Movies and Films
This is the forum for Movie and Film discussions. Again, our topic is naval warfare in WWII for the most part.
Re: K-19: pathetic
Posted by:
cate
()
Date: September 18, 2002 05:41AM
<HTML>I haven't yet seen K-19 so perhaps I have no business commenting here, but there does seem to be a recurring theme regarding this movie (and others) as to its merits or otherwise based on one or more of the following criteria:
It deviates from the 'true' story; it is derivative of Das Boot; it's nowhere near as good as Das Boot; the technical details were not accurate or properly researched; naval/military protocol was not plausibly depicted. There are others of course.
Now much of this is fair comment on any movie that purports to be based on a factual account, and you would expect people with a strong interest in submarines to be pretty exacting when it comes to films that are concerned with that subject. But I would say this - the real test of a film isn't in the end any of the above, but how it works as a piece of dramatic entertainment.
All filmakers work within a set of cultural and cinematic conventions that entitle them to play fast and loose with reality in the interests of moving the plot along and developing their dramatic themes. Few films of any genre can match Das Boot, which was quite simply a masterpiece, and internal references to other classic films are part of normal movie curency. Just because a film doesn't come up to the very high standard set by Petersen's film doesn't make it completely valueless - as Patrick said, there is a continuum and a lesser film can still be entertaining.
The technical stuff is of course great fun and given the size of film budgets nowadays it's not unreasonable to expect a high standard of verisimiltude. But even a film that tries its utmost, like Das Boot, is not going to get it completely right, as is clear from other threads on this forum, and in the end a film shouldn't stand or fall by that. It's also reasonable to expect the moviegoer to be prepared suspend their disbelief to some degree. These movies are of course made in the end for a general audience not submarine buffs.
For me (and this is just a personal view) the point at which it becomes irksome is when, as in U-571, given the budget and the technical expertise on hand it would have been just as easy to get it right but the film makers were too sloppy or lazy to bother. When a film is as badly written and dramatically incoherent as that one it has already lost all credibility anyway.
And yes you're right Ray, nobody has so far done it better than the Germans, but the reality of cinema is that sub movies are spendy and Hollywood is where the bucks are. It may well be that K-19 is pants, and if so I will have no hesitation in saying so when I've seen it, but if we want to see the sub movie genre growing in the future (I for one do) then maybe we shouldn't be so dismissive and negative of every effort that comes along.
Just a thought
Cate.</HTML>
It deviates from the 'true' story; it is derivative of Das Boot; it's nowhere near as good as Das Boot; the technical details were not accurate or properly researched; naval/military protocol was not plausibly depicted. There are others of course.
Now much of this is fair comment on any movie that purports to be based on a factual account, and you would expect people with a strong interest in submarines to be pretty exacting when it comes to films that are concerned with that subject. But I would say this - the real test of a film isn't in the end any of the above, but how it works as a piece of dramatic entertainment.
All filmakers work within a set of cultural and cinematic conventions that entitle them to play fast and loose with reality in the interests of moving the plot along and developing their dramatic themes. Few films of any genre can match Das Boot, which was quite simply a masterpiece, and internal references to other classic films are part of normal movie curency. Just because a film doesn't come up to the very high standard set by Petersen's film doesn't make it completely valueless - as Patrick said, there is a continuum and a lesser film can still be entertaining.
The technical stuff is of course great fun and given the size of film budgets nowadays it's not unreasonable to expect a high standard of verisimiltude. But even a film that tries its utmost, like Das Boot, is not going to get it completely right, as is clear from other threads on this forum, and in the end a film shouldn't stand or fall by that. It's also reasonable to expect the moviegoer to be prepared suspend their disbelief to some degree. These movies are of course made in the end for a general audience not submarine buffs.
For me (and this is just a personal view) the point at which it becomes irksome is when, as in U-571, given the budget and the technical expertise on hand it would have been just as easy to get it right but the film makers were too sloppy or lazy to bother. When a film is as badly written and dramatically incoherent as that one it has already lost all credibility anyway.
And yes you're right Ray, nobody has so far done it better than the Germans, but the reality of cinema is that sub movies are spendy and Hollywood is where the bucks are. It may well be that K-19 is pants, and if so I will have no hesitation in saying so when I've seen it, but if we want to see the sub movie genre growing in the future (I for one do) then maybe we shouldn't be so dismissive and negative of every effort that comes along.
Just a thought
Cate.</HTML>
| Subject | Written By | Posted |
|---|---|---|
K-19: pathetic
|
Luis | 09/16/2002 07:19AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
Wachoffizier | 09/16/2002 06:24PM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
Luis | 09/26/2002 09:25AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
ROBERT M. | 09/28/2002 01:52AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
Patrick Meagher | 09/17/2002 06:55PM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
ray schwartz | 09/17/2002 10:39PM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
cate | 09/18/2002 05:41AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
Les Hubert | 09/26/2002 06:46AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
Io Chrysafidou | 09/29/2002 04:35PM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
ROBERT M. | 09/30/2002 02:48AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic 484
|
Les Hubert | 10/01/2002 11:21AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic 484
|
ROBERT M. | 10/02/2002 11:39PM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic 484
|
Mikko | 10/27/2002 08:05PM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic 484
|
ROBERT M. | 10/28/2002 12:37AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic 484
|
Mikko | 10/28/2002 06:02AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic 484
|
ROBERT M. | 10/28/2002 02:54PM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
ROBERT M. | 10/08/2002 01:21AM |
|
Re: K-19: pathetic
|
Mikko | 10/27/2002 08:25PM |