“Sink the Bismarck!” is a black
and white British movie released in 1960.
It is a true story of the events that led up to the Battle of the
Denmark Strait and the subsequent action which resulted in the destruction of
the German battleship Bismarck. The
screenplay was based on The Last Nine Days of the Bismarck by C.S.
Forester. He wrote the book with the
intention of it becoming a movie and worked closely with the screenwriter. Director Lewis Gilbert had also done “Reach
for the Sky” and “Damn the Defiant!”.
The producer John Brabourne used the fact that he was son-in-law to Lord
Mountbatten when he was Chief of the Defense Staff to get full cooperation of
the Admiralty. It allowed Gilbert to
film on board and film exteriors of various Royal Navy ships. The movie was a big hit in Great Britain and
also did well in America. It inspired
Johnny Horton’s song.
The movie opens with footage of
Hitler christening the brand new battleship in 1939. Two years later, Edward Murrow (playing
himself) reminds the audience that at this point in the war England stands
alone and winning the Battle of the Atlantic is crucial. The Admiralty has a new Chief of Operations
in Capt. Shephard (Kenneth More) to coordinate this task. He is something of a martinet and is
described as “cold, with no heart or soul.
Just an enormous brain.” (Sounds
like me.) His assistant will be a comely
WREN named Davis (Dana Wynter). Their
first crisis is a report that the Bismarck and the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen have sailed on what
may be a commerce raiding expedition.
Adm. Lutjens is overconfident and a hard core Nazi. His main motivation is glory. Capt. Lindemann doesn’t drink the Nazi Kool-aid.
The movie covers the cat and
mouse aspect of British efforts to locate and defeat the German warships. It intercuts between the British war room and
the bridges of the various combatants.
Models are used to reenact the battle scenes. The Royal Navy is all in as Churchill
proclaims “you must sink the Bismarck!”
This will not be painless as the British end up losing their most their
poster-dreadnaught the HMS Hood.
Although the movie is mostly command-centric, there is a subplot
involving Shephard’s son who is a gunner on a Swordfish torpedo plane that is
part of the aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal’s strike force. This allows for some character development as
the Blitz-widowered Shephard is very close to his son. The movie will make it difficult for him to
keep his upper lip stiff. He manages, of
course. I won’t go into detail on the
plot because if you are British you already know what happens and everyone else
can be in suspense as to whether the title comes true. ( Check out my
historical accuracy section below if you want to be spoiled.)
“Sink the Bismarck!” is one of
the better British WWII movies. Better,
but not radically different. I’ve seen
these officers numerous times.
Imperturbable would be a good description of them. Shephard is the main character and he is
interesting. His back-story makes the cold fish human. Davis helps humanize him and their
relationship thankfully is of sympathetic colleagues and avoids romantic
banter. There is a powerful scene where
she gets him to open up about his wife’s death.
The movie eschews emotionalism for the most part. It even has a
documentary feel to it. This is apparent
from the start with the appearance of Murrow reenacting one of his wartime
broadcasts. It is more documentary than
propaganda. It seems obvious that
Gilbert meant the film to be a history lesson and it has the appearance of
being an accurate retelling of the battleships demise. The Germans are not demonized, although
Lutjens is depicted as a fanatic whose greatest moment is birthday wishes from
der Fuhrer. Although the film does not
spend a lot of time with the tars, it is effective in showing the terrible last
moments of the German crew. It is not
really a celebratory film which reflects the Cold War fact that West Germany was
now Britain’s ally.
As far as naval combat is
concerned, the movie is as good as could be expected considering when it came
out. Models were relied on since there
was no CGI back then. If you have seen
the recent “Battleship”, you know that computers don’t always enhance combat
cinematography. These models are not
bad, although they follow each other too closely in the bathtub. When they take hits, it’s not archaic. Lord Mountbatten’s influence allowed for a
nifty loading sequence to go with the obligatory big guns firing (or “shooting”
as the British called it).
“Sink the Bismarck!” is as good
as you are going to get if you want to see how the Bismarck met its end. It is more entertaining than a History
Channel doc. (I am, of course, referring to the History Channel back when it had
programs about history.)
GRADE = B+
HISTORICAL ACCURACY: No surprise that the Shephard and Davis characters are
fictional, as of course was the son who was fished out of the drink. No problem there. That is acceptable cinema. Since the existence of Enigma decoding was
not revealed until 1975, Shephard’s hunches actually would have been based on
intelligence intercepts. The doomed
Norwegian agent replaced a Swedish cruiser that reported the sighting to its
government. The report was intercepted
by the British. The Prince of Wales did
have civilian workers on board to finish their work on the guns, for
example. The movie has a few minor
glitches in the coverage of the Battle of Denmark Strait. The Brits actually targeted the Prinz Eugen
first in a case of mistaken identity.
They did manage to hit the Bismarck several times and one of the hits
severed access to the forward fuel tanks.
The destruction of the Hood is substantially as shown. It was most likely a shell that hit the
forward ammunition magazine. The Hood
was doomed by its paltry armor plating that was a result of the navy’s decision
to sacrifice armor for speed. The movie
accurately shows the Prince of Wales withdrawing. In reality, the PoW had to avoid the wreckage
which resulted in concentrated fire upon her, plus she had malfunctioning
guns. She was hit several times so Capt.
Leach ordered smoke. At this point,
Lutjens vetoed Lindemann’s proposal to chase the PoW.
The movie’s portrayal of Lutjens
and Lindemann is far off. Lutjens was
not a Nazi. In fact, the Kriegsmarine
was the least Nazi of the branches. He
actually protested Kristallnacht and refused to give Hitler the Nazi salute
when he visited the Bismarck. Far from
being a glory-hound, he was pessimistic about the expedition and was
conservative in interpreting Adm. Raeder’s orders to attack convoys and avoid
capital ships. He decided going after
the Prince of Wales was not worth getting fired over. In some ways, the movie has reversed the Lutjens
and Lindemann characters. It was
Lindemann who overrode Lutjens in initiating the fire on the Hood, for
instance.
The Swordfish attacks are a
mixed bag. The first did result in an
inconsequential torpedo hit. The second
did accidentally target the Sheffield.
The magnetic torpedoes were defective, causing the significant switch
to contact torpedoes for the next attack.
The movie shows some of those attackers getting shot down. In actuality, there were no losses. One of them did jam the Bismarck’s rudder and
it did turn out to be irreparable. No
doubt Lutjens was not optimistic about their chances after this. The night destroyer attack is enhanced for
entertainment as there were actually no torpedo hits and no destroyers were
sunk. The HMS Solent is fictitious. The final battle is basically accurate. The
movie leaves out the post script of British warships picking up 110 survivors
(far from the majority of the crew that was in the water), but then leaving the
rest due to an alert that a u-boat was lurking.
Only a hand full of the rest of the survivors were eventually rescued by
German ships.
Totally agree! I love the old British war movies and this is one of the best, if not THE best!
ReplyDeleteI am glad that you mentioned the false depiction of Admiral Lutjens. He just is stereotyped as the typical Nazi - a Hitler sycophant, careerist and wild-eyed fanatic. This was most certainly not the historical Lutjens, who was by no means a Nazi fanatic. Lutjens was a naval hero from World War I, who served out of duty and dedication, not Nazi conviction. (Lutjens, who I read had some Jewish blood in him, protected Jews under his command, and members of his family were in trouble for their anti-Nazi views.) This is at complete odds with his depiction in Sink the Bismarck, which I find inexcusable, given that the above information was certainly available to the production. In fact, an accurate depiction of Lutjens would have, in my opinion, added interest to the plot.
ReplyDeleteThe depiction is understandable given the timing of the movie. Evil Nazis were required, plus you already had a good German in Lindemann. Cinematically it would not have worked having both leaders with similar philosophies. I prefer historical accuracy, but I see the reasons.
DeleteThe legend of the Bismark is indeed very strong. The movie does a good job of imagining what it might have been like for the British, trying to hunt for the ship, and for the German crew of the Bismark, trying to deal out damage without getting beat up in return.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, the film's depiction is authentic enough to raise the question of whether the Bismark was as big a threat to the British as they imagined after all. While capable of fighting older battleships individually and using speed and weather to hide from view the ship was vulnerable to massed attack - and the British were bound to pin the ship down sooner or later. And while the Bismark might be able to scare off convey escorts and sink merchant shipping in the meantime doing so would also deplete its stores of ammunition and fuel, making it less able to fight a pitched battle and therefore less willing to risk one. And improvements in technology and the weight of allied war production would only lengthen the odds later on - whatever the Bismark could confidently accomplish in early 1941 would be iffy after 1942.
Of course some of this would not be known at the time, but the odds seem long enough to ask whether the Bismark was as much of a threat as the British made it or was fought by both sides more as a propaganda battle than for strategic effect.
Very interesting. Thanks.
DeleteThe destroyer shown attacking the Bismarck has a black ring round the funnel which means it's captain d of the squadron which was HMS solebay
ReplyDelete