Excellent movie, but could have been Great...

Overall, good post that I mostly agree with.

The pacing is slightly off. It could benefit from being longer and having more breathing room. A 3 hour version with wider shots and a more meditative tone, like an old epic, would allow for more detail, nuance, and really draw us into the world of submarine life. The conversations are some of the best parts of the movie - more of that.

I don't know, but probably sound assessment. It's too speculative without a final product to see.

Vagueness. Scott's music video roots come through in some of the impressionistic treatment of the film's action. What EXACTLY was Vossler doing with those circuit boards and how did he fix the radio? How did the engine guys fix the propeller and what exactly was wrong with it? Why couldn't the bilge deck guys hear the dude yelling at them? What was their geographical relationship to him?

This is the only part of your post that I think is way off base. The movie depends on technical vagueness, or else the central conflict probably can't believably be set up in the first place, nor can the time suspense of Vossler and the radio. They weren't fixing the propeller, BTW, it was "propulsion" (small point). I always felt pretty clear that the bilge bay guys couldn't hear because it was deafeningly loud where the flooding was taking place, plus they were fixated on their emergency task, and then after the injury the other guy(s) simply wasn't going to leave a shipmate behind.

Unnecessary Racist Ramsey. It cheapens his character and almost makes him a boo-hiss bad guy, which the film intelligently avoids for the most part. I suspect this was a Tarantino contribution, along with the slightly out-of-place pop culture references. It narrowly avoids a 'pie' scene.

100% agree, although there were some other elements that put Ramsey over the top.

Dumbed Down Script. I get the feeling that an intelligent and subtle script went through the Bruckheimer/Simpson machine and came out worse off. The great dialogue scenes between Hunter and Ramsey soon give way to the more action-heavy beats. I'd like to have seen this predicament explored with a more art-house approach, or for the studio to have treated this as a prestige picture in reach of Oscars. The action would still be there, but it would have added significance.

Maybe...probably. I think the story is built around the heavy-handed "two schools of thought" narrative that either wouldn't bear up under closer inspection or else could be played out as an interesting role-reversal...in fact it almost gets there. (Ramsey, Mr. I Just Follow Orders, is actually the one trying to assess the big picture and let that guide his decisions; Hunter, Mr. We All Need to Understand Why, is really just advocating for making sure they follow orders blindly and to-the-letter, he just wants up-to-date orders.)

Any other thoughts on this?

Yes, to get any further into the realm of greatness, this movie needs to explain to me why such a supposedly fine skipper as Captain Ramsey is trying to undermine his XO from almost the first minute of the cruise. Having an XO who your men don't respect - who your men don't think you respect - is a guaranteed recipe for failure. It's leadership friggin' 101. Why would Ramsey go that way? Because Hunter went to Harvard? Sheesh.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

making this movie difficult to watch for people who have served on submarines. Too many cringe-worthy moments.

Ranb

reply share

add reply

formatting help

The randomly inserted race angle was just ridiculous. It nearly ruined the film.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

My only gripe is the cringey Silver Surfer dialogue. Obviously Tarantino's handywork.

reply share

add reply

formatting help