Dammit. I was pumped about this film. But now it's an Apple TV+ exclusive. No other streaming options.

quote:

Originally posted by Pyker:

quote:

Real escort work was a lot of tedium and boredom.

Best movie depicting convoy work:

The Cruel Sea

[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/joUDAD3GB3g" width="560"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

Film is showing it's age somewhat (although it's pretty faithful to the book - but I can't stand the pompous soundtracks of that era). The book is an absolute classic. Nicholas Monsarrat wrote from experience, as he had served in the RN on convoy duty during WWII. You may be interested to know that he lived on Gozo (smaller island in the Maltese archipelago) for most of his life post-war. His wife, Anne, who was a noted journalist, passed away a couple of days ago at the age of 83. she was a fine lady of the old school: https://timesofmalta.com/artic...t-passes-away.804342

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Dammit. I was pumped about this film. But now it's an Apple TV+ exclusive. No other streaming options.

I see that they are offering a free trial for 7 days. I'll watch it this evening.

Jim

I really enjoyed it. I served aboard the USS Truxton (DLGN-35) and could relate to the seas they endured. Great flick and Hanks did his usual superb job as the Captain.

I am a huge Tom Hanks fan and love military movies, but I really was a little disappointed in the movie overall. Tom Hanks did a great job as usual though.

I watched it yesterday and really enjoyed it, except for some technical issues involving bandwidth and streaming delays. The story itself was crisp, Hank's acting was good as usual, the CGI was very good, and I thought technical aspects of the battles seemed believable. In the end, I felt the roughly 90 minutes of the production ended too soon and I guess that shows how engrossing it was. I'd definitely recommend it!

Watched it last night. Enjoyable war movie, albeit I was hoping for something closer to two hours in length - maybe with some more plot and character development. I thoroughly enjoyed the book which it was based on too.

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
The story itself was crisp, Hank's acting was good as usual, the CGI was very good, and I thought technical aspects of the battles seemed believable. In the end, I felt the roughly 90 minutes of the production ended too soon and I guess that shows how engrossing it was. I'd definitely recommend it!

Agreed, it made me feel as if I was on a ship at times. Having grown up in the midwest and visited U-505 (captured German U-boat in Chicago) many times, it was interesting to see a film representation of the Battle of the Atlantic.

Obviously some dramatic license taken, as with all movies but it was a good show. Only critique was I bet the Capt would have had a bit more of a 5 o'clock shadow if he had in fact never left the bridge for 2-3 days, but maybe he shaved up there as well.

Free AppleTV+ since I purchased an iWatch a couple of months ago, so even better.

I really REALLY enjoyed that movie.

Watched it today on Apple TV. Not bad at all. Carving thru those sea's were unreal. That destroyer could really maneuver way quicker than I ever imagined.

quote:

That destroyer could really maneuver way quicker than I ever imagined.

We had a guy jump overboard about 20 miles outbound from Pearl Harbor. The Capt hit the 1MC announcing man overboard, prepare for severe maneuvering. You’d be surprised at just how fast a destroyer size vessel can spin around - and how far over it heels.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mcrimm,

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Dammit. I was pumped about this film. But now it's an Apple TV+ exclusive. No other streaming options.

Check your email

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
The story itself was crisp, Hank's acting was good as usual, the CGI was very good, and I thought technical aspects of the battles seemed believable. In the end, I felt the roughly 90 minutes of the production ended too soon and I guess that shows how engrossing it was. I'd definitely recommend it!

Agreed, it made me feel as if I was on a ship at times. Having grown up in the midwest and visited U-505 (captured German U-boat in Chicago) many times, it was interesting to see a film representation of the Battle of the Atlantic.

Obviously some dramatic license taken, as with all movies but it was a good show. Only critique was I bet the Capt would have had a bit more of a 5 o'clock shadow if he had in fact never left the bridge for 2-3 days, but maybe he shaved up there as well.

Free AppleTV+ since I purchased an iWatch a couple of months ago, so even better.

I visited U505 at the Museum of Science and Industry too and your mention of it brought back memories.

Thinking about the quality of this production and that submarine resulted in a comparison of Greyhound with Das Boot. If those who'd produced this tale had devoted a bit more time and effort towards character development (maybe looking at a few other crewmen and their responsibilities), a 2 or 2.5 hour production could have been our "Das Boot" moment? A very good film could have been a Tom Hank's great film. Now I'm feeling a bit disappointed.

Dan Carlin just had Tom Hanks on his Hardcore History: Addendum podcast.

Wolf Pack Hunting with Hanks

Its an easy 1-hour chat, mainly about Hank's impression of history then, into how Greyhound came about, and how the story was put into acting form, principally about avoiding exposition but insuring the audience knows what's going on.

I really liked it. When it comes out on Blue Ray I'll buy a copy.

Very good movie. Well worth my time.

0-0

I watched it with my wife and fifteen year old daughter Saturday night and we all really liked it. While it is very “Hollywood-ized,” it’s very fast moving. It also portrays the Captain as a man of deep faith without a hint of mockery.

quote:

Originally posted by mcrimm:

quote:

That destroyer could really maneuver way quicker than I ever imagined.

We had a guy jump overboard about 20 miles outbound from Pearl Harbor. The Capt hit the 1MC announcing man overboard, prepare for severe maneuvering. You’d be surprised at just how fast a destroyer size vessel can spin around - and how far over it heels.

In the past growing up I had a very close friend who served aboard what he called a "Tin Can" I never heard that expression before but used to love hearing his stories about serving on one.

I always wondered about why subs found some of their biggest threats were those destroyers. Always seeing one through a camera shot with the periscope and the destroyers steaming full speeds towards them. They seemed to catch up on the subs pretty fast and drop charges. I could never imaging how loud and frightening they may have been to those aboard the subs taking those beatings from the explosions.

quote:

Originally posted by just1tym:
In the past growing up I had a very close friend who served aboard what he called a "Tin Can" I never heard that expression before but used to love hearing his stories about serving on one.

I always wondered about why subs found some of their biggest threats were those destroyers. Always seeing one through a camera shot with the periscope and the destroyers steaming full speeds towards them. They seemed to catch up on the subs pretty fast and drop charges. I could never imaging how loud and frightening they may have been to those aboard the subs taking those beatings from the explosions.

Tin Can is a nickname for a destroyer...lightly armored, if at all, and inexpensive to build. Anti-sub warfare requires A LOT of assets to saturate a search area and the ability to box-in a contact. Destroyers & destroyer escorts fit the bill given their low overall costs, small maneuverable size and enough endurance to outlast a sub's batteries.

Fast forward to today, submarines can cruise much faster underwater than their WWII ancestors for near unlimited amount of time. More sensors than the space program, and jammed packed with weapons and countermeasures. Contrast with todays anti-sub surface forces, there's little investment in inexpensive small combatants, sensors are reliant on sono-bouy/aircraft, yet the ability to box-in/bracket a contact is much harder given a subs ability to dive deeper and faster than before.

Another thing people lose sight of was WW2 subs spent a lot of time on the surface, since they could go faster and needed to recharge batteries buy running their engines - when it was time to attack they submerged but were limited on speed / time on battery power.

It was a good movie - as others have mentioned, a tad shallow in terms of character development - but it did a good job of portraying the burden of command, making hard decision, etc. It also gives a good a human portrayal of that part of the war, which wasn't glamorous or especially noteworthy, but was absolutely critical to keeping the UK in the fight and then rolling back the Germans in Europe in the years to come.