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: U-571
Posted by:
Ken Dunn
()
Date: December 05, 2003 01:42PM
<HTML>Hi Bruno,
No, the movie U-571 isn’t based on facts. It is simply a made-up story and a poor one at that. The scene depicting U-boat men machine-gunning men in a lifeboat never happened either. It is pretty much a disgrace.
A few U-boats were captured during the war but not the way it is depicted by the movie and mostly by the Brits although Americans did capture U-505 after it had been abandoned by its crew.
The movie U-571 is an excellent example of how NOT to make a U-boat movie. Das Boot on the other hand is an excellent example of how to do it right even though it is a composite of a number of patrols and some “artistic license†was taken. The “artistic license†taken in Das Boot has made it somewhat controversial amongst some former U-boat men too but is pretty much invisible to the general public. It did depict the U-boat men the way they really were though, decent, brave men doing a difficult job under extremely dangerous conditions. Its overall excellence (technical and historical and in its depiction of the men involved) should set the standard for all future U-boat movies and perhaps someday it will even be improved on (but probably not by Hollywood).
Also there was a U-571 during the war but the movie has nothing to do with it. The real U-571 was (from the member’s area here at uboat.net) “Sunk 28 Jan, 1944 west of Ireland, in position 52.41N, 14.27W, by depth charges from an Australian Sunderland aircraft (RAAF-Sqdn 461/D). 52 dead (all hands lost).â€
The technical details of life on a U-boat are so difficult to come up with due to the small number of former U-boat men to survive the war and the length of time that has passed since the actual events that any U-boat movie is going to have some technical flaws though. On top of that you also have to deal with the “artistic license†taken by the writers and producers etc.
Hollywood makes movies to make money not to document history. Mostly they haven’t figured out that historically accurate movies will make money too although they do try (but not very hard and not in this case) from time to time. Their product is entertainment not serious history. They should be ashamed of the movie U-571 although some (but not me) do find it entertaining. Watching it just makes me mad.
Regards,
Ken Dunn</HTML>
No, the movie U-571 isn’t based on facts. It is simply a made-up story and a poor one at that. The scene depicting U-boat men machine-gunning men in a lifeboat never happened either. It is pretty much a disgrace.
A few U-boats were captured during the war but not the way it is depicted by the movie and mostly by the Brits although Americans did capture U-505 after it had been abandoned by its crew.
The movie U-571 is an excellent example of how NOT to make a U-boat movie. Das Boot on the other hand is an excellent example of how to do it right even though it is a composite of a number of patrols and some “artistic license†was taken. The “artistic license†taken in Das Boot has made it somewhat controversial amongst some former U-boat men too but is pretty much invisible to the general public. It did depict the U-boat men the way they really were though, decent, brave men doing a difficult job under extremely dangerous conditions. Its overall excellence (technical and historical and in its depiction of the men involved) should set the standard for all future U-boat movies and perhaps someday it will even be improved on (but probably not by Hollywood).
Also there was a U-571 during the war but the movie has nothing to do with it. The real U-571 was (from the member’s area here at uboat.net) “Sunk 28 Jan, 1944 west of Ireland, in position 52.41N, 14.27W, by depth charges from an Australian Sunderland aircraft (RAAF-Sqdn 461/D). 52 dead (all hands lost).â€
The technical details of life on a U-boat are so difficult to come up with due to the small number of former U-boat men to survive the war and the length of time that has passed since the actual events that any U-boat movie is going to have some technical flaws though. On top of that you also have to deal with the “artistic license†taken by the writers and producers etc.
Hollywood makes movies to make money not to document history. Mostly they haven’t figured out that historically accurate movies will make money too although they do try (but not very hard and not in this case) from time to time. Their product is entertainment not serious history. They should be ashamed of the movie U-571 although some (but not me) do find it entertaining. Watching it just makes me mad.
Regards,
Ken Dunn</HTML>
| Subject | Written By | Posted |
|---|---|---|
U-571
|
Bruno Motta (Rio, Brazil) | 12/05/2003 11:52AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
HWM | 12/05/2003 01:37PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Ken Dunn | 12/05/2003 01:42PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/05/2003 11:53PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
David Thomas | 12/05/2003 06:56PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/05/2003 11:56PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Vin | 12/09/2003 04:03AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/09/2003 06:50AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
tim2 | 12/09/2003 03:16PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/09/2003 04:50PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Ken Dunn | 12/09/2003 08:46PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/09/2003 10:51PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
J.T. McDaniel | 12/09/2003 11:33PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Ken Dunn | 12/10/2003 12:49AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
J.T. McDaniel | 12/10/2003 02:46AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/10/2003 02:52AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Steve Roberts | 12/10/2003 11:55AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
kurt | 12/30/2003 09:30PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/31/2003 05:21AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/10/2003 02:46AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Paul K. Mengelberg | 12/12/2003 04:28AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
J.T. McDaniel | 12/12/2003 11:59PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Paul K. Mengelberg | 12/12/2003 04:28AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
tim2 | 12/10/2003 04:39PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Matt Brown | 12/16/2003 11:27AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Matt | 12/19/2003 07:50PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/10/2003 02:54AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Daryl Carpenter | 12/10/2003 03:14AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
tim2 | 12/06/2003 06:35PM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Steve Roberts | 12/10/2003 11:57AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Marc Lund | 12/18/2003 01:13AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
ROBERT M. | 12/18/2003 01:49AM |
|
Re: U-571
|
Ken Dunn | 12/18/2003 04:56AM |