Surprisingly Good
Went in with almost no expectations. It was good. Got right into the story. Loads of action throughout. Wont win any awards but it was quite entertaining. I recommend.
3.5/5.
Just what was good about it!?
I struggle to see anything that is good about it. Worse, I struggle to find anything that is not blatantly terrible.
The story is completely absurd and unoriginal (rogue Russian general AGAIN?).
Everything submarines/military is complete fantasy, from tactics to technology to how the crew behaves.
The acting is cringe-worthy.
The characters are all-around cliche and over-drawn.
The editing is your standard wannabe military movie, nothing original.
Pacing is garbage too.
Soundtrack is as generic as it gets.
Effects are standard for our time.
But let meh guess: "It'Z jUhSt a mOvEeh!
*sigh*
Have you worked in a sub?
shareActually I have, yes.
USS San Francisco, 1999-2003.
What now?
What's your point?
Do you have a point?
I was just asking. You sound like an asshole btw.
shareOh come on, you know exactly if I would have said no, you would have given me the "but then you cannot judge this" which is a terrible argument to make in any case. Don't act all innocent here, let's stay honest.
shareYeah you got him on that one. However, since you served in a sub you probably are just a little whole lot biased.
As a guy who never wants to serve in a sub I found it entertaining enough. At least sub battles were something you don't see every day. I might have been in the mood for some mind-numbing military action, and it certainly served its purpose.
What if I did not serve in any submarine ever and still write what I have written?
Does that make my criticism suddenly more or less acceptable?
"Credentials" are worthless on their own. Address the argument instead.
A medical doctor once send a family member of mine home saying "you probably have a heart attack, you should go to the hospital", which is just so absurd I wouldn't blame anyone to not believe it, but it happened.
It's like a math teacher struggling to put 5 and 4 together, that's how absurd it was.
My point is, just because a person is an expert in some field doesn't mean they are automatically right about everything while people that aren't professionals in some fields can still be very knowledgeable in them, because they studied these fields for years with passion.
BTW: I never set foot on a submarine, ever. I was infantry.
One of the most idiotic things to do in a debate is to pull the "did you do what you're talking about" card.
The sole purpose of it is to dismiss whatever someone said without the need of an actual argument, because the person using such tactics has no idea but wants to "win".
It is incredibly pathetic and I wish people would just stop this nonsense already and grow a spine.
I kinda think you're thinking too much about it. It's not like anyone knows anyone on here. You can be a douchebag, you can be honest, you can pretend you're a 10-year old kid. Nobody cares and nobody knows you personally.
You're telling a complete stranger through a keyboard to grow a spine and you wrote a diatribe about it. You need to step back and realize we're talking about our opinions about a b-level submarine movie while we're probably watching the football game.
So you know, I was in the Air Force. I flew fifteen missions throughout the 1990s.
Wow, Intothenight (1261 posts!) ran away with his tail between his legs before he even got to use the reliable old "well, you make a better movie then!" argument...
shareHaha, nice. Give him time, he might still drop that one.
One of my favorites as well. Whenever someone uses it you immediately know you're up against someone with the intellectual capacity of a toddler.
Looks like you missed out on the accident your ship was involved in 2 years later.
share