ANATOMY OF A SCENE: Das Boot – Running the Strait

            “Das Boot” is the gold standard for submarine warfare movies. I have considered it to be a great movie, but not outstanding because of one scene. I have read several books on submarine warfare and the Battle of the Atlantic, so I know u-boat tactics. The tactics shown in the scenes depicting the attempt to run the strait of Gibraltar seemed puzzling to me, especially since the captain is portrayed as a good leader who would not make any stupid mistakes. Recently, my opinion on this flaw in the movie has reared its head again and has caused me to question whether I have been too harsh on the captain for this. So, I have rewatched the pertinent scenes and read the book version of the scenes to see if the movie followed the book and if so, was the captain wrong.

            In the movie, the sub is given orders to enter the Mediterranean Sea by way of the Strait of Gibraltar. The captain is well aware that this is a very risky mission because the strait is very well defended. It will take a good plan and a lot of luck. He decides to approach the strait in the dark on the surface. The boat will evade British ships to get close to the strait and then dive and use the eastward current to save fuel and safely run through the strait. No one on the crew questions the decision, but it is obvious some of the officers are skeptical. The boat manages to maneuver through several British ships and are within ten minutes of diving when the captain sends all the conning tower personnel below deck except himself and the navigator. A plane attacks and drops two bombs that damage the sub and wound the navigator. The captain orders “prepare to abandon ship”, but he stays topside and orders full speed ahead. The second officer guesses the captain is trying to reach shallower water off the coast of Africa. When the sub runs into several British ships, the captain is forced to dive. He plans to hold at 100 meters, but the damage causes the boat to continue its dive until it bottoms out at more than 280 meters, well below crush depth.

            Were the captain’s decisions good ones and do they conform to the captain in the book? In the book, the captain’s plan is the same as in the movie. No one questions them, but there is some doubt. Heading for the strait on the surface in the daytime, they are forced to dive three times because aircraft are spotted. None of the planes attacks. They are back on the surface when night falls. They are ten minutes from diving when the plane attacks. (In the book, the officers wonder how the plane was able to find them in the dark which is appropriate because in October, 1941 the RAF’s radar on planes would not have been known to the u-boat fleet.)  The conning tower is hit and the deck gun is destroyed. No one is wounded. The boat dives, but resurfaces due to the damage. However, star shells turns the night into day, so the captain orders a dive to 100 feet (I am not sure why the movie went with meters.) The boat continues to the bottom which is more than 825 feet deep.  

            The movie is close enough to the real incident, considering it’s a dramatization. Obviously, the director and screenwriter were not going to reenact three dives because of aircraft. And the dive to the bottom is close to what happened. They did have rivets busting, by the way. It’s not just a submarine movie cliché. However, the captain in the movie makes a very puzzling decision to stay on the surface after the plane attack that damages the sub. He does not explain his decision, but it seems like he would not have known the damage would cause the sub to sink. His order to race towards the African shallows is not explained, but we can give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he knew the boat might sink and he wanted it to be in shallower water. (That’s a big assumption.) This actually worked out because although the sub does go way below crush depth, if it had sunk where it had been damaged, it surely would have been crushed by the lower depth. Probably because of time constraints the movie does not show the boat diving after the attack (which would have been standard procedure), but having to surface because of damage. The captain is then forced to dive because the alternative is being a sitting duck. Because the movie edits out some of this, it makes the captain look like a gambler who loses his bet. In the movie, it is insane to stay on the surface after the plane attacks and clearly informs the warships about the sub. He does not know that diving will result in sinking. In fact, since the ship draws fire on the surface, it is likely the damage that causes the uncontrolled dive was due to a shell hitting on or near the boat.

            This analysis has led me to adjust my view on the movie’s depiction of the Strait of Gibraltar sequence. I still feels the movie captain makes a poor decision to stay on the surface after being attacked, but I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because we don’t know what he is thinking and the movie might have made decisions for dramatic effect. With that said, I still believe both the movie captain and the book captain were insane to go as far as they did on the surface, even at night. In the war, the u-boats that successfully ran the very well-defended strait did it submerged using the eastward current to narrow the speed loss from not being on the surface. 

            P.S. Let’s take the scenes a little further. The movie covers the repairs to the sub and its surfacing very close to the book. And I just want to add something that might not have been apparent to viewers. The sub would not have survived if the Chief had gotten his wish to go home and/or if the captain had shot Johann when he had his panic attack.

THE 100 BEST WAR MOVIES: #40. Das Boot (1981)

 

 “Das Boot” (“The Boat”) is a German submarine movie directed by Wolfgang Petersen.  Originally the movie was going to be made by John Sturges starring Robert Redford and then by Don Siegel starring Paul Newman.  Thankfully, both projects fell through.  It is based on the novel by Lothar-Gunther Buchheim.  Although fictional, Buchheim used his experience as a correspondent on U-96 on a tour in 1941.  The Werner (Herbert Gronemeyer) character is based on Buchheim.  Buchheim began as a technical adviser, but had a falling out with Petersen because of what Buchheim considered unrealistically enhanced dramatic license.  The movie took three years to produce (1979-81) and was the most expensive German film up to then.    It was released in 1981 at 150 minutes and then shown as a miniseries at 300 minutes.  The version I am reviewing is the definitive Director’s Cut which clocks in at 209 minutes.  The original version was a big hit in Germany and the U.S.  It was an even bigger critical success.  It was nominated for Academy Awards for Director, Cinematography, Adapted Screenplay (Petersen), Film Editing, Sound, and Sound Effects Editing.  Stunningly, it was not nominated for Foreign Film!

             The movie opens at La Rochelle, France in the autumn of 1941.  We are informed that the u-boat fleet is beginning to suffer heavy losses.  By the end of the war only 10,000 of 40,000 submariners will have survived the war.  So, don’t expect a feel-good movie. The Captain (Jurgen Prochnow), the Chief (Klaus Wennemann), and Werner arrive at the base and Werner gets his first taste of the submarine service when some of the drunken crewmen piss on their car as it passes by.  (I don’t mean taste literally.)  The enlisted are not the only ones “preparing” for their next tour, the officers are partying at a French cabaret.  The scene is reminiscent of a cinematic fighter squadron on a regular night except that these guys are going to be away from debauchery for a couple of months.  They party like there’s no tomorrow partly because they know that might be true.

 The next day the U-96 sets sail.  Werner is given a tour of the boat.  It is very crowded and narrow.  Spaces are filled with supplies, even one of the two latrines. We are introduced to the key members of the crew.  There are 48 men on board a boat that would have had 24 in peacetime.  The First Watch Officer (Hubertus Bengsch) is the only Nazi fanatic.  The rest of the officers are cynical and war-weary.  The Captain, in particular, makes biting remarks about the “braggarts” that run the government and to needle the “Hitler Youth leader” (the FWO) insists on singing “Tipperrary”. 

            The next twenty days are ones filled with boredom. This boredom switches to terror instantly when the boat is surprised by a British destroyer.  The sub dives below its maximum depth of 160 meters and withstands a depth charging.  There is no warning of the explosions for the crew or the audience. Later, they manage to torpedo three freighters, but then its payback time for the escorts.  The depth charging is much worse this time.  Leaks, flying bolts, a fire, and numerous close explosions cause extreme tension. If you are expecting a lot of sinkings, the movie is not about the glory days of the u-boat campaign. It is not an American WWII submarine movie. The sub could be labeled hard luck. Despite great leadership, it suffers from a lot of hardships. Besides the effective anti-submarine warfare tactics, the movie makes it clear that the other foe is the Atlantic Ocean. The film is far from a recruiting film for the u-boat force. This is not the “Top Gun” of German submarine movies.

ACTING:   A                 

ACTION:   C  (6/10)                   

ACCURACY:  N/A             

PLOT:  A                         

REALISM:   A               

CINEMATOGRAPHY:    A+

SCORE:   B  (not much)               

SCENE:  the burning tanker

QUOTE:  Captain:  They won't catch us this time! Not this time! They haven't spotted us! No, they're all snoring in their bunks! Or, you know what? They're drinking at the bar, celebrating our sinking! Not yet, my friends. Not yet!

HISTORICAL ACCURACY:  Analyzing this movie for historical accuracy is problematic.  The film is based on a novel so it is hard to determine what in the novel is true.  The movie does follow the book closely which means the questions about accuracy focus on the book.  There was a U-96 and it was commanded by Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock for its first eight patrols.  He was the 6^th highest u-boat ace based on tonnage.  He won the Iron Cross.  The submarine was credited with sinking 27 ships in 11 patrols.  Buchheim (Werner in the movie) was a Navy correspondent who was embedded for propaganda purposes.  It appears that the patrol he based the book on was the 7^th one.  My research on that patrol shows that Buchheim enhanced the story quite a bit.  In fact, even if Buchheim used incidents from other patrols, it is still hard to find the incidents that appear in the book and in the movie.  The seventh patrol saw the sinking of only one freighter and one significant depth charging.  There was no Gibraltar incident on any of the patrols.  The u-boat sailed from St. Nazaire (the movie understandably used La Rochelle because the sub pens are intact there and were essential to the verisimilitude of the film).  It also returned to St. Nazaire, but not to the reception shown in the film.  U-96 was sunk under similar circumstances when the submarine pens at Wilhelmshaven were bombed in 1945. 

So, what could have happened?  It seems likely the submariners partied hard considering the u-boat service had the highest mortality rate of any service in WWII for any country.  Adm. Donitz did make a habit of seeing off the individual boats.  The depressed vibe may be a bit laid on, but autumn 1941 was the first nonhappy time for the u-boats.  In 1941, convoys became more effective and more escorts came into play.  Also, anti-submarine technology improved with the use of ASDIC (sonar).  The movie implies that the u-boat war was on a path downward from then on, but in reality there was to be a second “happy time” with the entry of the U.S.  The vibe in the movie is more appropriate for 1943 when the Battle of Atlantic was clearly lost.  It seems unlikely that the depth of depression and cynicism would have sunk that low by autumn 1941.

  The movie accurately reflects the fear the pinging of sonar caused for the crew.  By this stage of the war, Ultra was being used to reroute convoys away from wolf packs.  Of course the U-96 would not have been aware of this and the movie makes no allusion to the code-breaking.  The movie does make a point of depicting the use of the Enigma machine to decode messages from submarine command.  The u-boat crews were noted for being outspoken in their cynicism and the Captain evidences that.    As far as the Nazi on board, this stock character has been criticized, but it seems likely there would have been someone like him on board.  Actually, I would have thought there would have been more than one fanatic.    While the incidents in the movie can be questioned, the u-boat is as real as it can get.  The movie interior was an exact copy of a Type VII-C on display in the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry.

CRITIQUE:  The effort that went into this movie is amazing.  It reminds me of “Master and Commander”.  I already mentioned the interior, but there were also several models that were used for exterior scenes.  One was an eleven foot long model used for the ocean storms.  It was hollow and driven by a man laying inside on his stomach.  The same model was borrowed by Spielberg for “Raiders of the Lost Ark”.  There were dolls on the tower that were moved by remote control.  For the depth charge scenes, the interior mockup was on a hydraulic apparatus called a gimbal that allowed for realistic (even dangerous) hurling of bodies and objects.  The filming in this tight environment is incredible.  A special version of the steadicam was developed by cinematographer Jost Vacano who wore padding so he could move and not be hurt by encounters with the walls and hatchways.  One of the great war movie shots is when the crew rushes to the bow of the boat to speed the crash dive.   It is done in one continuous shot with no cuts.  The cinematography overall is great.  In the opening scene in the Bar Royal, Vacano has a long shot where the camera moves around the room to catch the revelry. 
               The acting matches the technical virtuousity.  The cast was relatively unknown even in Germany.  Most went on to good careers.  Prochnow is perfect as the Captain and Wennemann matches him as the Chief.  Gronemeyer is appropriately awed, wide-eyed, and terrorized by his experiences as the neophyte Werner.  Erwin Leder makes a good impression as Johann.  It was his first acting role and you won’t be able to forget his face.    The entire cast was serious about making the picture special.  They all agreed to avoid sunlight during the production to get the sallow look.  The movie was shot in sequence so the men’s beards reflected time at sea.  The actors went through a type of boot camp so they could maneuver through the cramped interior smoothly.

There have been many submarine movies.  What makes “Das Boot” special is the way it gets the life of the submariners right.  The sailors behave as you would expect a German u-boat crew to behave.  Some veterans took umbrage with the crude language, but that seems revisionist and the book (by an ex-submariner) is even cruder.  No movie has depicted life on a WWII submarine better.  Any submarine.  At screenings in America, when the statistic of 30,000 German submariners dying appeared on the screen, the audience applauded.  By the end of the film, few rejoiced in the tragic exemplification of that stat.  You care about these men.  They are not the enemy.  Speaking of which, the movie does not cut to the anti-submariners.  U-96’s foes are faceless.
            The plot is linear and somewhat episodic.  It builds nicely to its overt anti-war message.  It is not perfect, however.  The depth chargings are a bit repetitive with each topping the last.  By the end of the movie, the boat has had everything but the kitchen sink thrown at it.  The movie cannot escape some of the clichés submarine movies are noted for.  The sub has to go below “hull crush depth” and yet the hull is not crushed.  The sub withstands not one, but three depth chargings with the depth charges exploding alongside the sub.  Unrealistically close, by the way.  It does avoid several other tropes.  There is no command conflict.  The captain is no Ahab hunting his white whale.  Noone is left on deck during a crash dive and no debris and oil are released to fool the hunters.  Most importantly, the sub is on a routine patrol.  No special mission.

CONCLUSION:  “Das Boot” is a very good movie, but it is not great.  I have to admit that in my opinion it is slightly overrated.  In the worthy attempt to be firmly anti-war, it has a narrative arc that is consistently downward.  Each episode is more depressing than the last until the twist of the ending.  In my opinion, the plot would have been more effective as a roller coaster ride than a downward spiral.  This does conform to the novel, but movies have the right to improve on their sources.  “Das Boot” would have been better if it had included some of the thrills of u-boat combat.  There is too much prey and not enough predator.  The torpedoing of the three enemy ships is given short shrift. The three depth chargings are not. Still, in spite of those quibbles, it is still the best submarine war movie ever made. And it is unique in depicting life on a German submarine. 

In Enemy Hands (2004)

 

 

                    “In Enemy Hands” is a WWII submarine movie directed by Tony Giglio, who also wrote it.  It was his second movie.  His first being “Soccer Dog”.  If that’s not a red flag, I don’t know what is.  It made $64,000 at the box office.  That sounds about right. 

                    This entry into the large submarine warfare subgenre attempts to be different by placing an American submarine in the Atlantic.  (“U-571” infamously placed one there so America could take credit for acquiring an Enigma machine.)  They were actually rare in that theater and duels with u-boats did not occur.  But this is Hollywood and it sure sounds like a winning formula.  The film opens with information about the Battle of the Atlantic.  Spoiler alert:  the Allies won.  But in 1942, the u-boats kicked ass.  Then in 1943, the Allies turned things around.  This brings to an end the factual part of the movie.  Unlike the far superior “The Enemy Below”, this duel is between two subs instead of a destroyer and a sub.  U-429 is commanded by Kapitan Herdt (Til Schweiger).  We first see it undergoing a depth-charging.  Rivets pop and leaks abound.  Cliché alert!  In an ominous development for any viewer who cares about sub tactics, the sub immediately surfaces and sinks the destroyer.  I check my watch.  Meanwhile, its future foe the USS Swordfish is shaking down.  Capt. Sullivan (Scott Caan) and Chief of the Boat Sullivan (William H. Macy) put the crew through continuous drills ala “Run Silent, Run Deep”.  This leads to dysfunction in the crew ala every sub movie.  What follows starts laughable and escalates to ridiculous.  There is a scene where two subs sink each other in an underwater face-off.  Caan, Sullivan, and a few of the crew end up on the U-429.  One of them brings meningitis with him.  (I guess Donitz was right when he ordered his u-boat captains to not pick up victims of sinkings.)  So, technically there is not a monster on board, but …  The Americans will have to help the Germans after the disease wipes out most of the crew.  They decide to sail to America and give themselves up.  Along the way, we get the requisite mutiny and another underwater sub duel!  That makes one more than in the entire history of submarine warfare.

                    It amazes me that considering the size of the sub combat subgenre, there are so few good sub movies.  Even the acknowledged gold standard, “Das Boot”, is not a great movie.  Hollywood keeps trying because it loves the dynamic of placing men under stress in an underwater tube.  It’s the best way to get soap opera into a war movie.  Alpha males dealing with each other and the dangers of the silent service make for good entertainment.  Unfortunately, the subgenre is very susceptible to cliches that even the better movies find hard to avoid.  “In Enemy Hands” is not on the level of the all-inclusive “U-571”, but it does incorporate some of the hoariest, like rivets popping and dysfunction.  The problem with the movie is not cliches, however.  The problem is the movie is a mess. 

                    Its strength should have been its cast.  It is full of familiar faces and some of them have good reputations as actors, like Macy.  Surprisingly, the acting across the board is weak.  This may be due to the braindead script.  The trite dialogue must have been painful for respected actors to utter.  It is filled with ridiculous scenarios that even a person with no knowledge of submarine warfare would shake their head at.  I wasn’t just shaking my head, but pulling hair from it.  The movie insulted my intelligence.  For instance, WWII subs had no ability to attack each other underwater.  And yet, the movie does this twice.   The only time a submerged sub sank another submerged sub was on Feb. 9, 1945.  The U-864 developed engine problems which produced noises that were picked up by the hydrophone on the HMS Venturer.  It soon saw its snorkel.  The Venturer tracked the German, but as it waited for the u-boat to surface, the German discovered it was being tailed and took evasive action.  The British captain decided to fire a spread of four torpedoes at the approximate location of the u-boat.  The German captain ordered an emergency dive and turn.  The first three torpedoes missed, but the submarine had turned into the path of the fourth.  It went to the bottom with the whole crew.

                    Sub movies are common because they are not expensive to make.  The good ones are challenges for directors and cinematographers because of the confined nature of the set.  The more claustrophobic and cramped, the higher the quality of the movie.  The interiors on these subs are spacious and not crowded because they apparently could not afford extras.  The movie has a Tuesday Movie of the Week look to it.  It is distinctly low budget in its vibe.  It is basically a half-ass effort.

                    Although I am harsh on most sub movies, there are enough good ones to watch without having to waste 94 minutes of your life on this piece of debris.

 

GRADE  =  F