NETFLIX STREAMING: The Wolf’s Call (2019)

                        “The Wolf’s Call” (Le Chant du Loup) is a French submarine movie.  It was written and directed by Antonin Baudry.  He seems to have read some Tom Clancey.  The film is set in the near future and fits in with  recent modern sub movies.  It is currently appearing on Netflix streaming.  Unfortunately, it is dubbed, although not badly.

                          The movie leads with: “Humans come in three types:  the living, the dead, and those who go to sea.”  If you are the first type and want to see a movie about the third, this may be the movie for you.  Or just watch “Jaws”.  The Titan is on a mission to recover some French commandoes who are doing some business in Syria.  Complications ensue when an Iranian frigate arrives and starts pinging them using a sonar boom lowered by a helicopter.  They refer to the sonar as “the wolf’s call”.  A depth charging forces them to the surface, but not to worry, they happen to carry an RPG on board.  It’s not as silly as it sounds.  It turns out the main character is the acoustics expert Chanteraide (Francois Civil).  He’s like an acoustics savant.  He can tell you if a dolphin is male or female.  He could swear he was picking up a stealthy Russian sub aiding the frigate, but no one believes him.  He’s in need of some redemption.  But first he’s in need for some romance and some skullduggery.

                        When they return to port, Capt. Grandchamp (Reda Kateb) is promoted to skipper of a new ballistic sub called Formidable.  His exec D’Orsi (Omar Si) takes command of the Titan.  This is going to get awkward as the Russians invade Finland (again) and the Formidable is sent just in case and the Titan is its escort.  Things get hairy when a Russian sub launches a nuke at France and the Formidable is ordered to retaliate.  If you’ve seen “Fail Safe”, you know where this is headed.

                        “The Wolf’s Call” avoids most of the submarine clichés.  There is a commando raid, but it is not a big part of the plot and is merely an excuse to introduce future plot elements and lead off with some action.  There’s no significant depth charging.   There’s no command dysfunction.  What it does have is the ridiculously over the top action of modern sub movies.  And this escalates in silliness to reach a blazing finale.  It’s no more ridiculous than “Hunt for Red October” and “Crimson Tide”, and much better than “Phantom”. 

                        Baudry does a competent job directing.  He must have gotten some cooperation from the French navy because those are real subs surfacing and diving.  The underwater CGI is fine and not distracting.  The interiors are realistic and operational procedures are nicely done.  The acting is adequate.  Apparently, Omar Si is a major star in France.  Civil is hunky, but you won’t mistake him for Tom Cruise.  He spends a good bit of time listening on ear phones and looking like a student who is trying hard to look like he is thinking about the correct answer.  Everyone keeps a straight face throughout the escalating mayhem.  The movie has no humor in it.  Not intentional humor, anyway.  I’m pretty sure we’re not supposed to laugh when D’Orsi approaches the Formidable using a diver propulsion device and carrying a hammer for communication purposes.

                        If you found “Fail Safe” to be too cerebral, “The Wolf’s Call” may be for you.  It has some nice twists and is not totally predictable.  It also differs from most of its ilk by not being afraid to kill off major characters.  I won’t tell you whether it kills off France.

GRADE  =  B-   

NOW SHOWING: Hunter Killer (2018)

               

               

                I had been waiting a while to see “Hunter Killer” because of an article I read a while back.  That doesn’t mean I couldn’t wait to see it.  I knew it held a high likelihood of being disappointing.  I am especially leery about submarine movies.  Hollywood loves them to the point where they have their own subgenre within the war movie genre and the cramped setting lends itself to drama. Unfortunately, most are just not good and clichés abound.  It is very hard to be in a submarine movie these days.  Just look at the last major sub movie – U-571.  Instead of breaking new ground, it decided to go retro and include virtually every sub cliché known to man.  Where does “Hunter Killer” fall in the subgenre?

                “Hunter Killer” was directed by the unknown Donovan Marsh.  It is based on the novel Firing Point by Don Keith and George Wallace.   Marsh and Gerard Butler went aboard the USS Houston for three days to do research.  The interiors of the submarine were built based on plans approved by the US Navy.  The underwater scenes were done in a water tank using a model.

                The movie is a combination of “Hunt for Red October”, SEAL movies, and a typical sub movie.  If you are going to make a sub movie in 2018, it has to cross subgenres, apparently.  Actually, it is comfortable in the action genre, too.  It does have a two-word title, after all.  It opens with an international incident in the chilly waters of the Barents Sea.  An American sub and a Russian sub are sunk under suspicious circumstances.  Since the U.S. government is already concerned about the militaristic new Russian President, it is assumed this might be the start of WWIII.  The hunter-killer submarine USS Arkansas is sent to investigate.  It has a new commander named Glass (Butler) who has risen from the ranks.  He has to deal with a veteran crew.  Dramatic, right?  A second arc has a National Security adviser (Linda Cordellini) working a theory that the situation might be part of a Russian coup to provoke a war.  She convinces the President to launch a third arc by sending a SEAL team into Russia to get good old eyes-on information.  The four-man team confirms that a rogue Russian general has captured the Russian President and is going to start a war.  The SEAL mission morphs into a rescue mission because that will get gunfire into a sub movie.  Meanwhile, Glass is having to navigate the usual sub movie waters that include command dysfunction with his exec, a sub duel, a sub rescue, mine evasion, and depth charging.

                There is nothing special about “Hunter Killer”.  It is what you would expect it to be.  It is what I call a kitchen sink movie. As in, the director throws everything in, including the kitchen sink, to awe the fourteen year-old boys in the audience.   Hell, he’s not content with making a submarine movie.  He also wants to make a special forces movie.  The scene where the SEALs rescue the Russian President is straight out of every special forces movie (and TV show).  The submarine scenes have all been done before, too.  One positive thing is the sub does not play host to the myriad of submarine clichés.  It does have the standard command dysfunction element.  There is a whiff of “Crimson Tide”, but in this case it’s the executive officer who is by the book.  Glass plays the Capt. Kirkish commander who goes with his gut instead of his orders.  Of course, his gut leads to success and success usually negates a court-martial.  (We’ll never know since I doubt there will be a sequel.)  Speaking of stereotypes, Jayne (Cordellini) has to butt heads with a war-mongering admiral (Gary Oldman).  By the way, why is Oldman wasting his time in this movie?  He certainly classes up the cast, but seriously…  I will say he doesn’t bring his A game, so he doesn’t overshadow the average acting going on around him.

                Cliches and stereotypes do not sink “Hunter Killer”.  It is also not torpedoed by poor effects.  That doesn’t mean they are cutting edge.  It just means they keep the underwater stuff dark enough to keep your head from shaking.  Well, I did smirk a bit as the sub maneuvered like a mouse in a maze.  But hell, it is a cinematic sub so they can avoid anything and go anywhere.  (If the exec had ever seen a sub movie, he would have been a lot less stressed.)  The big problem (if you demand your movies respect your intelligence) is that it gets progressively more ridiculous as it goes on.  It does not even bother to try to flesh out the scenario.  It just plunges from one action sequence to the next.  Glass announces their mission to find the USS Tampa Bay and suddenly, they are there.  Why bother with exposition, considering the intended audience?  By the end of the movie, I wasn’t shaking my head, I was face-palming.  Stick around for the scene where Glass’ gut has to depend on a Russian destroyer to save the Arkansas.  Speaking of which, the movie has some post-Cold War Russian villains (straight out of central casting), but it also has some heroic Russians. 

                Do I recommend it?  Not for a regular movie-goer.  And not if you are a discerning war movie fan.  It is entertaining in an unchallenging way and pushes the usual buttons of an action movie (with a pulse-pounding soundtrack).  If you don’t go see it (and if you do), it will be forgetten.  Bring on “Overlord”. 

   

                GRADE  =  C-

CRACKER? The Hunt for Red October (1990)

                “The Hunt for Red October” was based on Tom Clancy’s debut novel about a rogue Soviet sub captain who attempts to defect to the West.  The book was a bestseller and Hollywood was interested.  The U.S. Navy was interested in cooperating due to the desire to have a boost to submarine recruitment similar to the effect “Top Gun” had on naval aviation.  The Navy vetted the script and was pleased.  It allowed inspection of the non-classified sections of American subs so the production could create realistic interior sets on soundstages on gimbals for pitch and roll.  For the first time, the USN allowed the filming of a sub in dock. For exterior shots, the production built a 500-foot mock-up that could submerge and surface.  The movie was directed by John McTiernan who was famous for action films like “Die Hard”.  This was his only war movie.  “The Hunt for Red October” was a big hit.

                The movie is set in the Cold War before the collapse of the Soviet Union.  The movie opens with a title card informing the audience that there was an incident in 1984 where a Soviet sub sank in the Atlantic due to a radiation problem.  Very suspicious, right?  “But according to repeated statements by both Soviet and American government nothing of what you are about to see actually happened.”  Wink, wink.  Now that the seed is planted, we learn that there is a Soviet Typhoon class ballistic missile submarine captain who wants to defect to the West and bring his boat with him.  The rest of the officers are on board and if they aren’t, Capt. Ramius (Sean Connery) will take care of them Ninja style.  A CIA analyst named Jack Ryan (Alec Baldwin) has discovered that the Red October has a revolutionary propulsion system called a “caterpillar drive” that makes the boat very difficult to be picked up by passive sonar (which is basically the ability of another sub to hear the sub when they are both under water).  Coincidentally, the USS Dallas (an attack submarine) is on duty monitoring Soviet subs in the Atlantic.  It’s ace sonar operator Jones (Courtney Vance) picks up the Soviet boat and then loses it when the caterpillar drive is initiated.  Ryan connects the dots and convinces the CIA that the reason why the Soviet navy has sallied in large numbers is to track down the Red October before it can defect.  We need to make contact with Ramius and facilitate his gifting this amazing technology.  Since its your crazy theory, you can do the contacting, Mr. CIA analyst.  Meanwhile the entire Soviet navy is determined to sink its ship.  In particular, one of Ramius’ proteges is chasing him in an attack sub called the V.K. Konovalov.  It’s like “Fast and Furious” underwater.  The movie would have been better titled “The Chase of Red October” as the boat is actually easy to find.

                “The Hunt for Red October” is an entertaining rendering of a popular novel.  It has been a long time since I read the book, but as good as it was, the movie is better.  The plot makes clearer the motivation of Ramius.  The book emphasized the death of Ramius’ wife due to a corrupt system.  Sean Connery insisted in clearer motivation so John Milius was brought in to write dialogue where Ramius speaks about having an impact on the Cold War.  He is a “good Russian”.  Connery also insisted that the movie make it clear that the incident is occurring before the Gorbachev era.  Once the motivation and goal is firmed up, the movie is very manipulative to get to the desired conclusion.  Not that that is particularly unusual for a Hollywood action movie.  You decide on the outcome and then arrange the dots to get there in as exciting a manner as possible.  And plausibility be damned.  I already mentioned “Fast and Furious” as a good example. 

                The connecting of the dots is competently done by an outstanding cast.  Alec Baldwin was the original Jack Ryan and he does a good job in portraying him as a reluctant hero.  An egg-head who was also a Marine so it is fairly believable that he can go from policy wonk to action hero. Scott Glenn is well-cast as the captain of the USS Dallas.  The Navy may have been hoping for a “Top Gun” type recruiting result, but the sailors are not mavericks.  Glenn went on board the USS Houston and was allowed to parrot orders to get a feel for the captaincy of a sub.  Mancuso is not a Captain Queeg.  In fact, he even listens to a CIA analyst at the risk of his boat and its crew.  This is the modern Navy, young men.  But the key recruiting bait is Sonar Operator Jones. Hey potential African-American submariners, you can now be a Sonar Operator instead of a cook in today’s silent service.  (And in just a few years with “Crimson Tide”, you could actually become an executive officer.)  Not only can you be a sonar expert, but you can go aboard a Soviet sub with a select group even though the enemy sub already has a sonar operator.  (But they did not have a black guy.)  Sean Connery is solid especially after he no longer has to fake a Russian accent.  He is so good you forget he plays a traitor and murderer.

                The movie is refreshingly free of submarine movie clichés.  It does have the claustrophobic setting.  The sets are authentic looking.  The Navy cooperated with the mise-en-scene for the Dallas and set designers winged it with the Red October by putting in lots of dials, buttons, and assorted gizmos.  The underwater shots are excellent, but clearly CGI.  This is an improvement over models, however.  The special effects are good and unfortunately encourage some silly pot developments, as I will point out below.  The sound effects are outstanding as evidenced by the film’s lone Academy Award for Sound Editing.  Speaking of sound, the soundtrack is one of the best for a war movie. 

                So, it’s a good movie then?  Yes, but it is a bad war movie.  Plot devices that have the average viewers on the edge of their seats, have hard-core war movie lovers pulling their hair.  There is much that is ridiculous in this movie.  Let me name a few things that I found laughable.  Ryan is an unheralded CIA analyst and yet he convinces the head of the CIA and a submarine captain to take action on his theories even though he presents no convincing evidence.  Although Ramius is meant to be a positive character, he is certifiably insane if you look at some of the things he does.  He sends a letter to the head of the Soviet Navy telling of his intentions, which makes his goal infinitely more difficult.  This was a plot requirement, obviously.  By the way, he made this decision without consulting his fellow mutineers.  He traverses an underwater twisting cavern at a recklessly high speed.  The movie is also chock full of implausibilities - all of which propel the narrative.  It is an incredibly small ocean as three submarines keep running into each other.     Well, not literally running into each other, but coming within a whisker of each other.  They are so close that torpedoes don’t have time to arm themselves!  The final showdown between the Red October and the Konovalov strains credulity for anyone familiar with how subs actually fight.  This is intercut with an equally ridiculous showdown between Ryan and a patriotic Soviet (and that’s exactly what he is!).  There’s more, but I won’t bore you with the details.  You may now yell “it’s just a movie, for Christ’s sake!”   It is just a movie, but this blog reviews war movies.  It is definitely a war movie so it should be held to a higher standard than “Die Hard”.  And the technical adviser should also be held to a higher standard.

                Will it crack my 100 Best War Movies?  No.  In fact, although there is a fairly large submarine subgenre, few are well done.  “Das Boot” stands out because its competitors are weak.  It is hard to make a realistic submarine movie, although the dynamics are rife for drama.  Those dynamics tend to be cliched.  One thing about “Hunt” is it avoids the tropes of the subgenre, but it substitutes the tropes of the action genre.  Enjoy.

GRADE  =  C

HISTORICAL ACCURACY:  If you believed that based on a true story bull shit that opens the film, you probably have not made it this far.  If you are still reading, sleep well knowing that the world did not come close to ending in 1984 due to a rogue Soviet sub.  Surprisingly, there was a seed of truth to Clancy’s novel.  He was inspired by an article about the attempted defection of a Soviet anti-sub frigate named the Storozhevoy (Sentry).  The political officer named Sablin planned the defection on his own.  He was upset with the corruption of the Brezhnev government and wanted to start a revolution.  His plan was to sail to Leningrad, take over a radio station, and broadcast a call to arms.  And I thought Ramius was insane!  He tried to convince the rest of the officers to join after he locked up the captain.  Only half the officers were convinced and the rest were locked up.  One of the supposed conspirators escaped to sound the alarm, so the ship was forced to flee the harbor ahead of schedule.  Sablin, who was persuasive for a delusional individual, got the crew to support the mutiny.  Many of them were conscripts.  They lost their enthusiasm when the Soviet air force found the ship and dropped bombs on it.  One hit the stern.  At this point, some of the crew set the captive officers free and they freed the captain.  The captain confronted Sablin and wounded him with a gunshot.  And that was that.  Sablin was executed, naturally.  However, the other mutineers were not.  All the officers were demoted or dishonorably discharged.  Most of the crew was sent home after taking an oath of secrecy.  The Soviet government did not want the public to get any ideas about rebellion or any Western authors any ideas for a book.  Or become the buffoons of a US Navy recruiting film.

#1 Das Boot vs. #4 Crimson Tide

VS.

CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT:  “Das Boot” is outstanding in this category.  The Captain is enigmatic, but we know why he is cynical and jaded.  He is a veteran of numerous patrols.  Each of the officers is distinct.  They are recognizable archetypes - the fanatical Nazi, the naïve rookie, the well-respected chief engineer, the frat boy Second Watch Officer, etc.  Since it’s a long patrol fraught with boredom broken by intense stress, there is time and opportunity to develop even some of the minor characters.  When the camera pans over the dead at the end, you know these men.  GRADE  =  A

“Crimson Tide” is dominated by Capt. Ramsey and Lt. Commander Hunter.  It is clear through dialogue where each man is coming from.  They are stereotypes, but in the hands of Hackman and Washington, you don’t mind it.  Ramsey is given a dog (which the Navy was not happy about) as part of his character.  Hunter jogs on the sub.  (Try that, u-boat captain!)  Some of the officers get a little development and some of them are interesting, like the Chief of the Boat who idolizes Ramsey but sides with Hunter.  This contrasts with Weps (Viggo Mortensen) who is Hunter’s best friend and yet inexplicably joins the Ramsey faction.  There is virtually no crew development except we know two of them are big Silver Surfer fans.  GRADE  =  C+

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Das Boot  =  9

                                             Crimson Tide  =  7

REALISM:  No sub movie comes close to “Das Boot” when it comes to realism.  If you want to know what life was like on a German u-boat in particular and any WWII submarine in general, it is a must-see.  There is not a lot of action, which is appropriate for a typical patrol.  Most people do not realize that most subs returned home with torpedoes unfired.  It is the only sub movie that depicts the role mother nature plays in submarine warfare.  It is the gold standard in showing the effects of life in a cramped setting aggravated by lack of success.  The movie leads off with a title card that points out that the u-boat service had a 75% casualty rate and then proceeds to show you why.  GRADE  =  A+

“Crimson Tide” is based on a far-fetched scenario.  Considering the situation in the former Soviet Union when the movie was made, it is plausible that nuclear weapons could fall into the wrong hands.  However, the U.S. government responding with a preemptive strike goes against established doctrine.  It is also highly unlikely a mutiny as depicted in the movie would take place in the modern U.S. Navy. (The Navy absolutely refused to cooperate with the film.  It did cooperate with “Hunt for Red October”.)  The turmoil that takes place on board the Alabama is classic cinematic license and must be taken with a grain of salt.  GRADE  =  C

HALFTIME SCORE:  Das Boot  =  19

                                   Crimson Tide  =  13

SAILOR BEHAVIOR:  “Das Boot” does an outstanding job in depicting submariner behavior on a u-boat.  The men go through a lot and all of their reactions are genuine.  Other than Bengsch, no one is a hard-core Nazi.  This accurately reflects the make-up of the u-boat service.  These are young men who volunteered for a very dangerous, yet at times exhilarating job.  They run the gamut of emotions appropriate to the various stresses they encounter.  The movie is particularly adept at rendering the crude nature of sailor interaction.  This is the only sub movie that shows someone flicking boogers on a mate.  GRADE  =  A+

“Crimson Tide” requires the officers on a US nuclear sub to divide into two factions to battle for control of the sub.  It is no wonder the Navy refused to cooperate with the movie.   A captain and his exec yelling at each other in front of the crew?  Highly unlikely.  Two groups pointing guns at each other?  Only Hollywood could conjure up such foolishness.  The submarine service has the historical reputation of being a bit lax in discipline, but this movie takes that to an extreme.  As far as exhibiting submariner behavior, the movie concentrates on the officers so we get almost know crew behavior.  They don’t even discuss dames.

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Das Boot  =  29

                                              Crimson Tide  =  18

ENTERTAINMENT VALUE:  Although any submarine movie fan will find “Das Boot” mesmerizing, it was not designed to entertain the masses.  It avoids most of the clichés that most sub movies rely on to gin up excitement.  Just like the voyage, there are long stretches where nothing much happens.  The tedium of u-boat life is painstakingly recreated.  If you love great acting in confined spaces, this is the movie for you.  It is far from an action picture, but when it does get hinky it is pulse-pounding.  GRADE  =  B

“Red October” was probably created in a lab where scientists put together all the ingredients that please 18-45 year-old males.  Alpha males, turf warfare, sub duel, clock ticking to an explosion, etc.  And this is all done with a straight face and with no shame.  It is well crafted and if this is what a modern sub movie will have to be like to be made in the modern cinematic universe, so be it.  Better this than an embarrassing throwback like “U-571”.  GRADE  =  A

FINAL SCORE:  Das Boot  =  37

                           Crimson Tide  =  27

ANALYSIS:  “Das Boot” (1981) and “Crimson Tide” (1995) are part of the fourth wave of sub movies.  The first was the rare movie made between the world wars, the second were the ones made during WWII, the third was the fertile 1950s period, and then we have the modern ones that basically began with “Das Boot”.  “Crimson Tide” is a better example of the modern sub film.  It and “The Hunt for Red October” have taken the sub film into the action genre.  Better to be there than nowhere at all, I suppose.  The cramped environment does lend itself to drama.  And with CGI you can even make a sub chase film!  “Das Boot” is the best sub movie ever made because it bridges the third and fourth wave adroitly. It keeps some of the clichés from the third wave and adds technical proficiency.  Some of its tropes are well-worn, but it manages to do them better than ever before.  No surprise it took a foreign film to accomplish this.  No American studio would have greenlit this movie.  

#2 Run Silent, Run Deep vs. #10 Operation Pacific

VS.

DIALOGUE:  “Run Silent, Run Deep” gave us the famous line “dive, dive!” which Richardson repeats numerous times during drills.  The dialogue is good and there are some tense exchanges between the two superstar actors.  The crew banter is fine and is helped by the debut of Don Rickles.  He probably wrote some of his lines.  In spite of his involvement, the movie lacks a sense of humor.  There are few memorable lines, but it’s a manly movie and doesn’t need any.  GRADE  =  B

“Operation Pacific” has an awkward romance and the dialogue that goes with it.  There is little on sailor behavior so we don’t get much banter.   This is a very officer-centric film.  The only notable lines are some shots at the movie they watch on board – “Destination Tokyo”.  The movie is not overtly patriotic in its dialogue.  GRADE  =  C

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Run Silent  =  8

                                             Operation Pacific  =  6

ACTION:  “Run Silent” has three convoy attacks, two destroyer sinkings, a sub duel, and two airplane attacks.  And a brewing mutiny.  There is plenty of action, even if much of it is ridiculous.  GRADE  =  B

“Operation Pacific” has an average amount of action.  The love triangle and the torpedo testing takes up a good amount of the plot.  There is an encounter with a Q-ship, a brief encounter with an enemy sub, and a convoy battle.  None of it is believable.  GRADE  =  D

HALFTIME SCORE:  Run Silent  =  16

                                   Operation Pacific  =  11

SPECIAL EFFECTS:  “Run Silent” has some decent effects.  The Navy assisted in the production (surprising due to the mutinous plot) so there are a lot of surface shots of subs.  For the rare times that the USS Nerka is submerged, the model in a swimming pool technique is used.  The depth chargings are typical of the genre.  As usual, they are too accurate.  In WWII Pacific submarine movies, Japanese escorts never miss by much, but seldom sink their prey.  The sound effects are noteworthily outstanding.  GRADE  =  B

“Operation Pacific” has cheesy special effects.  The underwater shots are very fake and there are some hilarious shots of torpedoes boinking off ship hulls.  The sub looks like a model in an aquarium.  In fact, the Pacific Ocean looks about as deep as an aquarium.  GRADE  =  D

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Run Silent  =  24

                                               Operation Pacific  =  16

ACCURACY:  “Run Silent” has some of the most accurate firing sequence scenes in sub movie history.  This includes use of the Target Bearing Transmitter for surface attacks.  While being technically accurate, the movie comes up short in historical accuracy.  “Down the throat” shots that the movie is predicated on were rarely accomplished (or attempted) in the war.  Subs fighting each other submerged is virtually unheard of.  The legendary ability of Bungo Pete flies in the face of the established ineptitude of Japanese escorts.  GRADE  =  C

“Operation Pacific” deserves credit for depicting two historical incidents.  There was a significant problem with the Mark 14 torpedoes.  The torpedoes frustrated the submarine effort for the first two years of the war.  There was a problem with both the magnetic detonator and the firing pin of the contact detonator.  The movie highlights the solution to the firing pin problem.  The torpedoes were tested by dropping them from a crane as depicted by the movie, but this was not done by a sub crew.  It is instructive of how Hollywood deals with submarine warfare that most Pacific war movies do not allude to the torpedo problems.  In most films, every shot is deadly.  The death of Commander Perry (Ward Bond) is based on the death of Commander Howard Gilmore (probably the most famous submariner loss for the US Navy).  The USS Growler was making a surface attack when a patrol vessel attempted to ram.  The Growler rammed it instead, possibly in its attempt to avoid being rammed.  Gilmore was wounded by machine gun fire from the wounded escort and famously ordered “take her down!” to save the boat.  He was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously.   The sighting of the Japanese fleet may have been inspired by the efforts of the Dace and Darter in the Battle of Leyte Gulf.  When the Thunderfish picks up downed fliers (although this is done purely to facilitate the lame love triangle), it accurately reflects a role subs played in the war in the Pacific.   GRADE  =  A

FINAL SCORE:  Run Silent  =  30

                           Operation Pacific  =  25

ANALYSIS:  “Run Silent” is considered the greatest American submarine movie.  Although overrated, it is certainly better than a movie that relies on John Wayne to make a splash.  “Operation Pacific” may do a service to the silent service by bringing to light a significant problem and a laud-worthy hero, but it is done in the guise of a “Destination Tokyo” wannabe.  “Run Silent” has two John Wayne’s and the tension between them.  It is even more far-fetched than “Operation Pacific”, but more entertaining.

#3 Hunt for Red October vs. #6 We Dive at Dawn

QUARTERFINALS

 #3  Hunt for Red October  vs.  #6  We Dive at Dawn

DIALOGUE:  The dialogue in “Red October” is above average, but it is mainly an action fature, so exposition is not key.  One interesting note on dialogue is that Sean Connery insisted on Ramius’ dialogue be rewritten to make it more clear that he is a “good Russian” who wants to end the Cold War.  GRADE  =  B

 “We Dive at Dawn” has decent dialogue, but there is too much of it.  There is a lot of sailor talk and it feels right.  It is very British, so use your British/English dictionary.  When the crew finds out they had sunk the German battleship, one of them exclaims “blimey!”  GRADE  =  B

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Hunt for Red October  =  8

                                             We Dive at Dawn  =  8 

SPECIAL EFFECTS:  “Red October” has a technology advantage over “We Dive” since it was made 47 years later.  The underwater scenes are very good.  Almost good enough to achieve the goal of making it an undersea “Fast and Furious”.  I refer to the underwater chase scenes between the subs.  Unfortunately, the CGI allows for some ridiculously close sub action.  GRADE  =  B

“We Dive at Dawn” was released in 1943, so no CGI.  It is not big on effects.  There is little underwater action.  Maybe this is to the good since modelwork back then tended to look very fake.  Better to leave it to the imagination.  GRADE  =  C

HALFTIME SCORE:  Hunt for Red October  =  16

                                   We Dive at Dawn  =  15

ACTION:  “Red October” has quite a bit of action.  Maybe too much considering some of it is reality-challenged.  It may have more action than any other movie in the tournament.  And this is done without a commando raid!  But it is done with a gun battle on a submarine. There is lots of chasing.  Subs chasing other subs.  Torpedoes chasing subs.  GRADE  =  A

“We Dive” closes with a nice set piece in a harbor as the sub has to steal fuel under the noses of the Germans.  This is not accomplished without copious expenditure of bullets.  It is one of the better commando type scenes you see so often in sub movies.  However, the quantity of action is pretty low in the film.  GRADE  =  C

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Hunt for Red October  =  25

                                              We Dive at Dawn  =  21

ACCURACY:  Surprisingly, there was a seed of truth to Clancy’s novel.  He was inspired by an article about the attempted defection of a Soviet anti-sub frigate named the Storozhevoy (Sentry).  The political officer named Sablin planned the defection on his own.  He was upset with the corruption of the Brezhnev government and wanted to start a revolution.  His plan was to sail to Leningrad, take over a radio station, and broadcast a call to arms!  The plot was discovered after he took over the ship and convinced most of the officers and crew to go along with him.  The ship fled the harbor and almost made it to international waters before it was halted by a hit from a Soviet bomber.  The loyal officers regained control and the mutiny was over.  Not much like the movie, but at least there is a seed of truth to the claim “based on a true story”.  GRADE  =  C

“We Dive at Dawn” does not claim to be based on a true story.  No German battleship was sunk by a submarine in WWII.  The movie does feature one historical accuracy in its portrayal of a German rescue buoy from which the sub picks up three German airmen.  The Germans put these buoys far offshore to be used by downed air crews.  They could provide accommodations and supplies for several days until the men were rescued.  GRADE  =  C

FINAL SCORE:  Hunt for Red October  =  31

                           We Dive at Dawn  =  27

ANALYSIS:  If you look at the interiors of the HMS Sea Tiger and the USS Dallas, you can tell a lot about this matchup.  “We Dive at Dawn” is a nice little British sub movie made during the war.  It deserved to win, but the tournaments are not always fair.  The categories tended to favor the behemoth.  “Red October” outpointed it due to it being an action movie doing its thing competently and its CGI which facilitated that action.  In both categories quantity bludgeoned “We Dive”.

#1 Das Boot vs. #16 The Enemy Below

PLOT:  “Das Boot” is the story of a u-boat patrol in 1941.  It coincides with the downturn in u-boat fortunes.  The movie is based on the novel by a military correspondent who went on a patrol.  The U-96 leaves from a French harbor to hunt convoys.  It will be an eventful patrol, but not because of sinkings.  The plot covers everything bad that might happen to a u-boat.  But it’s not a kitchen sink movie.  It is realistic in depicting life on a u-boat.  The crew goes through some shit, including boredom.  All of it is believable and very instructional.  No movie does a better job putting you on a submarine for a war patrol.  GRADE  =  A

“The Enemy Below” is an odd duck.  It tries to tell both sides of the story -  the escort and the submarine.  A destroyer escort captained by Robert Mitchum plays cat and mouse with a u-boat skippered by Kurt Jurgens.  The plot jumps between the ship and the boat effectively.  Since the movie was released well into the Cold War, it takes into consideration that West Germany was now our ally so the movie has no villains.  Jurgens is a worthy adversary and far from a Nazi.  The fact that the two captains are interchangeable makes the movie a bit trite.  It is the rare war movie that ends in crowd pleasing (but hardly believable) tie.  GRADE  =  B

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Das Boot  =  9

                                             The Enemy Below  =  8

ACTING:   I don’t really know how good the cast of “Das Boot” is considering I am not German and would not recognize the actors.  I do know they are outstanding in this movie.  Having seen a lot of submarine movies, I can attest to the difficulty of fleshing out more than a few of the crew.  Usually the movie concentrates on the officers.  “Das Boot” creates a large number of indelible characters and this is due mainly to the uniformly great acting.  GRADE  =  A+

“The Enemy Below” is a two man show.  Mitchum and Jurgens dominate.  They are as solid as you would expect.  However, since their characters are flawless, they don’t have to display much acting chops.  The supporting cast is low rent, but capable.    GRADE  =  C 

HALFTIME SCORE:  Das Boot  =  19

                                   The Enemy Below  =  14

TACTICS:  “Das Boot” is tactically sound, with one major exception.  U-96 relies on radiograms to put it in contact with convoys.  The boat is submerged when it should be and on the surface when it makes sense (aside from that exception).  It makes a night surface attack on a convoy and marvel at the lack of escorts and then get surprised when a destroyer shows up.  Next time you wonder about why things are so easy, try scanning better.  The Captain refuses to pick up survivors of a tanker which would have been per doctrine.  The cat and mouse moves the Captain makes are realistic.  The movie (or maybe I should just blame the Captain) goes off the rails when the Captain decides to run the heavily defended Strait of Gibraltar on the surface.  Even at night, this is very questionable and has expected results.  GRADE  =  B

Tactically, “The Enemy Below” is more about anti-submarine warfare than submarine warfare.  To be fair, let’s concentrate on the tactics used by the USS Haynes.  The use of sonar to track the sub and depth charges to attack it are depicted in detail.  It’s a tutorial.  The ramming of the sub is also something that is realistic.  The problem is that the destroyer escort relies mainly on a captain who is an escort savant.  Murrell can guess exactly what the German will do and when he will do it.  He knows exactly when to feather torpedoes he lured von Solberg into firing at him.  Below the surface, von Stolberg is portrayed as a master tactician and yet he travels on the surface during daylight allowing a destroyer escort to sneak up on his boat and then later comes to the surface to finish the predator off with a torpedo.  But then, how would we end up with a tie if he did the safer thing?  There is also something about the sub emitting some substance that acts as a countermeasure to sonar.  That was a new one for me.  How else would the sub escape the relentless pinging?    GRADE  =  C

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Das Boot  =  27

                                               The Enemy Below  =  20

CLICHES:  “Das Boot” has every opportunity to ladle on the clichés and you might have expected a German equivalent to “U-571”.  However, it is admirably original for a sub movie released in 1981.  U-96 does go way below crush depth, but that is surprisingly not a common cliché.  There is a depth charging that is amazingly accurate, although the movie avoids showing the depth charges floating down.  It has the emergency repair trope.  Actually, repairs plural.  Hell, virtually everything on the boat has to be repaired!  GRADE  =  B

Once again, I must remind that “The Enemy Below” is more of a destroyer escort movie than a submarine movie, so it does not have a full 1:37 to fit in clichés.  Kudos for getting a black mess mate onto the USS Hayne.  We do get a depth charging from the sub perspective.  There is some minor jostling and some easily sealed leaks.  They go below crush depth to rest on the bottom, but it’s not suspenseful.  GRADE  =  B

FINAL SCORE:  Das Boot  =  35

                           The Enemy Below  =  28

ANALYSIS:  “The Enemy Below” is a good movie that manages to be fair to both the sub and the destroyer escort pursuing it.  It is different than all the other sub movies in this respect.  It is also significant that it depicts the u-boat captain as being as heroic and honorable as the ship captain.  This makes the movie entertaining, but too simplistic.  Interestingly, von Stolberg (“The Enemy Below”) and Lehmann-Willenbrock (“Das Boot”) are similar in their cynicism, but the latter is much more realistically war-weary.  And so is his boat.  After you watch “Das Boot”, it is hard to watch the interior views in “The Enemy Below” without shaking your head.  The interior of the u-boat in “The Enemy Below” could not be more different than the U-96.  It is pristine and spacious.  This is one sub movie that eschews claustrophobia.  It makes you realize just how realistic “Das Boot” is.     

#2 Run Silent, Run Deep vs. Hellcats of the Navy

VS.

PLOT:  “Run Silent, Run Deep” is a movie based on the most famous submarine novel.  The author was a sub skipper named Edward Beach, Jr.  He was not happy with the adaptation of his novel.  Commander Richardson (Clark Gable) is obsessed with getting revenge on a Japanese escort destroyer called “Bungo Pete”.  He is given command of the Nerka which is awkward because its exec named Bledsoe (and the crew) was expecting him to be promoted to commander.  Richardson drills the crew on a crash dive and shot up the bow on his great white whale.  When Richardson reinterprets their orders and heads for Bungo Strait, he butts heads with his exec.  Mutiny is in the air.  The plot took a great novel and ruined it.  There is little in the movie that makes sense even for fiction.  Richardson (Gable) is supposed to be your classic crazy like a fox, but he is just crazy, if you know submarine warfare.  Critics and audiences don’t.  GRADE  =  C

If “Run Silent” is dumb, “Hellcats” is dumber.  It has a similar command dysfunction theme.  Commander Abbott (Ronald Reagan) abandons a frogman when a Japanese destroyer comes along.  His exec Lt. Cmdr. Landon has a problem with that decision and because he is a wimp, Abbott puts the kibosh on him getting his own boat.  They stay together for the next patrol so we can have some tension.  They go on a mission to land commandoes to blow up stuff on a Japanese island.  Later, they are part of a wolfpack (the Navy called them Hellcats) sent to Japanese waters.  As though the plot is not bad enough with its ridiculous developments, the script throws in a clumsy romance between the future President and First Lady.  GRADE  =  F

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Run Silent  =  6

                                             Hellcats  =  4

ACTING:  “Run Silent” is overrated mainly because of the casting of Gable and Lancaster.  And the script gives them the conflict you want from two alpha males.  Both are great and the supporting cast is fine.  Don Rickles made his film debut and brings some comedy relief.  Jack Warden and Brad Dexter are also on board and have their own conflict going on as surrogates for Richardson and Bledsoe.  GRADE  =  A

“Hellcats” has B-List actors doing their thing.  Reagan was on the downhill of his career and it shows.  He is wooden and his scenes with Nancy are excruciating.   He does manage to keep a straight face through scenes like where he (as the freaking captain) goes over the side to clear a net from the propeller and proceeds to get caught in the net.  If you drink enough, the movie has its hilarious moments.  GRADE  =  D

HALFTIME SCORE:  Run Silent  =  15

                                   Hellcats  =  9

TACTICS:  For the definitive American WWII submarine movie, “Run Sllent” is surprisingly bad on tactics.  This is mainly because Richardson is bat-shit crazy.  His “move” is to bait a destroyer into charging at his sub, then crash diving and shooting at the destroyer’s bow.  Why would you wait to crash dive?  Because it’s exciting, I guess.  Hell, the dude stays on the surface even when radar picks up aircraft.  The director obviously did not know how to film after dark because the Nerka does all its attacking on the surface.  As an equal opportunity offender, the movie also screws up the Japanese tactics.  They have a sub doing escort duty.  The Japanese actually pigheadedly insisted on concentrating their subs on going after capital ships.  The movie features the very rare duel between two subs.  They both submerge and when the Nerka comes back up, the Japanese boat does too!  To top it off, the Nerka sinks the enemy boat by firing under a Japanese freighter!  That was one deep draft sub!  GRADE  =  F

“Hellcats” is equally head-scratching, but it has the excuse of “what do you expect?”  To tell the truth I expect better from a movie that had Vice Admiral Charles Lockwood (the initiator of the Hellcat wolfpacks) as technical adviser.  He must have been asleep on the set.  Abbott sneaks into a Japanese harbor and then surfaces during the day time.  Sound familiar?  Stick around.  A Japanese sub surfaces to fire at him.  Later, Landon dives and sinks a destroyer.  I guess he should have been the captain all along.  GRADE  =  D

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Run Silent  =  19

                                              Hellcats  =  14

CLICHES:  “Run Silent” set the standard for the command dysfunction.  Not only does the exec resent the outsider coming in over his rightful promotion, but they disagree on philosophy and tactics.  A mutiny results.  A crew member is left on deck during a dive.  There is a black mess mate.  During a depth charging, they release debris and bodies.  The depth charges are incredibly accurate.  A destroyer is sunk by a bow shot.  The crew listens to “Tokyo Rose”.  GRADE  =  D

“Hellcats” also has a crew member left behind in a dive.  This actually happens twice!  The command dysfunction is of the type where the captain blackballs his exec (like in “Torpedo Run”).  There is a commando raid.  The Starfish follows a freighter through a mine field.  Later, they go through another mine field and have a mine cable scrape their side.  A depth charging is very accurate.  Landon sinks a destroyer with a bow shot.  GRADE  =  D

FINAL SCORE:  Run Silent, Run Deep  =  24

                           Hellcats of the Navy  =  19

ANALYSIS:  As you can tell, I am not a big fan of “Run Silent”.  I am a big fan of the book, but the movie is full of clichés and flaky tactics.  The central conflict between Richardson and Bledsoe is entertaining, but its resolution is unsatisfactory.  While “Hellcats” has several truncated scenes, “Run Silent” has a bizarrely abrupt ending.  In many ways the movies are similar with “Run Silent” having the advantage of star power and a bigger budget.  “Hellcats” looks cheap in every aspect.  

#3 The Hunt for Red October vs. Submarine Command

VS.

PLOT:  “The Hunt for Red October” is an big budget action feature based on a Tom Clancey best seller.  A renowned Soviet sub commander Ramius (Sean Connery) decides to defect to the West taking his state of the art sub with him.  The Red October has a revolutionary new propulsion system that allows it to run quietly.  It also has a boat-load of nuclear missiles.  When the entire Soviet navy is mobilized to chase it, a CIA analyst named Jack Ryan (Alec Baldwin) convinces the US Navy to facilitate the defection.  He goes aboard an American attack sub to try to make contact with the traitorous Soviet before a Soviet attack sub can end his plan to bring peace and harmony to the world.  If this plot sounds unrealistic, you have not even heard the details necessary to make a sub movie into a thrill ride.  The dominoes drop at an increasingly ludicrous rate.  GRADE  =  C

“Submarine Command” starts in WWII and ends in Korea.  An exec (William Holden) is forced to dive leaving his wounded skipper topside.  This incident, on the last day of the war, leaves White with a guilt trip that makes him a gloomy Gus and hard to be married to.  What he needs is a redemptive war and along comes Korea.  The Tiger Shark is brought out of moth balls for a commando raid that is crucial to our war effort.  This is more of a character study than a sub movie and the character is not interesting.  It has a lot of soap opera in it and it’s a very small world for the main characters.  And these characters are put in some unbelievable situations.  GRADE  =  D

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Hunt for Red October  =  6

                                             Submarine Command  =  5

ACTING:  “Red October” has an all-star cast and they come through.  Kudos for keeping straight faces through the shenanigans.  Alec Baldwin was the first Jack Ryan and does a good job as the reluctant action hero.  Connery is the unflappable Soviet captain who is godlike.  Acting honors go to Courtney Vance as the ace sonar man who happens to be black.  No biggie in the modern US Navy.   GRADE  =  A

“Submarine Command” has a decent cast of recognizable actors if you are a baby boomer.  Unfortunately, they mostly phone it in. Holden is wooden in a schmaltzy role that requires him to whine like a beaten puppy.  The cast includes William Bendix who is forced to play a man who illogically hates White for “sacrificing” the captain.  Like he’s never seen a sub movie before.  And we get Don Taylor playing his usual flirtatious flyboy.  GRADE  =  C

HALFTIME SCORE:  Hunt for Red October  =  15

                                   Submarine Command  =  11

TACTICS:  There is some crazy shit that happens in “Red October”.  Significantly, the movie credits did not include a technical adviser.  Some of the things Ramius does with the Red October indicate he is either insanely confident or he read the script.  The other officers are constantly looking at him like he is going to get them all killed - which he would have if the movie was based on reality.  That boat can turn on a dime as it races through an undersea canyon.  Lucky for him that his protégé can’t hit a stationary sub.  GRADE  =  C

“Submarine Command” does not spend a lot of time at sea, but when it does it is shaky.  We do get to see the Tiger Fish rescue a downed pilot.  That is a nice touch and a sub job that is seldom seen in movies.  The attack on the convoy occurs at night and the boat submerges before firing.  That is a bit timid for that late in the war, but not tactically unsound.  Then they surface to pick up survivors with no concern for escorts or aircraft.  That is harder to justify and gets the CO killed.  The movie really mucks it up in the closing act.  The sub comes fully to the surface to send a message and gets hit by a shore battery.  Stupid.  GRADE  =  D

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Hunt for Red October  =  21

                                               Submarine Command  =  16

CLICHES:  In “Red October” the USS Dallas is sent on a secret mission to make contact with the Red October.  It has a black on board, but he is not a steward.  There is a very brief conflict between Ramius and the political officer.  Since it is not a typical sub movie, it avoids most of the clichés.  GRADE  =  A

“Submarine Command” does not spend a lot of time at sea, but it makes up for it with some classic clichés.  The captain is left on deck.  The Tiger Shark is sent on a special mission that involves landing commandoes.  The sub goes through a mine field and a mine cable scrapes its side.  

GRADE  =  C

FINAL SCORE:  Hunt for Red October  =  30

                           Submarine Command  =  22

ANALYSIS:  “Submarine Command” is a terrible movie so this outcome is no surprise.  There is a lot of stupid in it.  It is either ashore for a lame soap opera or at sea for clicheish developments that lack suspense or believability.  “The Hunt for Red October” is probably more preposterous, but at least it is all in.  It wins handily, but that does not make it a great sub movie.  It has too much action blockbuster in it.  It’s audience is not war movie lovers and it shows, especially in the ludicrous finale that would be silly even in a sci-fi movie.  

#4 Crimson Tide vs. #13 Torpedo Run

VS.

PLOT:  “Crimson Tide” is a post-Cold War submarine flick.  A rogue politician has gotten control of some nukes In Russia and is threatening to launch them.  The USS Alabama is a ballistic missile submarine that the movie makes a point of describing as one hell of a powerful instrument of international relations.   And this weapon is run by the old schooler Capt. Ramsey (Gene Hackman).  Ramsey is breaking in a new exec, Lt. Commander Hunter (Denzel Washington) and they don’t see eye to eye.  Ramsey is a Republican and Hunter is a Democrat, so to speak.  When the sub receives a launch order, it’s time to do what they exist for.  But wait, here comes an incomplete message that possibly rescinds the order to end the world as we know it.  And the clock is running.  Dial up the command dysfunction to ten.  The plot is thought-provoking and fairly balanced except that it’s obvious we are to root for the black guy.  It tends to be your basic action plot of dominoes dropping to build to the desired climax and is a bit redundant with two takeovers of the boat.  It is slickly done, if you like your entertainment that way.  GRADE  =  B

  “Torpedo Run” is a WWII submarine movie.  It also revolves around command dysfunction.   Commander Doyle (Glenn Ford) is best friends with his exec “Archie” Sloan (Ernest Borgnine), but they have a falling out when Doyle decides a Japanese carrier is more valuable than his own family’s life.  Don’t ask about the details, they are too unbelievable.  Even though Archie remains loyal to his mentally unstable skipper, Doyle feels Archie has stabbed him in the back with their superiors.  Incredibly, the two get a second shot at the aircraft carrier in a harbor.  The tension is high as you wonder if the plot can get any more ridiculous.    GRADE  =  F

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Crimson Tide  =  8

                                             Torpedo Run  =  4

ACTING:  “Crimson Tide” has Denzel Washington and Gene Hackman, ‘nuff said.  But there is also an outstanding supporting cast that includes Viggo Mortensen and James Gandolfini.  Everyone is fine, especially the two leads.  The situation lends itself to scene chewing, but the cast is mostly under control.  Washington and Hackman do not appear to be trying to top each other.  Unlike their characters.  GRADE  =  A

The strength of “Torpedo Run” should be its acting.  Ford and Borgnine are not Washington and Hackman, but they are a better duo than almost any other sub movie.  (Third behind Gable and Lancaster in “Run Silent”.)   Borgnine is good as the saintly Archie, but Ford is disappointing as he pouts or smirks his way through the role of the Ahab-like captain.  The supporting cast is low rent with Dean Jones and L.Q. Jones.  Unlike “Crimson Tide”, this movie has a female in Doyle’s doomed wife (Diane Brewster).  She makes little impression in a couple of home-life bliss flashbacks.  It’s a shame she was not allowed to emote through her husband sinking her ship.  As Archie assuages Doyle with “she would have wanted you to take the shot”, you wonder what the toddler-laden spouse really was thinking.  GRADE  =  C

HALFTIME SCORE:  Crimson Tide  = 17

                                   Torpedo Run  =  10

TACTICS:  You would think that considering the action movie plot of “Crimson Tide”, there would be no opportunity to display modern sub tactics.  If so, you underestimate Hollywood.  A submarine movie has to have torpedo firings so an enemy sub shows up to accommodate.  There sure are a lot of submerged sub duels in sub movies.  Don’t give too much thought to how a rogue politician got control of a sub or how it located the USS Alabama or why it opens fire.  Just enjoy.  The first torpedo attack is handled with countermeasures to assure potential recruits that American boomers are not easy to sink.  The Alabama survives another attack mainly through luck and suffers damage so we can have some clichés.  As far as the central conflict over the orders, the script incorrectly deems that the exec has to concur with the order to launch.  GRADE  =  C

“Torpedo Run” makes a mockery of submarine tactics.  The great white whale of an aircraft carrier is being screened by a transport carrying prisoners (including Doyle’s family, of course).  I know the Japanese were evil in WWII movies, but this movie was made in 1958.  Keep in mind that Doyle knows his family is on board and still takes the shot.  Later, the Grey Fish gets a shot at the sitting duck carrier, but Doyle does not wait for an enemy destroyer to pass by and instead the destroyer blocks all six torpedoes.  They fire torpedoes to break a hole in a submarine net!  Doyle travels on the surface even during daytime in dangerous waters.  It could be argued that he is insane.  GRADE  =  F

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Crimson Tide  =  23

                                               Torpedo Run  =  14

CLICHES:  “Crimson Tide” certainly has the command dysfunction cliché covered.  In fact, the crew picks sides.  The bout with the mystery sub allows them to flirt with hull crush depth and deal with leaks, although the movie avoids a depth charging.  Congratulations, blacks in sub movies, you’ve been promoted to Executive Officer.  There is a revolutionary scene where Hunter eats with the other officers instead of serving them!  There is no unexploded bomb, but they do have a fire in the galley that causes problems.  Nobody is left on deck, but some men are sealed in a flooded compartment.  So basically, some tweaking of the classic clichés and avoidance of most.  GRADE  =  B

Are you expecting a clean sheet for “Torpedo Run”?   The skipper and the exec have major conflicts.  The sub is sent on an emergency mission to get the carrier.  The boat passes through a sub net and a minefield.  One of the mine cables drags along the side.  They suffer two depth chargings.  The second one is so intense they are sent to the bottom.  In spite of this, the captain gets redemption through revenge.  There is a black mess mate.  GRADE  =  C

FINAL SCORE:  Crimson Tide  =  31

                           Torpedo Run  =  20

ANALYSIS:  This match was no contest.  “Crimson Tide” was a big budget action picture that was smart enough to place a classic action scenario into the claustrophobic confines of a modern sub.  (Although it is the least claustrophobic submarine movie in the tournament.  For example, Hunter jogs on board to stay in shape.)  While it is stocked with predictable action tropes, it avoids for the most part the temptation to make a WWII submarine movie using a nuclear sub.  “Torpedo Run”, on the other hand, is a half-ass dinosaur trying to get in bed with “Destination Tokyo”.  For a Glenn Ford fan, it’s embarrassing.