New submarine movie: TORPEDO U-235

[Onkel Neal]

Oh, man, that was EPIC.

The dubbing was just fine, some excellent dubs, no problem there! This is the kind of movie
that should be filmed in non-English and dubbed, it fundamentally demands it.

Opening credits, I knew this was going to be amazing when one of the producers was listed
as "Tax Shelter for the Belgium Government". Classic!

Someone said this was a hybrid of Inglorious Basterds and U-571, that's really accurate. They
tried to shoehorn in some Das Boot and Hunt for Red October tropes as well, but it didn't make
any sense at all. Don't these filmmakers ever Subsim?

Spoilers: sorry, can't really discuss without, but these are intentionally vague.

So, you can train a small group of guys to manage a submarine with a couple days of bad training?

Another underwater battle between two subs. Hey, in WWII, were any submerged subs
able to torpedo another submerged sub, solely by passive sonar? And I don't mean one was surfaced
and one was at PD, I mean 50m down, no visual bearing, range by sound alone?

Gotta love how the hydrophone operator was so precise, frequently calling out "Torpedo! Range 150 meters!"
I need this guy on my boat in Wolfpack.

So, one things I learned, if you torpedo a submerged U-boat 200m away, the thing explodes like 8 times,
and the shock waves are horrific.

When a woman shoots a rifle and blows up a destroyer, I have to say, women's rights have arrived.

Lots of throwback racist comments, stuff I haven't seen in a movie since the 60s. Of course, it was
appropriate for the time and setting in the film, but I didn't think any modern filmmakers would bring it back.


Specific spoilers: don't read if you want major elements of this soon-to-be cult classic ruined:

 

So, a German destroyer comes up on a German U-boat and they are ready to blow
it away at a moment's notice? Ok, maybe they got a warning that a rogue U-boat was operating somewhere in the Atlantic...

But then when the DD rams the U-boat, causing massive flooding in the center compartments and the
control room... they sink like a stone... but they are able to resurface hours later by simply blowing
the tanks?? What" No damage repairs were necessary? Holy cow, that's dumb writing.

Drowning babies, them Nazis were evil!

Wait, just why did the Allies need a Nazi sub to transport uranium to the US? I mean, wouldn't it have
been 1000x easier just to load it onto a few planes? Or a fast destroyer group? Jeesh, if there was ever
a more complicate and unnecessarily risky way to do something, I don't know what it is.

Summary: If you thought there couldn't be a movie you loved more than U-571, you're mistaken, my friend.

.



.
.
.

[McBeck]

Sounds like a blast! ☺️

[skin-nl]

Bought it with Original Belgium audio

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Another underwater battle between two subs. Hey, in WWII, were any submerged subs
able to torpedo another submerged sub, solely by passive sonar? And I don't mean one was surfaced
and one was at PD, I mean 50m down, no visual bearing, range by sound alone?

Yep. U-864 sunk by HMS Venturer. February 9 1945.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_submarine_U-864

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by u crank

Yep. U-864 sunk by HMS Venturer. February 9 1945.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_submarine_U-864

Ah, yes they were submerged but both were using snorkels/scopes and therefore their surface position was marked.

The British submarine HMS Venturer was sent from the British submarine base at Lerwick. After German radio transmissions regarding U-864 were decrypted, Venturer was rerouted to intercept the U-boat. On 6 February, U-864 passed the Fedje area without being detected, but one of her engines began to misfire and she was ordered to return to Bergen. A signal stated that a new escort would be provided her at Hellisøy on 10 February. She made for there, but on 9 February, Venturer heard U-864's diesel engine noise. Venturer was not using active sonar, (ASDIC), to avoid betraying her position and spotted the U-boat's snorkel.

In an unusually long engagement for a submarine and in a situation for which neither crew had been trained, Venturer waited 45 minutes after making contact before going to action stations, waiting in vain for U-864 to surface and thus present an easier target. Upon realizing they were being followed by the British submarine and that their escort had still not arrived, U-864 began zig-zagging. Each submarine risked raising her periscope. After three hours, Venturer fired all four bow torpedo tubes at the U-boat's predicted position, beginning at 12:12 and at 17 second intervals (taking four minutes[citation needed] to reach their target), then dived suddenly to evade any retaliation from his opponent. U-864 heard the torpedoes coming and also dived deeper and turned away to avoid them, managing to avoid the first three but unknowingly steering into the path of the fourth. Imploding, she split in two, sinking with all hands and coming to rest in over 150 m (490 ft) of water, 2 nmi (3.7 km; 2.3 mi) west of Fedje.[6]

In this movie, both subs were deeper than 20m and neither had a snorkel or scope to use as a reference.

But that U-864 does fit the bill.

[Catfish]

As far as i read U 864 was running surfaced when performing the zig zag course, being observed by the english sub alright.
Only when the english sub had fired its 4 torpedos, U 964 dived to evade at greater depth, but ran into the fourth torpedo. So one can hardly speak of a submerged duel?
There is obviously a fault in some report

Also the U 864 carried the aforementioned parts and plans and mercury, but no uranium or such. This was tried in another boat bound for Japan, with the appropriate hull name of U-234.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Another underwater battle between two subs. Hey, in WWII, were any submerged subs
able to torpedo another submerged sub, solely by passive sonar? And I don't mean one was surfaced
and one was at PD, I mean 50m down, no visual bearing, range by sound alone?

Probably the best animation out there of the event.



Re-enactment footage.

[fire-fox]

looks more accurate than that tom hanks dross.

[Catfish]

@ Neal: Great review I have to see that

So, you can train a small group of guys to manage a submarine with a couple days of bad training?

That's what i thought when i read the first hints about the film..
But then you know..
I managed to kill two carrier groups with a Balao in Silent Service II, and i did not even have any training before. Also i only had to reload 12 times or so (the game, not the torpedoes) to achieve that.

Another underwater battle between two subs. Hey, in WWII, were any submerged subs able to torpedo another submerged sub, solely by passive sonar

Yes, me in Silent Hunter II, near the virtual Azores! Ok i used external view but hey, you have to manage things with the tools at hand..

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Catfish

@ Neal: Great review I have to see that
That's what i thought when i read the first hints about the film..
But then you know..
I managed to kill two carrier groups with a Balao in Silent Service II, and i did not even have any training before. Also i only had to reload 12 times or so (the game, not the torpedoes) to achieve that.
Yes, me in Silent Hunter II, near the virtual Azores! Ok i used external view but hey, you have to manage things with the tools at hand..

Yeah, it's worth watching as long as you know it cannot be taken seriously.

You'll learn that when the Dirty Dozen show up to train on the u-boat, they are told they will have 3 weeks to learn, and that is viewed as "impossible!"

 

Then a sneak attack by the enemy cuts that short by 2 1/2 weeks.... but somehow they still manage to operate the sub without sinking it and killing themselves.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Probably the best animation out there of the event.

Re-enactment footage.

Thanks, have not seen this yet.

Though this IX D.2 (!) was not "sunk by using hydrophones". edit: just reread

U 864 was primarily detected because of the code breaking, and it was the third time the boat was there, having returned two times because of technical problems already. The third time the british sub was able to sink it. U-864 was heading back the third time, this time because of Diesel engine problems.

The british sub knew position and mission of U-864 via the british tapping service, having broken the code already earlier in the war (no, not the US and not U-571 ).
So the british "Venturer" may have then heard the german boat via hydrophones, but it was also clearly to be seen running a regular zig-zag course, surfaced.

The english crew was able to foresay the course, and fired four torpedoes from a distance of roughly two kilometers. The fourth torpedo was set to a deeper run, assuming the german boat would dive when it saw the incoming torpedoes, and so it did. The fourth torpedo hit, and U-864 sank.

It was not exactly an "underwater duel"..

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Thanks, have not seen this yet.

Though this IX D.2 (!) was not "sunk by using hydrophones".

That's correct, they used a torpedo

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

That's correct, they used a torpedo

ok but it still amazes me how wrong a lot of those war stories and films are.
On the HMS Venturer site they write that U 684 was running zig zag submerged. Not true. It was surfaced and dived when they saw the incoming torpedo. Nothing to do with hydrophones.

I mean propaganda is a difficult task, you have to bedevil others, you have to describe how mean and bad and invincible threat they are, but you have to place confidence in your own people that they can be beaten.
But why repeat this now, spin it further after fifty years, or adding something wrong and even irrelevant?

[darkdrone]

U571 was a godawful movie and this looks even worse,No wonder I watch foreign movie's


Greyhound was just bland,I couldn't care less if they all died, except the black cook I was a bit upset about him dying,Make a movie about PQ 17 not all of us are 17

[samlarson]

Oh, man, that was EPIC.

The dubbing was just fine, some excellent dubs, no problem there! This is the kind of movie
that should be filmed in non-English and dubbed, it fundamentally demands it.

Opening credits, I knew this was going to be amazing when one of the producers was listed
as "Tax Shelter for the Belgium Government". Classic!
Or this info on short term investments https://promoneysavings.com/best-sho...m-investments/

Someone said this was a hybrid of Inglorious Basterds and U-571, that's really accurate. They
tried to shoehorn in some Das Boot and Hunt for Red October tropes as well, but it didn't make
any sense at all. Don't these filmmakers ever Subsim?

Spoilers: sorry, can't really discuss without, but these are intentionally vague.

So, you can train a small group of guys to manage a submarine with a couple days of bad training?

Another underwater battle between two subs. Hey, in WWII, were any submerged subs
able to torpedo another submerged sub, solely by passive sonar? And I don't mean one was surfaced
and one was at PD, I mean 50m down, no visual bearing, range by sound alone?

Gotta love how the hydrophone operator was so precise, frequently calling out "Torpedo! Range 150 meters!"
I need this guy on my boat in Wolfpack.

So, one things I learned, if you torpedo a submerged U-boat 200m away, the thing explodes like 8 times,
and the shock waves are horrific.

When a woman shoots a rifle and blows up a destroyer, I have to say, women's rights have arrived.

Lots of throwback racist comments, stuff I haven't seen in a movie since the 60s. Of course, it was
appropriate for the time and setting in the film, but I didn't think any modern filmmakers would bring it back.

Summary: If you thought there couldn't be a movie you loved more than U-571, you're mistaken, my friend.

.

I cannot share your enthusiasm on this one. Yeah, the movie was good and these two hours were well spent but calling it a new/old classic its a bit exaggerating.

First of all, the movie lacks chemistry. It's like the director did not decide whether it would be a serious bit or the clinky one and therefore the movie balance in the middle without showing its full potential and character.

Secondary, I liked how they how actors handled the script but some performances were too blend and that's why the overall picture seems too uncertain.

I'll give this movie 7 out of 10 just becaye of that