Rented U-571...

[IndianaJones]

It was good. I will not rave over it as a whole, but it had several things that really got me, namely special effects. The explosions were insane. Very well done. Some of the CGI stuff was pretty poor though. Decent acting, namely by Harvey Kitel(sp?). One major disappointment was Bill Paxton. I've found his acting ability to be iffy in the past, but at least decent. He was horrible in this film. VERY transparent, I was actually glad he got killed, he was distracting. The over all plot was strong and likeable.

Rating: 8.0

[JonathanLB]

Glad you liked it, but I can't agree with most of what you said.

I thought the CG and effects as a whole were great! The sound, though, is killer and probably lost to anyone not seeing it in a theater or at least a good home theater, but oh well...

I liked the plot of the movie too ("It was not historically accurate!" Yeah neither is Star Wars, though), it's a good movie.

U-571 is almost everything an action movie should be, I'd give it 3.5 stars.

[IndianaJones]

Actaully, I have a surround sound system, not top notch, but killer anyway. 8 speakers. An my tv is ten feet long diagonally from top corner to bottom. So, I thought the sound was amazing
Each depth charge shook the house I had it up so loud. That I was pleased with.

[ReaperFett]

Still not gonna see it. Not historically acurate? By a mile! The US got a code box three months later, why not write about that one? Rather than disrespecting lives, and ramming down our throught how great America was to do it.


Ironic how some critics criticised Battlefield Earth for being propaganda for Scientology. Noone criticises pro-American propaganda though. Oh the irony...

[Jedi Master Kyle]

I'm waiting for the DVD. I saw it in the theater, and refuse to watch VHS!

[Bromine]

I have nothing against historically inaccurrate movies, but if you're going to promote your movie as being accurate, and use real names and places, thenyou have a responsibility to tell the true story. If you want to make up your own story, then make up a fictitious setting.
For example, while M*A*S*H is quite accurate in many respects, they never say exactly where they are or refer to specific historical battles, so they can make up whatever storyline they want without rewriting history. U-571 was about a submarine that really existed on a mission that actually happened.

And you're right, Reaper. When a movie promotes the U.S.(or any country, I suppose), it's called "patriotic"; When a movie promotes a certain idea or belief, it's propaganda. If Mel Gibson waving an American flag and cursing the "evil" British is accpetable, then scientologists should be free to write really crappy sci-fi!;)

[ReaperFett]

This is my beeef with it. Why did they have to be American? War films have been made where Americans play British, why not do that? Would it make a difference? COurse it will. THat wont make Kids think the US did everything

[mez7]

its going to happen again too,

tom cruise is producing a story about an escape from a WWII war camp,
the people who escaped 2 or 3 british, or 2 british and an irish or something like that, just 3 people from the UK is what im certain of,

who escapes in the movies script???
3 americans, nice job of rewriting history again hollywood,
the major thing i think is when ive read about this movie they call it a historical movie,
but if its not really what happened then its fiction,
quit calling it historical its not if you rewrote history,
that pisses me off most

ill probably see U571 casue ive heard its a good film,

[Jedi Master Carr]

That is why I have not seen it either, I find the film terrible, one of the worse retailings of history. I am more critical of this because I am a will be a historian (when I graduate in december). I mean I have no problem with some inaccuracies because almost all historical films have them. Braveheart comes to mind, but it is the complete retelling of history that bothers me like in U-571 changaing a major event like that and making the U.S the victors of it. This too me is the worse example most historical films are not this bad, The Patriot comes to mind which has a few inaccuracies but mostly it is a solid depiction of what happened in the Revolutionary war. I am sure I will hear some backlash about the british officer who is made to look extremly villanious and the British act like they did not do that kind of thing when of course they did in War incidents like that always happen, you cannot fight a civilized war that is an oxymoron. Still, there were a few scenes that I was critical on, but I tried to overlook them because the story was good, regardless the film did not rewrite the revolutionary war and change outcomes of certain battles. While U-571 trahses history by changing huge event in order to help its box office take.

[ReaperFett]

I think I heard it was an Englishman, and Irish man and a Scots man. Sounds like a joke :)

I hear the film ENigma is out in January, with Dougray Scott and Kate Winslett. High hopes for that, made in Britain

[Jedi Master Carr]

Is that based on the novel by Robert Harris, the author of Fatherland.

[ReaperFett]

Also, being biased help at Oscar time. The Patriot will get a few nominations, I assure you. Saving private Ryan did well, almost too well. Three Kings, on the other hand, was hugely underrated. My theory is it is due to how critical it is

[Jedi Master Carr]

Here is something to add fuel to the fire, I found this on IMDB under goofs
Incorrectly regarded as goofs: Although the British navy was the first to capture an Enigma machine and its codebooks from a submarine, the American navy did this also. In any case, the film does not purport to be telling a true story; a notice at the end acknowledges the real-life ships whose crews captured Enigmas
Does anybody know if this true, I never knew the American Navy captured one. I might have to do a little research on it. I probably should watch the movie since even the producers admit its a fictional account and not, "history." I guess my problem is too many people look at the movies and see them as history. When I see an historical movie I admitly go the library and look up more about the topic and period, but I know many people do not do that.

[ReaperFett]

The US did get one, but it was months afterwards. The code had been cracked by then, so it was useful, but not as vital as U-571 made out

Think that is right

[Bromine]

I finally saw U-571, so I'd like to add to my previous comments on the subject of historical accuracy:

At the end of the movie, before the credits, it reads something along the lines of: "This film is dedicated to the Allied troops who risked their lives to capture "Enigma" code materials during the Battle of the Atlantic." It then lists about 8 dates and the ships involved. The U-571 was not mentioned here, so I realise that the ship was made up. I didn't realise that before. When I made comments above about historical accuracy you will see that I was mainly referring to movies that use historical names and dates and then are not accurate.

So, bottom line is I don't have a problem with this film. I thoroughly enjoyed it, in fact. It was made pretty clear that the movie was simply a fictitious story that "could" have happened, but didn't. I suppose they could have made the ship English like the first ship was, but they never said that this was the first time they'd captured an Enigma machine. They just said they wanted to capture the machine to crack the German codes.

[Darth Hez]

Still refuse to watch that film. Or even to acknowledge its existence.

I find it outrageous that people think it can be justified in completely reforming history as they see fit. Most americans who saw that movie will now think that they were the first to capture an enigma code box. The fact that they made the ship name up counts for nothing. If they wanted to portray a wonderfully patriotic movie then they could have just made up some ships, and a fictional item they needed to capture.

I hate this movie because it disrespects the efforts and risks taken by the largely british sailors. Certainly we weren't the only country involved, but it was mainly our effort.

Can you imagine the outcry if a film was made which switched the roles of the heroic americans for the british? America would raise hell!

Movies like braveheart and the patriot I can live with, because apart from a few minor adjustments they are mostly true. People expect a good bad guy, someone to really hate, and I'm more than willing to admit that we weren't exactly Mr Friendly when it came to war or conquering other countries. But hey, neither were the romans!

The british did some horrendous things during their empire days, you don't get the largest empire the world has ever seen by being nice. But then the romans did some horrendous things, the greeks, the egyptians...

Sorry for the rant. :)

[Bromine]

I can understand your viewpoint. I thought the exact same way until I saw the film. One point, though:

"Most americans who saw that movie will now think that they were the first to capture an enigma code box."

Nowhere in the film is it said that they are capturing it for the first time. They just say that they need to capture it.
Also, at the end of the film they list the actual ships that captured Enigma machines in chronological order. It's made clear the British did it first.

[Darth Hez]

Not really the point. It shouldn't need to be made clear that events did not take place as just depicted.

I'll bet its not specifically pointed out that other people have already captured enigma machines in the movie is it?

[Bromine]

No, you're right it's not specifically pointed out. There's no indication either way.

Point is, there were many operations involving capture of Enigma machines, some by British, some by American. The movie could only show one nation, and they chose the Americans. Personally, I agree that since the British arguably did more missions, I think the movie should be about them. However, Americans did capture Enigma machines, so the movie WAS accurate in that regard.
I can only vouch for my own viewing, but when I watched the movie I didn't get the impression that they were capturing the first Enigma ever.
Also, IMHO it wasn't important who was first to capture Enigma material. If they said the Americans did it, then I would be complaining because it would be wrong, but fact is it wasn't important enough to bring up who was first. All the missions were important, really.

p.s. - Sorry about the edits...comp trouble.

[Darth Hez]

OK, I'll trust your judgement on this one, since I'm not going to watch it to form my own. It just gets on my nerves where if something doesn't suit hollywoods purposes they will chnge it out of all recognition until it does.

[Bromine]

I agree. Movies like The Patriot, etc set a new standard. This isn't good news, especially when you consider most people only know the history they learn from movies.