Worst Sub movie ever created.

[Red October1984]

The Syfy movie Sea Snakes (or Silent Venom) almost made my face burn off when I watched it. Nothing about the sub was correct except that it goes underwater. Sheesh. Give it a netflix if you think u can stomach it. The sub looks like a 688, but it's a SSK!! Exact quote from movie "this baby runs pretty quiet on electric motors" and the Chinese dropped a DEPTH CHARGE!?!? One charge, somehow, bangs up a 688 SSK. Then, the Chinese shoot a torp. Well that is a disaster. Ugh. Terrible movie.

[Overkill]

I've not seen that one but I did see this horrible excuse for a sub movie:



The only thing good about it was the paneling they picked out to line the inside of the sub's control room.
I left the movie theater after about 35 minutes of torture. Fortunately "Men at Work" was playing in the adjacent theater.

[Red October1984]

Ugh. The poster even looks bad.

[S-13]

I love submarines, but I haven't seen enough of them to give an "actual worst" since I'm sure there are ones that deserve the title better to the one I'm going to name, which I'm sure alot of people liked.

With that said, I thought Hunt for Red October was pretty terrible, the whole plot about defecting was bad enough, but the idea of the newest ship in the fleet is given to a Captain who while highly decorated as the movie claims but his loyalty to his country isn't insured especially for a nuclear submarine? and rest of the crew would go along? Let alone the fact supposedly the XO of this ship would be a Political Officer?

It's a decent rambo style cold war action movie, but not my idea of a submarine movie.

[Red October1984]

This is strictly my opinion. But. YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!!!! I thought Hunt for Red October was great!! (hence, my username) I fell in love with the book!! It was the first real sub movie I had sat down to watch. I'm a die-hard Clancy fan. It might not be the MOST realistic situation, but it would make sense to give your brand new sub to the man who is the best in the fleet and who has taken out all the new subs in his career. Would you drop me in a fighter plane to protect your country when the only training I've had is flightsims? Or would you go with the Colonel with many flight decorations and kills painted on his aircraft? Just an opinion. No hard feelings S-13.

[S-13]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

This is strictly my opinion. But. YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!!!! I thought Hunt for Red October was great!! (hence, my username) I fell in love with the book!! It was the first real sub movie I had sat down to watch. I'm a die-hard Clancy fan. It might not be the MOST realistic situation, but it would make sense to give your brand new sub to the man who is the best in the fleet and who has taken out all the new subs in his career. Would you drop me in a fighter plane to protect your country when the only training I've had is flightsims? Or would you go with the Colonel with many flight decorations and kills painted on his aircraft? Just an opinion. No hard feelings S-13.

Non-taken, but regardless of this fantasy submarine commander that is given apparently a new submarine every time a new sub comes out of the factory, doesn't explain why a full crew would give up their families and lives, the hero in my opinion of that novel/book was the Cook.

[tommo8993]

I remember seeing a b-movie on tv a while ago call akula. The (new) russian submarine that went rouge and a scantly clad nurse who was captured took up arm with her super strong body-builder rescuer and spent 90 minutes killing russians on a near sci-fi sub.... the sub even had windows with light blue water outside....

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by S-13

I love submarines, but I haven't seen enough of them to give an "actual worst" since I'm sure there are ones that deserve the title better to the one I'm going to name, which I'm sure alot of people liked.

With that said, I thought Hunt for Red October was pretty terrible, the whole plot about defecting was bad enough, but the idea of the newest ship in the fleet is given to a Captain who while highly decorated as the movie claims but his loyalty to his country isn't insured especially for a nuclear submarine? and rest of the crew would go along? Let alone the fact supposedly the XO of this ship would be a Political Officer?

It's a decent rambo style cold war action movie, but not my idea of a submarine movie.

Ramius was Lithuanian, not Russian, an his wife was killed by the soviet bureaucracy, so he had motive too.

That's why decent movie based on excellent books still suck.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

That's why decent movie based on excellent books still suck.

I have to agree, being an avid Tom Clancy reader, this movie was not done well, too little background character development, and the movie gave an entirely different vibe from the book. It seemed to hurry the plot too much IMHO. The movie telegraphed the plot twist at the end, while it blindsided you in the book.

But the worse? Nah, I would put this as one of the better, though nowhere near the best.

[hunter301]

Originally Posted by S-13

I love submarines, but I haven't seen enough of them to give an "actual worst" since I'm sure there are ones that deserve the title better to the one I'm going to name, which I'm sure alot of people liked.

With that said, I thought Hunt for Red October was pretty terrible, the whole plot about defecting was bad enough, but the idea of the newest ship in the fleet is given to a Captain who while highly decorated as the movie claims but his loyalty to his country isn't insured especially for a nuclear submarine? and rest of the crew would go along? Let alone the fact supposedly the XO of this ship would be a Political Officer?

It's a decent rambo style cold war action movie, but not my idea of a submarine movie.

Evidently you didn't listen to the movie you just watched it.

While I agree it was just a movie and highly unlikely to happen its plot did have credibility.
The XO wasn't the political officer. The XO was Borridan, the XO, the political officer was the guy he took out in his stateroom. Political Officers are highly fanatical like the Nazi SS of WW2 so this guy had to go.
When they were giving the briefing to the president's chief adviser Jack Ryan quoted that Ramius trained most of their top submarine skippers taking out the lead boat in every new class. He was quoted as being called: "The Villneous Schoolmaster". That's why he was on the Red October. It was the shakedown cruise for a new boat design. This also put him in a position to select his own officers, men who would be willing to defect with him. As Jack Ryan also quoted.
For the rest of the crew he created, with help from the chief engineer I'm sure an elaborate radiation scare to get them off the boat. Who wouldn't want to get off a boat being flooded with radiation.
Finally his reason for turning over the boat to the Americans was not for the purpose of defecting or being a traitor to his country. He quoted that "Red October" had but one purpose. To slip thru our eastern seaboard defenses and launch a nuclear attack on our country. "There are those that still believe we should strike first in one massive blow".....stated Ramius.
His reason for stealing the boat was to keep the Russians from having such an upper hand on us they could start world war three. Something any sane man would do anything in his power to avoid.
What about the beginning text? Did this have any credibility or was it just put there for the movie?

Again I realize it was just a movie and what it would take for these steps to happen in this order would be like winning the lottery. But it's not totally implausible.

[Sailor Steve]

You really should read the dates before you respond to things.

Originally Posted by hunter301

Evidently you didn't listen to the movie you just watched it.

S-13 hasn't even looked at Subsim since last July.

Originally Posted by hunter301

That absolutely drives me crazy when they do that.

Again you're answering a guy who joined, made one post, and has never looked at Subsim again.

As to the other two, they're both still around and active, but you're responding to something they said six months and eighteen months ago respectively.

[Hinrich Schwab]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

Ugh. The poster even looks bad.

Oh yeah. It's horrible. Notice the Typhoon in the poster has Kirov written in Cyrillic on the side? A Kirov is a class of heavy guided missile cruiser. A complete and obvious failure to research.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

...the Chinese dropped a DEPTH CHARGE!?!?

The Chinese Navy still uses them on their older destroyers and small combatants. Also their Russian made destroyers can deploy them using the mine laying rails.

[Hinrich Schwab]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

The Chinese Navy still uses them on their older destroyers and small combatants. Also their Russian made destroyers can deploy them using the mine laying rails.

If I am not mistaken, many smaller nations that have Soviet/Russian naval vessels and gear still have depth charge laying vessels. I remember reading somewhere that the Cuban Navy (yes, they have one. ) has patrol craft that have DCs.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

The Syfy movie Sea Snakes (or Silent Venom) almost made my face burn off when I watched it. Nothing about the sub was correct except that it goes underwater. Sheesh. Give it a netflix if you think u can stomach it. The sub looks like a 688, but it's a SSK!! Exact quote from movie "this baby runs pretty quiet on electric motors" and the Chinese dropped a DEPTH CHARGE!?!? One charge, somehow, bangs up a 688 SSK. Then, the Chinese shoot a torp. Well that is a disaster. Ugh. Terrible movie.

Congrats. Your thread just made the news