn't aware of. For example, the New York Conscription Riots are not something that most people seem to know about. I mean, did you know that the Union Navy FIRED ON the slums of New York City? Yeah, that's not exactly something they bring up in 8th grade Civil War History, is it?
3. Some of the facts I learned were sort of unintentionally funny. Did you know that the firemen during the late 19th century in New York City were all volunteer companies, and each company was its own little gang? Since there was a bonus awarded to the first company to arrive at the scene of a fire, often the first two companies to arrive--instead of throwing themselves into fighting the fire--would start fighting each other for the right to claim first on the scene. Meanwhile, the crowd would loot the burning building while the neighboring buildings caught fire.
4. It's a glimpse into parts of history that mostly go unmentioned in modern times.
5. I learned that a brickbat is not in fact a type of bat. It's just a chunk of brick that still has the corners on it.
Having read the book, I figured it was about time I saw that movie (Gangs of New York) that is "loosely based" on it.
Well, let me tell you, when they say "loosely based" that is about the most generous use of the word "loosely" I have ever seen. Since, as I mentioned, there is no narrative to the book, basically the only thing based on the book is the context. The parts of the film discussing what was going on with the Draft Riots, the fire companies, the police, Tammany Hall, etc. were pretty accurate. However all the personal stuff was obviously fiction--while there was a man who went by the name Bill the Butcher, and his last words were supposedly "At least I die a true American" that's about the only things he had in common with the character played by Daniel Day-Lewis.
As far as the acting went, I was pretty impressed. Daniel Day-Lewis deserved any and all accolades he received for that part--although it was in some ways quite over-the-top, that's kind of the way the character needed to be played. Liam Neeson and John C. Reilly were good in their smaller parts, and for the most part, the ensemble of the cast did very well. However, I can't say I was altogether thrilled with the casting of the leads. First of all, I am not a fan of Cameron Diaz, and I find her particularly out of place in an historical epic. (Really, I don't think she belongs in any movie that doesn't involve her discussing shoes, belching, or shaking her ass...those are the things she excels at. Emoting...not so much.) And the hair! Really? Someone thought that red mess looked natural?
As for Leonardo DiCaprio, I guess I find him distracting. I mean, I know he's a good actor, but I find it really hard to forget that it's him. I never completely accept the characters he plays (with the notable exception of Arnie in What's Eating Gilbert Grape? in which I thought he was outstanding)--it's kind of the way I feel with Tom Cruise. I don't see "Amsterdam Vallon"...I see Leonardo DiCaprio with a hat. It's not really his fault--as I said, I think he's very talented. It's probably more that he was SO FAMOUS when I was younger and that he really hasn't aged much at all--aside from getting a little of the Tom Hanks fathead, he really looks pretty much exactly the same as he did in Romeo & Juliet. I simply couldn't get behind him. Also, after he's "horribly maimed," everyone goes on like he'll be forever hideous! Horrible! Children will weep when they see him! You'd think he had his nose and eyeballs removed...and then he turns up a scene later with what appears to be a little scrape on his cheek. That's seriously the best the make-up artists could do for a permanent disfigurement? Ridiculous.
On the whole, I enjoyed both the movie and the book, though I would recommend them both with cautions. I think one should certainly read the book first, in order to to understand some of the history involved. However it's not something you can power through in one night--it's kind of heavy, slow-going reading. Then watch the movie for the cinematography, the costuming, the amazing sets, and Day-Lewis's performance.
*Names are not accurate, but they're close enough for you to get the idea.
The first problem I had was the fact that the book was written in 1927, and the author takes for granted the reader's knowledge of events at the time. Although I know a certain amount about American history (probably more than the average person, I think) I had no idea about some of the people, places, and happenings the author referenced. I needed wikipedia at the ready to help me along in some spots. Also, the book's rather poorly structured. It's extremely tangential, and often meanders off-track completely. There is no narrative, and although it's marginally arranged chronologically, it's still tough to keep up. There are often spots that start off with "Googly-Eyes McGee*...who hung out with Limpy-Leg Jones...who was affiliated with this gang...who lived here but then moved here later...and which also included Kid Monkeyface...who was killed by Ulster Pete, wielding a steak knife, in 1903." And then it goes back to Googly-Eyes McGee, but you've already forgotten all about him. I just found it a little tiring.
However, here are 5 things I liked about the book:
1. The names of these people are crazy. They are almost worth reading the book just to see the kind of things people called themselves.
2. There were certain facts about America's history that I wasn't aware of. For example, the New York Conscription Riots are not something that most people seem to know about. I mean, did you know that the Union Navy FIRED ON the slums of New York City? Yeah, that's not exactly something they bring up in 8th grade Civil War History, is it?
3. Some of the facts I learned were sort of unintentionally funny. Did you know that the firemen during the late 19th century in New York City were all volunteer companies, and each company was its own little gang? Since there was a bonus awarded to the first company to arrive at the scene of a fire, often the first two companies to arrive--instead of throwing themselves into fighting the fire--would start fighting each other for the right to claim first on the scene. Meanwhile, the crowd would loot the burning building while the neighboring buildings caught fire.
4. It's a glimpse into parts of history that mostly go unmentioned in modern times.
5. I learned that a brickbat is not in fact a type of bat. It's just a chunk of brick that still has the corners on it.
Having read the book, I figured it was about time I saw that movie (Gangs of New York) that is "loosely based" on it.
Well, let me tell you, when they say "loosely based" that is about the most generous use of the word "loosely" I have ever seen. Since, as I mentioned, there is no narrative to the book, basically the only thing based on the book is the context. The parts of the film discussing what was going on with the Draft Riots, the fire companies, the police, Tammany Hall, etc. were pretty accurate. However all the personal stuff was obviously fiction--while there was a man who went by the name Bill the Butcher, and his last words were supposedly "At least I die a true American" that's about the only things he had in common with the character played by Daniel Day-Lewis.
As far as the acting went, I was pretty impressed. Daniel Day-Lewis deserved any and all accolades he received for that part--although it was in some ways quite over-the-top, that's kind of the way the character needed to be played. Liam Neeson and John C. Reilly were good in their smaller parts, and for the most part, the ensemble of the cast did very well. However, I can't say I was altogether thrilled with the casting of the leads. First of all, I am not a fan of Cameron Diaz, and I find her particularly out of place in an historical epic. (Really, I don't think she belongs in any movie that doesn't involve her discussing shoes, belching, or shaking her ass...those are the things she excels at. Emoting...not so much.) And the hair! Really? Someone thought that red mess looked natural?
As for Leonardo DiCaprio, I guess I find him distracting. I mean, I know he's a good actor, but I find it really hard to forget that it's him. I never completely accept the characters he plays (with the notable exception of Arnie in What's Eating Gilbert Grape? in which I thought he was outstanding)--it's kind of the way I feel with Tom Cruise. I don't see "Amsterdam Vallon"...I see Leonardo DiCaprio with a hat. It's not really his fault--as I said, I think he's very talented. It's probably more that he was SO FAMOUS when I was younger and that he really hasn't aged much at all--aside from getting a little of the Tom Hanks fathead, he really looks pretty much exactly the same as he did in Romeo & Juliet. I simply couldn't get behind him. Also, after he's "horribly maimed," everyone goes on like he'll be forever hideous! Horrible! Children will weep when they see him! You'd think he had his nose and eyeballs removed...and then he turns up a scene later with what appears to be a little scrape on his cheek. That's seriously the best the make-up artists could do for a permanent disfigurement? Ridiculous.
On the whole, I enjoyed both the movie and the book, though I would recommend them both with cautions. I think one should certainly read the book first, in order to to understand some of the history involved. However it's not something you can power through in one night--it's kind of heavy, slow-going reading. Then watch the movie for the cinematography, the costuming, the amazing sets, and Day-Lewis's performance.
*Names are not accurate, but they're close enough for you to get the idea.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Cannonball Read #10: In the Heart of the Sea: The Tragedy of the Whaleship Essex by Nathaniel Philbrick
Here we are with another maritime disaster, although this one takes place long before most of the others on the list. In 1819, the whaleship Essex, sailing from its home port of Nantucket, was attacked and capsized in the middle of the Pacific ocean by an 80-foot-long sperm whale. The members of the crew set out in three small whaling ships (roughly 25 ft oar boats) for the coast of South America, a trip of close to 3000 miles. Before the end, six men would die of hunger and thirst, three would be lost at sea, one would be executed, and the rest would resort to cannibalism. The men sailed for nearly 93 days straight, suffering from starvation, dehydration, exposure, and an almost crushing sense of despair. This story comes from the accounts of the survivors.
The author, Philbrick, has done an excellent job with research. (There are nearly 50 pages of notes at the end of the book as well as an extensive bibliography.) There is quite a bit of information about the whaling trade itself, as well as about the island of Nantucket's place in that trade. As an island with a mere 3000 residents (many of whom were gone for years at a time on whaleships, home only to drop off their precious whale-oil cargo, resupply, and take off again), the environment was very influential on those who had grown up there, and definitely effected the dynamics of the stranded sailors. There was also quite a bit of information about the daily lives of whalers and how they lived. However, the most interesting parts were the accounts of the survivors.
This is a story about overcoming all odds, and the consequences and guilt that remains after doing anything and everything to survive. I recommend this to anyone who likes a good sea-story or well-researched non-fiction. (I will say that it can be disturbing at some parts and is not recommended for children or the faint-of-heart.)
The author, Philbrick, has done an excellent job with research. (There are nearly 50 pages of notes at the end of the book as well as an extensive bibliography.) There is quite a bit of information about the whaling trade itself, as well as about the island of Nantucket's place in that trade. As an island with a mere 3000 residents (many of whom were gone for years at a time on whaleships, home only to drop off their precious whale-oil cargo, resupply, and take off again), the environment was very influential on those who had grown up there, and definitely effected the dynamics of the stranded sailors. There was also quite a bit of information about the daily lives of whalers and how they lived. However, the most interesting parts were the accounts of the survivors.
This is a story about overcoming all odds, and the consequences and guilt that remains after doing anything and everything to survive. I recommend this to anyone who likes a good sea-story or well-researched non-fiction. (I will say that it can be disturbing at some parts and is not recommended for children or the faint-of-heart.)
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Cannonball Read #9: When the Dancing Stopped: The Real Story of the Morro Castle Disaster and Its Deadly Wake by Brian Hicks
Well, here we are with number three in "The Caustic Critic's Maritime Disaster Series". (I will warn you...I have become totally obsessed. I have actually been checking Wikipedia for other disasters to see if in fact there are any non-fiction books about them. In case you're wondering, in the near future you can expect the whale ship Essex, the Andrea Doria, the Mary Celeste, the Lusitania, and the steamboat General Slocum. I have also added several related movies to my Netflix queue--Beyond the Poseidon Adventure, A Night to Remember, Poseidon [the made-for-TV-movie with "The Gutt"], and Deep Water as well as a couple documentaries on the Titanic.)
The Morro Castle was a luxury liner which sailed from New York City to Havana, Cuba during the early thirties. Although its primary function was to transport mail between the two cities, the ship also had a decent passenger business--despite the ever-worsening depression--taking tourists to "Gay Havana" which at the time was still a wild party town. On the Labor Day cruise in 1934, the ship mysteriously caught fire and sunk, killing more than half the passengers and crew aboard. This book tells that story, but also tells the story of George Rogers, a radio operator who was convicted of murdering two elderly neighbors as well as attempting to kill a friend with a bomb. The connection between those two stories is that George Rogers was the radio operator on the Morro Castle, and many believe he was responsible for setting the fire, and possibly also for murdering the ship's captain before the fire began.
The author of the book, Brian Hicks, has obviously done painstaking research, and although the book tends to be a novelization, it is comfortable with inserting facts (as well as their sources) into the story. The main voice we hear from during the parts of the story which take place on the Morro Castle is Tom, a young man who was working on the ship that summer. Hicks had a chance to interview Tom (who was roughly 84 at the time Hicks met him) and get a lot of details not just about the fire itself, but also about the way the ship ran and about the tensions and problems among the crew leading up to the disaster.
Hicks follows an extensive description of the disaster itself with coverage of the various trials held to attempt to get to the truth about the matter with regards to fault and blame. The aggregious errors made by the replacement captain and the crew are brought to light by the combined efforts of the U.S. District Attorney's office, the department which would soon become the FBI, and the board that dealt with issues of the sea. After that, Hicks continues on to follow George Rogers, and the case quietly being built against him as far as the Morro Castle was concerned.
This book is well-written and includes a lot of interesting, gripping details. It has a certain feeling of being a detective story without getting totally side-tracked, never forgetting what the story is REALLY about. The author ties his strings together well, and in general I found the book to be a fascinating read.
The Morro Castle was a luxury liner which sailed from New York City to Havana, Cuba during the early thirties. Although its primary function was to transport mail between the two cities, the ship also had a decent passenger business--despite the ever-worsening depression--taking tourists to "Gay Havana" which at the time was still a wild party town. On the Labor Day cruise in 1934, the ship mysteriously caught fire and sunk, killing more than half the passengers and crew aboard. This book tells that story, but also tells the story of George Rogers, a radio operator who was convicted of murdering two elderly neighbors as well as attempting to kill a friend with a bomb. The connection between those two stories is that George Rogers was the radio operator on the Morro Castle, and many believe he was responsible for setting the fire, and possibly also for murdering the ship's captain before the fire began.
The author of the book, Brian Hicks, has obviously done painstaking research, and although the book tends to be a novelization, it is comfortable with inserting facts (as well as their sources) into the story. The main voice we hear from during the parts of the story which take place on the Morro Castle is Tom, a young man who was working on the ship that summer. Hicks had a chance to interview Tom (who was roughly 84 at the time Hicks met him) and get a lot of details not just about the fire itself, but also about the way the ship ran and about the tensions and problems among the crew leading up to the disaster.
Hicks follows an extensive description of the disaster itself with coverage of the various trials held to attempt to get to the truth about the matter with regards to fault and blame. The aggregious errors made by the replacement captain and the crew are brought to light by the combined efforts of the U.S. District Attorney's office, the department which would soon become the FBI, and the board that dealt with issues of the sea. After that, Hicks continues on to follow George Rogers, and the case quietly being built against him as far as the Morro Castle was concerned.
This book is well-written and includes a lot of interesting, gripping details. It has a certain feeling of being a detective story without getting totally side-tracked, never forgetting what the story is REALLY about. The author ties his strings together well, and in general I found the book to be a fascinating read.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)