U-571
U-571 (2000)
"Those Krauts sure know how to build a boat."
As I mentioned above, the plot of this film isn't terribly accurate from a historical standpoint. In reality, it wasn't an American crew that first captured the Enigma coding machine, but a British one. However, as I've said on numerous occasions, I don't really care if a film is exactly true to history. As long as the film itself is entertaining, then historical accuracy is secondary. So, was U-571 entertaining? Well, yes and no.
From a story and character standpoint, the film has a fair amount of holes and inconsistencies. Take the opening, for example; the U-571 is taken by surprise by a British destroyer, suffering significant damage and forcing it to surface. However, instead of finishing them off or taking the German crew prisoner, the destroyer just...floats off, never to be seen again. Another example is the film establishes early on that the U-571 was adrift closer to Europe than North America, so it seems unlikely that a 30-year old American sub will cross a longer distance than a newer, state-of-the-art German sub in a shorter time. Those are just two examples, but the film is riddled with that kind of piss-poor storytelling. Taken individually, they wouldn't be a big deal, but as a whole, it puts a black mark on the film.
Likewise, I thought the characters were a bit thin. One of the reasons submarine movies are so compelling is that unlike a battleship or a destroyer, submarine crews are comparatively small. This gives the audience only a few characters to latch on to and care about. That is, of course, assuming the filmmakers take the time to develop them properly. Unfortunately, this was not the case in U-571. I'll go more into detail on this in a later section, but I was less than impressed with the characters in the film.
So, where does the film succeed? Another reason submarine films are so compelling is that they are excellent vehicles for building tension. A sub is unique in that there's no viewport or window on it, so those inside can't really see what's going on outside the vessel and must rely solely on the comm man. In that aspect, the film does well. In addition, it has a few really tense moments that keep the audience on the edge of their seats and really help make up for the failings in characterization and story.
Acting/Characters
As I mentioned in the previous section, I thought the characters were pretty thin in this film. The protagonist is the S-33's executive officer Lt. Tyler, played by Matthew McConaughey. The film tries to give Tyler some depth by revealing that he was turned down for his own command after his commanding officer Capt. Dahlgren (Paxton) failed to provide him with a recommendation. When he confronts Dahlgren about this, Tyer is told that he wasn't ready for command because he wasn't prepared to send men to their deaths if need be. This fails, I think, for two reasons: One, because this conflict with Capt. Dahlgren wasn't really fleshed out and only really mentioned at one other point in the film. The second reason is that it clearly sets up the predictable scenario in which Tyler is forced to order a man to his death. However, McConaughey does well with the material he's given. So, there's that.
Another performance I'd like to highlight is Harvey Keitel as the S-33's Chief Petty Officer (who apparently has no name). The Chief, as he's referred to, is your classic grizzled old seaman that everyone respects. While this is a very trope-y character, Keitel does a good job playing the crusty old submariner to a tee, and even though the character is just as thin as the rest, he's the most interesting. That's all because of the terrific job done by Keitel.
The rest of the cast is kind of just...there, with no real standout performances, other than perhaps Thomas Kretschmann as the Captain of the U-571, who is captured by the Americans and is constantly trying to foil their plans. David Keith (not Keith David) also does an excellent job as the cocky Marine Major Coonan. The rest of the cast is serviceable, if not noteworthy.
Visual Effects
The effects in the film are pretty decent for the time. At this point, I'm getting pretty good at catching spotty early-2000s CGI, and I didn't see a lot in this film. However, there's what appears to be extensive model work, which looks pretty good. While the film's story isn't historically accurate, the planes, ships and subs used look like a fit for the time. There are also several underwater explosions, which look pretty decent for the time.
Score/Soundtrack:
The music for the film was composed by Richard Marvin, and it's very subdued. But, of course, this was likely done with purpose because of the nature of the submarine environment. Sound in submarine movies, or the lack thereof, is such a massive part of building the tension, and the last this a director needs is a pompous, overbearing musical score ruining that effect. So, by that criteria, I'd say the music in U-571 is a success.
Action
Like I said earlier, submarine movies thrive on building tension and not bombastic action. However, that doesn't mean there isn't any action in U-571. The early scene when the Americans take the German sub is pretty interesting in that it's shot in a confined space, giving the whole scene a claustrophobic feel. Other than that early scene, there are a few fistfights and other minor action scenes, which are all done well. But, again, you don't go to a submarine movie for the action.
Final Verdict
I'm torn on this one because while I think the film has some really great moments, the story and characters really sink it (sorry for the pun...I hate myself). So I'd say you're safe to skip this one. Unless you really like WWII submarine movies or are lusting after Matthew McConaughey (spoiler alert, ladies: he doesn't take off his shirt).
Comments
Post a Comment