Captain Ramius was an immoral piece of *beep*
It's a major fault in this film. He's a character were suppose to like, admire, maybe even understand, but he's responsible for a lot of innocent deaths.
shareUmmm No.
He is responsible for only a single death. That of the Political Officer who is a tool of the Communist State.
What other "lot of innocent deaths" is he responsible for?
Can't answer?
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!
He single handedly was responsible for the deaths of all aboard the Russian sub that blew up. He did not have to alert Russia of his defection, he only did so to emulate Cortez, or to "motivate" his fello defectors. Aside for the ridiculous negligence on his part, he also killed an officer. For no reason. There was no legitimate reason to end his life. None what so ever. He's an immoral piece of *beep* I'm surprised I've only just realized.
shareHe did that to alert the American's.
Did you think he was going to sail into NY and pop the hatch?
It was part of the ruse. He had to make the Russians believe the Red October had been sunk. In order to do that he had to create a conflict in which he had the potential to be sunk. The Americans helped make the deception more believable.
You can't just go missing with a billion dollar sub, but if they think that sub is on the bottom of the ocean, the ruse becomes possible.
That was the Americans explanation. Ramius never said that. He said "The Russians aren't the problem. I know their tactics." That's an awful mentality.
shareThe only way to get the sub to the Americans was to make the Russians believe it was sunk and the only way to do that was to lure the Russians into trying to sink him and he needed a proxy in order to convince them they'd succeeded. The plan wouldn't work otherwise.
shareThat was the Americans explanation. Ramius never said that. He said "The Russians aren't the problem. I know their tactics." That's an awful mentality.
You negated the pertinent part of that scene, obviously to fit your illogical ideas.
He was comparing the risk of the Russians to the Americans. He knew if he didn't approach this in the right way and get the right American on the other end of the periscope, his plan was doomed. The best way to do that was to get the smartest high brass involved by creating a conflict in which even the highest echelon of the American intelligence community could not ignore.
Since he knew the Russian tactics he could evade them. The American's were the hard part.
This all is rather obvious to me and anyone I have watched it with(at least a dozen). Maybe watch it again. share
He single handedly was responsible for the deaths of all aboard the Russian sub that blew up.
WRONG. Just because you claim it does not make it fact.
Besides, there were two Russian subs lost. Both Alfa class attack subs.
The Konovalov (Tupolev's boat)
And The Politoveskyy (Not seen in film but featured prominently in the Novel)
He did not have to alert Russia of his defection, he only did so to emulate Cortez, or to "motivate" his fello defectors.
Whether or not he needed to so so is a matter of opinion, not your objective fact. Making sure his men would not have second thoughts and change their mind is a good reason (if not a particularly dangerous way to go about it). He also was caught up in a desire to Stick it to the Soviet. Had he just disappeared, the Soviet would have likely just written it off as lost at sea due to an accident. He wanted them to KNOW it wasn't just an accident. that it was done on purpose TO them. Because he blamed them for the death of his wife.
Regardless, that does not make him directly responsible for the death of those others in the subs.
he also killed an officer. For no reason. There was no legitimate reason to end his life. None what so ever.
Actually there IS and you are just being an asshat.
The Officer was not just some Naval Officer.
He was the Zampolit.
The Political Officer.
The embodiment of the Soviet.
He was there to insure everyone was politically correct and following the Soviet dogma.
He was also the only person on board not a part of the defection that knew their REAL orders and would not immediately fall for the cover story of sailing to Cuba.
IN a vessel as complex as a Nuclear powered Missile Submarine, it would not take much at all to sabotage and prevent their defection. The Zampolit could have easily made the defection of the officers common knowledge and turn the crew against them making it impossible.
He could not simply Lock him up (the crew would notice).
He's an immoral piece of *beep* I'm surprised I've only just realized.
No... just Dunning-Kruger showing itself in your statements.
If you’re incompetent, you can’t know you’re incompetent. The skills you need to produce a right answer are exactly the skills you need to recognize what a right answer is.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! share
Are *beep* retarded? How does the decision to defect approve the killing of someone that would disapprove of their defection?
shareWould you also disapprove of a movie depicting a slave killing his overseer before making his escape? Because that's what happened here.
shareDon't even waste anymore time on this troll trash.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!
[deleted]
Ramius was not a slave. Not by a long shot. That's a terrible analogy. At no point in this film do they justify the murdering, only with the asinine phrase "he was a pig".
shareIt isn't a terrible analogy, but perhaps a better one would have been George Washington and all of the rebels who led people, including innocents, to their death during their treasonous acts against King George III and England.
shareThat's just a bad of an analogy. The Gerorge Washington reference would work if it was for a greater good. In fact, the amount of people who benefited was superficial compared to the amounts of people who died. An entire Russian sub was sunk so that 8 high ranking officers could leave their country.
shareAn entire Russian sub was sunk so that 8 high ranking officers could leave their country...and give the US a sub which had tipped the balance of power to Russia's favor. Since it was a first-strike weapon intended to cripple the US before they could ever respond, it was a danger to a few billion people on this planet.
You seem to want to gloss over this whole aspect of it. This wasn't a bunch of guys who killed people so they could walk across the border and defect. The Red October, as was stated in the book and movie, was built with one purpose in mind - to attack the US.
Remember, this was in the 1980's during the Cold War. We were one step away from war with the Soviets all of the time. If the Soviets had something like Red October, they could attack and no one would know what happened until it was all over.
share