Das Boot

[Wizbomb]

Hey guys,

I just got around to watching Das Boot Directors cut in German (for full effect) and i have to say that is the best film i have ever seen, never has a movie made me teary eyed with joy when that sub lifted of the gibraltar sea floor bed! i couldn't believe how good this was even the "sitting around waiting for something to happen" scenes were really good! And ive never shook my fist at the screen before like when they just got home after being through so much **** just to have an air raid blow them all to hell and the captain watches his boat sink...incredible! I give it a Five out of Five!!!!!

is this an actual true story?

[CCIP]

is this an actual true story?

Nope. It's based on a novel by Lothar-Günther Buchheim, a war correspondent who indeed was on one patrol with the U-96 under the command of Lehmann-Willenbrock in late 1941. It incorporates his own experience (indeed the main character of the book/movie is based on himself), along with stories that he heard on the boat (with many characters being semi-caricatures of real men and officers he met), into a fictional literary plot. There are definitely parts to the book and movie that are very true, but others are artistic exaggaration or Buchheim's own perspective and, some would argue, his underlying (anti-war, anti-Nazi) message that he often prioritized over accuracy.

It's a fantastic book and movie, and one of the best war films ever made for sure, but as many of the old grogs here will tell you - it'd sure be great if people didn't take it as a U-boat "bible". There are many things in it which are historically inaccurate or artistically embellished. As someone said in another thread just the other day (I think it was Sailor Steve?), you can think of it as a classic German opera set on a U-boat, with all the over-the-top dramatic set pieces and a tragic, brooding hero to boot.

Oh, and by the way, I highly recommend the book. The movie is a lot like the book, and in some ways different, but the novel is a great read and extremely well-written all the same. I can't say which I like more - the book or the movie. They both have their own good points!

[Sailor Steve]

I can't say it any better than CCIP did, other than to also recommend the 5-1/2 hour 'Uncut' version. The characters are much better developed, and the extra time is well worth it.

[Wizbomb]

im glad i got those extra minutes because i like back story and the whole "its the trip not the destination" type thing

[Sailor Steve]

im glad i got those extra minutes because i like back story and the whole "its the trip not the destination" type thing
You said you had the Director's Cut. It is an hour longer than the theatrical release, but the version I mentioned is an hour-and-a-half longer than that. You're still missing a lot.

[Herr-Berbunch]

. . .I just got around to watching Das Boot Directors cut in German (for full effect) . . .


Given the option I will always take original language with subtitles over dubbed, aside from early Jackie Chan movies :D. It would be even better if I didn't need the subtitles and could get by on just the spoken word but unless they're telling me the train station is the second (or third) on the left (or right) I'm at a loss. (At school I learnt that the German and French public transport systems are great - the bus-stop, or train station are only ever a couple of turns away!).

Glad you enjoyed it, like Steve said, get the uber-long version. :rock:

[Hottentot]

It's a fantastic book and movie, and one of the best war films ever made for sure, but as many of the old grogs here will tell you - it'd sure be great if people didn't take it as a U-boat "bible".

[Off topicish joke attempt]
Have you read Jared Diamond's Guns Germs and Steel, by the way?
[/Off topicish joke attempt]

More on topic: it's funny to see this thread here now of all the times. I have wanted to watch the movie again for a long time and been planning on it, but since I have the blasted uncut version, I can't ever find enough time to stare it from the beginning to the end. If nothing else, my dog will start protesting.

Must add this on the to-do-on-holiday list. It's a great film for sure. And when you have seen it, you can start making cool references to it and feel really "inside" when no one else understands them. Or that's what I keep telling myself every time I randomly yell: "Alaaarm!"

[Sailor Steve]

[More on topic: it's funny to see this thread here now of all the times. I have wanted to watch the movie again for a long time and been planning on it, but since I have the blasted uncut version, I can't ever find enough time to stare it from the beginning to the end. If nothing else, my dog will start protesting.
I've gotten into the habit of watching it 48 minutes at a time, just like the original miniseries. I can never justify sitting in one place for five hours. :sunny:

[BossMark]

The film was very good, but the book was bloody marvellous :yeah:

[Ducimus]

It's a fantastic book and movie, and one of the best war films ever made for sure, but as many of the old grogs here will tell you - it'd sure be great if people didn't take it as a U-boat "bible".

Blasphemer! Someone notify the Inquisition! Everybody knows Das Boot and Iron Coffins is a 100% historically accurate portrayal in every detail and tells it all how is really was! :O:

[nikimcbee]

Blasphemer! Someone notify the Inquisition! Everybody knows Das Boot and Iron Coffins is a 100% historically accurate portrayal in every detail and tells it all how is really was! :O:

That depends who you ask. Karl Merten didn't like the book, said it was totally inaccurate. (regarding u-boat crew behavio(u)r.

Source:
http://www.uboat.net/men/merten.htm

http://www.uboat.net/books/item/210
(this book has a whole chapter about Das Boot and Merten/Bucheim's relationship.:haha:)

[Herr-Berbunch]

behavio(u)r.


Thank you :up: otherwise I wouldn't have had a clue. :O:

Or should that be 'Thank yo, otherwise I woldn't have had a clue'? :hmmm:

[nikimcbee]

Thank you :up: otherwise I wouldn't have had a clue. :O:

Or should that be 'Thank yo, otherwise I woldn't have had a clue'? :hmmm:

:haha:I just don't want anything getting lost in translation.:D

[Red Brow]

My only complaint is that the movie added in the scenes of the British air attack against the wishes of the book's author. Nor was the attack realistic since it did not show any barrage balloons over the docks. German U-boat men did mention that such ports were covered with barrage balloons to prevent low-flying aircraft from zipping in and dropping bombs into the open entrances of the concrete U-boat bunkers.

So when I watch this movie I stop right before the air alarm. Then I switch to the beginning of the show and end with the officers having a good time at the local brothel/bar. In fact the first scene I open the movie with is where they captain is escorting the corespondent through the U-boat bunkers past all the repair work.

[Sailor Steve]

Nor was the attack realistic since it did not show any barrage balloons over the docks.
Is that all???

The long shot of the bomber formation breaking up was cut from Battle Of Britain. All other shots were of T-6 Texan/Harvards pretending to be combat planes.

German U-boat men did mention that such ports were covered with barrage balloons to prevent low-flying aircraft from zipping in and dropping bombs into the open entrances of the concrete U-boat bunkers.
That would have been hideously expensive, especially for just one scene. I can think of a lot more to complain about than that. To me that's like complaining that they changed the "man going crazy" from Franz to Johann.

Also at the end of the book no one died except Herr Kaleun, and he wasn't really dead, coming back for two sequels. The movie changed a lot, and the book was very much better, but it's still a great movie and worth owning the 'Uncut' version.

[SqL]

I love this film, but atack scenes are not realistic.
How come, destroyer surprised the u-boat crew when they were attacking convoy ? That scene and few other I have to ignore. Besides its a great film.

I remember my u-boat passion started when I saw the music video from "Das boat" soundtrack (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwc0shJ2aYc). I've allways wondered, did they used real VIIC ? How did they made those storm scenes, they look so real.

[Cybermat47]

How come, destroyer surprised the u-boat crew when they were attacking convoy ?

All the destroyers were attacking another U-boat on the other side of the convoy.

[Sailor Steve]

I love this film, but atack scenes are not realistic.
How come, destroyer surprised the u-boat crew when they were attacking convoy ? That scene and few other I have to ignore. Besides its a great film.
Why is that unrealistic? u-boats didn't usually get surprised by destroyers, but it did happen. One of the main points about the book and the movie seems to be that anything and everything goes wrong, from start to finish.

I've allways wondered, did they used real VIIC ? How did they made those storm scenes, they look so real.
No. For the inside they built a full-scale interior on a platform that could rock up and down and back and forth. For the bridge scenes they built a model of the conning tower and filmed with backdrops, and giant fans and water hoses for the storms. For the external scenes they built several different sized models, including a full-sized one for 'leaving the harbor'. That model was borrowed for Raiders Of The Lost Ark.

If you look closely at the long shots of the sub cruising, you can see that the crew on the bridge are not moving. In those scenes the crew are also models. The scene in which Frentzen falls and is injured really happened. They thought it looked good on camera so they worked it into the movie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqPVjnZe2M4

[SqL]

All the destroyers were attacking another U-boat on the other side of the convoy.

Why is that unrealistic? u-boats didn't usually get surprised by destroyers, but it did happen. One of the main points about the book and the movie seems to be that anything and everything goes wrong, from start to finish.

Nonsens.

I remember ther was a complete silence before the atack. And then suddenly they saw destroyer near by. WTF? They didnt heard him comming ? How come ? Was sonar man sleeping ?

No. It was just made to create drama. So that scene is not realistic.

And one thing. I dont remember exactly but I think they saw the convoy through binoculars and went full speed ahead emerged or something like that, I cant remember now, but there was something I thought it was not realistic or stupid risky.

Nevertheless I ignore it, and it is still one of my top favorite movies. Thats unquestionable.

[Sailor Steve]

Nonsens.

I remember ther was a complete silence before the atack. And then suddenly they saw destroyer near by. WTF? They didnt heard him comming ? How come ? Was sonar man sleeping ?
U-boat hydrophones don't work on the surface. Not nonsense at all. Also on the surface at full speed the diesels make a lot of noise, so not "complete silence" by a long shot.

And one thing. I dont remember exactly but I think they saw the convoy through binoculars and went full speed ahead emerged or something like that, I cant remember now, but there was something I thought it was not realistic or stupid risky.
Possibly, unless they were out of position, or possibly thought all the destroyers were dealing with boats on the other side of the convoy.

There are several unrealistic things in the movie. You don't mention any of them. Just this one, and you're wrong.

[Cybermat47]

Nonsens.

Wrong.

Might they be chasing one of ours on the other side?

Also, what you say about the sonar man not hearing the destroyer? There are more than enough explanations:

a) In the film, the sonar man is seen being the Radio man and Medic.

b) Hydrophones are useless when on the surface, and the U-boat was going at least at 15 Knots.

[SqL]

U-boat hydrophones don't work on the surface. Not nonsense at all. Also on the surface at full speed the diesels make a lot of noise, so not "complete silence" by a long shot.

Ok, I found talking about two different scenes. I found one,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISD1hJz53L8
Looks more like a cavalry charge rather then silent u-boat atack. Just think about it. Which one of us playing SH would risk like that to be detected and exposed. It looks like FAIL. In real life no one would do such a thing. If they could see the convoy with the binoculars so they could be seen also by the enemy.

Now the second scene
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYqQvV89YzM
Looks like the destroyer teleported. Or maby its the second destroyer? Ok, could be... But why they didn't heard him comming? Because its just to create drama.
It would be realistic if they were in move, and destroyer came from starboard.

My friends, it happend only in book and movie to create dynamic action and drama for unaware mass public.

There are several unrealistic things in the movie. You don't mention any of them.
Yeah for sure though I cant't remember at the moment, but certainly ther are more bugs. Those two I mention are just a needle in the eye for me.

[Cybermat47]

^^^^

Of course, you're absolutely right!
No real U-boat captain would be so stupid! The only ones we know actually did such idiot things, were the greatest submarine captains of all time, sinking around 20,000 tons in EVERY SINGLE ATTACK!

[CCIP]

Actually if you read historical accounts of U-boat combat, you'll see plenty of this happening. For example, look at E.B. Gasaway's "Grey Wolf, Grey Sea", which is written from historical accounts of the U-124. There is more than one incident in that boat's history where it was surprised by escorts on the surface, including the one that, on April 2, 1943, resulted in the boat's demise. And this is a recurring theme throughout U-boat warfare, not just one boat's story. The fact is that visibility conditions are not a universal given. The Silent Hunter games to date actually do a really poor job of representing that, because visual contact there is even and fixed all around - DO NOT use SH as an authoritative guide on visibility in U-boat tactics. Likewise, you really have to take SH with a grain of salt when it comes to escort tactics. I would go as far as to say that SH is actually very unrealistic in these aspect, while the scene from Das Boot is very realistic. Visibility on the North Atlantic, especially at night, is extremely unpredictable. There are drifting mists even on clear nights, and there are plenty of indications that the attack in Das Boot was taking place in less than ideal weather conditions following an intense storm, and it's not unlikely that there were still rain squalls in the area. The moon was appearing and disappearing from cloud cover, further complicating things. A darkened ship in a patch of mist could practically run over a U-boat, even unintentionally. In fact, that even happened historically. Heck, look at the Titanic, which successfully ran into an iceberg in this same geographical area, despite the fact that it was sailing in peacetime, with lights, without the pressures of an ongoing attack.

U-boat attack tactics were themselves founded on taking advantage of the problems of visibility. Your assumption that "if you can see the convoy, then they can see you" is flat-out wrong, because the small, low-profile U-boat always had a visibility advantage at night over a big, tall ship, which had a much bigger reflective surface and could cast big shadows. U-boats were designed from the start to sneak up on the surface unseen, where they would simply blend in with the ocean. As long as they did not go too fast, the U-boats did not generate a foam wake, while the big ships almost always did. Many tests were made, long before the war, to verify this phenomenon - and they found that in ideal conditions for a U-boat attack, a large surface ship could be seen by a U-boat from as much as several kilometers away, while the U-boat could approach to within 300 meters or closer on the surface without being seen. Many claimed - not without reasons - that a U-boat traveling on the surface at several knots of speed, with decks awash, facing its target was basically invisible at night - and inaudible to hydrophones and active sonar thanks to the echoes and refraction from the waves on the surface. It was correctly theorized that a U-boat on the surface at night was much stealthier to visual and sound detection than a submerged U-boat. This is what Doenitz's entire wolfpack doctrine was based on - night surface attack. For a while, it more or less worked brilliantly. The most successful tactic early in the war was actually sailing directly into the convoy on the surface from behind, getting into the middle of it, and attacking with all tubes - and in some cases, the U-boats even left the convoy on the surface afterwards, never diving through the whole attack. That is literally impossible in SH, yet that's how it really went. U-boat commanders correctly assumed that they were very hard to see, especially if the enemy had no idea what they were looking for or couldn't guess where the attack was coming from - after all, who'd think to look right in the middle of the convoy? And even if they did, diving in the middle of the convoy meant that the noise of all the ships would hide the U-boat pretty effectively. But that assumed that the enemy needed to see or hear the U-boat at all... more on that later.

Escort ships are small too. Assuming they move slowly, they can be hard to see. U-boat tactics, however, assumed that they would move quickly while searching for a U-boat on the surface, and would reveal themselves with lights and foam wakes - otherwise, they were blind and slow. The chance of them catching a U-boat while going blind and slow is obviously not great. Possible, but not likely. So as long as we assume that both sides rely on visual and sound contact, yes, U-boats had an advantage, and it was in the interest of the fast escort ships to force a U-boat under as quickly as possible while defending a convoy. This meant that U-boats would always have plenty of time to see the danger approaching and dive. Big advantage. In theory.

But what that scene is really about is actually something a lot more important: the fact that U-boats, from a certain point in the war, were actually at a massive disadvantage on the surface, because of allied radar. The Captain seems puzzled in that scene at how the destroyer snuck up, and I think that is exactly what happened in that scene - radar. The destroyer probably had early radar contact and was already coming up on the U-boat, which would've had no idea it was there, especially if the visibility was less than ideal. They could not have heard it - as others have stated, hydrophones do not work on the surface. U-boats at this point in the war did not have radar warning receivers or even any idea that the enemy was equipped with such radar equipment. Even later in the war when they had receivers, those were notoriously unreliable and often did not actually extend to frequencies used by allied radar. The result was that they would have expected lights and flares to be fired from long distance, and destroyers speeding at the boat with "bone in teeth" from first indication of contact. In fact the smart escort captain who knew what his ship's radar could do would be creeping towards the U-boat at low speed, only lighting up when the sub was in the no-escape zone. All other indications seem to point to the fact that on that (fictional) night, the (fictional) U-96 ran into an experienced and clever escort commander who knew what he was doing, and was equipped with some working form of early radar. There is ample evidence that even as late as early 1943 many experienced U-boat commanders still did not believe that the enemy was equipped with this kind of radar, and assumed that ships suddenly appearing on top of them was just a fluke or a mistake on their part, which led to fatal errors - and the movie supposedly takes place in late 1941, when virtually any U-boat crew would've considered the idea of the enemy effective ASW radar preposterous. They simply assumed that visibility would always be on the smaller U-boat's side - and they were wrong, just that far from every Allied ship was equipped or trained to use radar effectively at that point. That was gradually changing, and that's what Das Boot definitely portrays.

This is in fact a realistic scene. I would go as far as to argue that dozens of U-boats were probably sunk in exactly that situation, after being attacked by a surface ship tracking them on radar, whose approach they did not - and could not - detect.

[Dowly]

Excellent post CCIP :salute:

[SqL]

CCIP - nice post, very good arguments which I can't argue. I've checked information about wolf pack surface attack, and it's seems you were right... and I was wrong. Respect.

[CCIP]

No worries, sorry to get on my lecturing horse. Just thought I'd give a good write-up about what I knew, I do not mean to be patronizing in any way :)
It's fun to test and study assumptions though.

The SH games are awesome and Das Boot is pretty awesome. Both really need grains of salt though when it comes to figuring out what was the 'truth', though. Because you're definitely right when you say there's dramatic exaggaration in Das Boot, but there is also some very 'gamey' simplifications even in the best of SH unfortunately.

I hope someday there is a new sub sim that deals with the issue of visibility in a little more detail. I've always dreamed of being able to sneak around fog banks and rain squalls and dodge destroyers coming out of them.

[SqL]

I hope someday there is a new sub sim that deals with the issue of visibility in a little more detail. I've always dreamed of being able to sneak around fog banks and rain squalls and dodge destroyers coming out of them.

Thats a nice dream.
Regards commander

[Hinrich Schwab]

Nonsens.

I remember ther was a complete silence before the atack. And then suddenly they saw destroyer near by. WTF? They didnt heard him comming ? How come ? Was sonar man sleeping ?

No. It was just made to create drama. So that scene is not realistic.


It is you who are mistaken. There were two major types of hydrophone arrays on U-Boats. The GHG and the KDB. The GHG was a fixed array on both broadsides of the boat, but had both a forward and aft baffle, where the U-Boat could not detect anything. It was useless on the surface because all it would pick up was the diesels and surface chop.

The KDB eliminated the forward baffle and the after baffle was mitigated if the sub was at a full stop and sufficient time had passed for previous cavitation to fade. However, it was utterly worthless on the surface because the soundhead was a mini-mast that was mounted to the deck. It was above water when surfaced.

As far a destroyers sneaking up on U-Boats. It did happen...a lot. Destroyers would get a fix on the U-Boat and determine its course. It would then turn into its baffles and get enough steam to generate speed. Then, it would stop its screws and drift towards the U-Boat using its momentum as propulsion. Even submerged, there would be nothing for the hydrophones to pick up because the escort is drifting and not technically underway. Granted, the scene in Das Boot could be argued as overdramatized, U-Boats getting jumped by destroyers in this manner DID happen.