Das Boot

Not pointless at all.

It may have been Bucheim's first time on a submarine, but not his first time at see. From what I've read he served first in destroyers, and not as a correspondent, but an actual officer. His letters home so enthused the official censors that he was recommended for a writer's job, then transferred to a minesweeper and finally a u-boat.

In the book he portrays himself less the idealistic novice of the movie than as an experienced officer, standing watch for other crewmembers, and during his first depth charging comparing it to attacking a British submarine while on a destroyer. "Now I know what it feels like from their side".

Something I noticed in my latest watching of Das Boot: while we see him assisting the captain on the bridge, we never actually see the 1WO leading his watch. Going on watch, yes, but not actually on the bridge. Maybe 'Werner' only wanted to be up there when the 2WO was in charge. After all, in the book he says they had a saying: "Only when the second officer was on the bridge did the Old Man sleep easily".

[Rose]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

Probably never won an Oscar, because the dialogue translated in English was very badly done. Most things either don't make sense or are really cheesey...plus it sounds like they recorded the English version in my garage (on top of the old lawn mower). Now, if it could win the Best International Film award is another matter.

Though even here I am a bit dubious about the acting. Some of them are either completely insane or are overacting. The main characters for the most part are fine...but it's too cliche'd. You have the melancholic captain, the completely nuts warrant officer (or whatever he is), the really anal and wet behind the ears junior Officer, the old rusty hermit-like chief engineer, and the oh-I'm-so-excited-about-the-whole-thing journalist who then-realises-it's-hell-out-there.

Let's face it, the film's good but it's cheesey as hell...and the characters are cartoons.

Might I remind you that it was Das Boot that created these clishe's. As for the dialog translation, just get the subtitled version!

[Enigma]

There seems to be a weird thing around here that says a sub movie has to be textbook realistic to be any good...I agree U-571 was a poor film, but I was mildly entertained. As for Crimson tide, I LOVE that film. Its entertaining, its well acted, and its a great story.

[Rose]

Das Boot leaves a lump in my throat every goddamned time I watch it. I just cannot fathom how anyone can say this classic -- this staple of the submarine genre -- is a bad movie...

But hey, as that "clishe'd" saying goes, everyone is entitled to their own opinion .

[tbarak]

Well it didn't win any Oscars but it was nominated for six of them which is still pretty respectable. Films that win Oscars aren't necessarily the best, just that their producers lobbied more vigorously than the others. Besides what do a bunch of pierced-nosed, Starbucks-sipping, Liberal artsies know about u-boats?

[Umfuld]

It's a very good movie. I remember when it first came out on cable here in the States. It had a lot of buzz. And yeah, who cares if it won an Oscar? Is there anything more meaningless than an Oscar?

Besides an Emmy, that is.

I just saw if for the first time (maybe I saw some of it as a teen, don't remember) a few months ago. The 5 hours version was on one of the Encore channels.
I played SHIII shortly after, and concluded that either: A) SH3 simply copied the feel of the movie almost 100%, or B) they are both so realistic that they are similar because of this.


I play dead is dead for the most part, and always start in 39. So my expirence with the later years of the war are very limited. And the scene when they go to attack the Destroyer in a storm, and he loses sight of it for a moment, and when he finds it again the Destroyer is right on top of him in an attack run, well, that happened to me pretty much that night after watching the movie.

What does he say? "The British have stopped making mistakes." And someone else speculates about rumors of advanced detection tools.

It was amazing. I knew just how they felt, as I was approaching a convoy as I always do and before I got even close a Destroyer was steaming right at me, 1000s of m away from the convoy.

It's a great film, is what I'm saying.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I'm sorry, Crimson Tide may have used realistic sets, but the plot and the procedures were about as realistic as a twelve-year-old in a cardboard box. That movie was pure drek.

Care to elaborate?

Originally Posted by Ula Jolly

Wait... please tell me that is irony on some divine level. Crimson Tide? The 1995 Crimson Tide? Ohio sub? I damned near puked from it! I don't mean to be trying for flaming or anything, but it goes "down there", with U-571 and the rest.

Would be nice if you were more specific. I hope you're not going to add "Oh, by the way...I'm Norwegian".

Originally Posted by Rose

Might I remind you that it was Das Boot that created these clishe's. As for the dialog translation, just get the subtitled version!

No it didn't...the cliches are about as old as the mountains. And I have the subtitled/Directors Cut. The subtitles are just as bad...

[Ula Jolly]

@ Kuru:
Why would I want to add THAT? Oh by the way... I'm Norwegian.
(And don't triple post, I urge you)

Crimson Tide is another production based on something Hollywood never understood, submarines. Go ahead and call me a nitpicker and feel free to claim that I don't know what I'm talking about, but if I remember the movie correctly (it's been a year since I watched it), there was an Akula-Ohio engagement. This, absolutely, SUCKED. I mean one thing is that you have the boats not seeing one another till the last FIVE HUNDRED YARDS, another is the dreadfully cliché evasion. That Ohio would be deadscrabble! The story was good, but the movie was a horrible way of trying to get it through. Yes, it was perfectly viewable, but for the same reasons as U-571: If you see things that you know or have good reason to suspect is wrong, you groan inside. Like National Geographic's documentaries about aircraft accidents, and how badly they are made. Perhaps ninety percent of the audience don't know better, and think of it as good enough. Well, isn't it?? YES, these documentaries are good enough for the stories and the education, but not for the visual depicting.

I'm not complaining about, say... the submarine equal to sounds in space, I am complaining about the complete lack of desire to depict ANYTHING in ANY fashion which might not keep the audience glued to the chair. Those submarines should ("should") have engaged at a much greater distance and in a different manner which would have offered perhaps nowhere near the suspense that incorrectly depicting it would have.
The insides of the ships, very nice. The struggle, nice one. Moral point = unbeatable. Visual, crap and toodlefoodles. It's a movie, the picture is important.

Originally Posted by Ula Jolly

@ Kuru:
Why would I want to add THAT? Oh by the way... I'm Norwegian.
(And don't triple post, I urge you)

Crimson Tide is another production based on something Hollywood never understood, submarines. Go ahead and call me a nitpicker and feel free to claim that I don't know what I'm talking about, but if I remember the movie correctly (it's been a year since I watched it), there was an Akula-Ohio engagement. This, absolutely, SUCKED. I mean one thing is that you have the boats not seeing one another till the last FIVE HUNDRED YARDS, another is the dreadfully cliché evasion. That Ohio would be deadscrabble! The story was good, but the movie was a horrible way of trying to get it through. Yes, it was perfectly viewable, but for the same reasons as U-571: If you see things that you know or have good reason to suspect is wrong, you groan inside. Like National Geographic's documentaries about aircraft accidents, and how badly they are made. Perhaps ninety percent of the audience don't know better, and think of it as good enough. Well, isn't it?? YES, these documentaries are good enough for the stories and the education, but not for the visual depicting.

I'm not complaining about, say... the submarine equal to sounds in space, I am complaining about the complete lack of desire to depict ANYTHING in ANY fashion which might not keep the audience glued to the chair. Those submarines should ("should") have engaged at a much greater distance and in a different manner which would have offered perhaps nowhere near the suspense that incorrectly depicting it would have.
The insides of the ships, very nice. The struggle, nice one. Moral point = unbeatable. Visual, crap and toodlefoodles. It's a movie, the picture is important.

First of all, I didn't "triple post". I was replying to 3 different posts. I have no idea how you put 3 different quotes in one post. Secondly, you are not in any position to say what is realistic or unrealistic, considering as I understand it, are or never have been in the US Navy or been on an Ohio class sub in any capacity...let alone an expert on air disasters.

Secondly, I don't think it's the Ohio's job to engage anyone. You know it's a boomer, right? It's supposed to evade if possible.

p.s. I put the "Norwegian" bit because I'm trying to figure out how a Norwegian would know anything about an Ohio class sub, let alone US Navy procedures.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

I'm sorry, did I see the title "U-571" in the same topic - no - the same forum as Das Boot?

You know, I must be honest with you, I was loving U-571 when i first watched it. Then they threw grenades down the hatch - I was mildly annoyed. Then a torpedo scraped along the side of the boat - I was frowning.

But what really got me miffed on a re-watch?

"Its all in German!"


Just....gah.

[Ula Jolly]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

First of all, I didn't "triple post". I was replying to 3 diffrent posts. Secondly, you are not in any position to say what is realistic or unrealistic, considering as I understand it, are or never have been in the US Navy or been on an Ohio class sub in any capacity...let alone an expert on air disasters.

Secondly, I don't think it's the Ohio's job to engage anyone. You know it's a boomer, right? It's supposed to evade if possible.

You did post three separate times in a row, that should technically be considered triple posting, unless you have your specific rules about that. I am not looking to open up any kind of flame war of any kind, I was expecting this to be a somewhat objective sharing of viewpoints about a movie.

You misread me, and you have misjudged what knowledge I do have about submarines. I'll leave it to that, because any further explanation would either not suffice to you, and/or just result in another, just as unproductive reply. I should have provided my reasons to disliking the movie as I already provided my viewpoint, but I saw this as a discussion about Das Boot - not a 'film critics meet and discuss'.

As I said before, I do not know how to put 3 different quotes into one post...thus why I had to use three different posts to quote and answer three different people. I don't care about post count or anything petty like that. Tell the mod to reset my post count or better still, fix it on 0...see if I care. Not that it's of any concern to you...are you a mod?

You seem to imagine you're more then you actually are. Authority on the Ohio, an expert on air accidents...and now a mod, which you are plainly not. Not trying to flame...

[Umfuld]

Well I know nothing about subs at all. But one of my favorite movies is Hunt For Red October.

Anyone have any thoughts about that? Just wondering if that is more or less accurate in regards to modern subs. I don't read Clancy, but from what I know he does a lot of research on the subjects he writes about.

Again, not to side track the thread, I'd just be interested in hearing from anyone who knows about such things.