MovieChat Forums > The Hunt for Red October (1990) Discussion > Worst part of the movie!

Worst part of the movie!

posted 8 years ago by el_cochino55
10 replies | jump to latest

I am surprised that no one takes issue with the underwater obstacle course, with speed changes, course changes, and depth changes. It made no sense to me at all, and it wouldn't even make sense if you could be on The Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea's Seaview and had all its windows. The movie in my opinion makes a decent attempt at being realistic, but that part is blatantly horse pokey.

I enjoyed this movie as entertaining, but the scene where they go through that obstacle course is for entertainment only. I served on a diesel powered submarine in the late 60's and submarines are not capable of that kind of precision as depicted by the movie. I know there have been incredible improvements in submarines, in guidance, navigation, and sonar, but if a boat survived that course the crew would want transfers off if they ever came back to port. For instance the USS San Francisco in 2005, while transiting at flank speed hit an uncharted undersea mountain that nearly sank it and resulted in the death of one submariner. That it even made it back to port was a miracle was a miracle.

[–] AdmiralTugBenson 8 years ago

I didn't realize it was that unrealistic, nor would it really bother me if it were. It's just a movie and I suspend disbelief. What part of it is so unrealistic, the actual handling of the sub or the way they were navigating? I wouldn't be surprised if they took some artistic license with how the subs could handle to make things more exciting. But the actual navigation seemed pretty sound to a layman like myself. Maybe it's dangerous to go down a route like that, but the film explained it away with the fact that they had super accurate surveys of the route and so were able to navigate it with a stop watch and those surveys. For most of us who have never been on a sub that was good enough for us. Maybe some of the turns it made were unrealistic, or maybe the route they took would have been impossible. I don't know. But if movies were always 100% realistic they probably wouldn't be much fun.

"Dan Marino should die of gonorrhea and rot in hell. Would you like a cookie son?"

[–] el_cochino55 8 years ago

As I mentioned I enjoyed the movie. I also enjoyed The Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, and the exploits of the Seaview. If you think the obstacle course is somewhat realistic you appear to be in the majority here.

When I was serving we got a kick out of explaining to people given tours that we were windowless. The Seaview was another boat any sailor with an ounce of sense would have requested a transfer off.

[–] CGSailor 8 years ago

That the sub was anywhere deep enough to be within the underwater canyons in itself was ridiculous. except in a few areas, the tops of those underwater ridges are well below crush depth.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] CGSailor 8 years ago

The novel explained the "running of red route one" much more realistically, if not actually realistic.

They were not running inside of narrow canyons with walls of rock on either side, pulling off some sort of underwater Death Star trench run... Rather, They were charting a course deemed cler by detailed charts to keep clear of higher underwater features while remaining as deep as possible to lose their accoustical signature in the bottom terrain.

As much as I love the film, There are a number of alterations from the novel which are ridiculous goofs not present in the original novel. Such as the self destruct of an air dropped Mk-46 torpedo.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] strntz 8 years ago

Yeah, but I'm sure you realize that the vast majority of the fannies in the seats don't have a clue about those things you mentioned (I didn't).

I'm a retired MSEE and I see lots of stuff in movies that just aren't possible, but I let them slide lest they detract from my enjoyment.

Is very bad to steal Jobu's rum. Is very bad.

[–] CGSailor 8 years ago

I'm a retired MSEE

???

Yeah, but I'm sure you realize that the vast majority of the fannies in the seats don't have a clue about those things you mentioned (I didn't).

A couple of things here...
1) I wasnt trashing the film. Red October is one of my favorite films despite the goofs. (All films have goofs).

2)whether or not the majority of the audience would not have the knowledge to know it was wrong does not make it right. It is still wrong and there is nothing wrong with acknowledging that fact. Again keep in mind I'm not trashing the film for it, just pointing it out.

When I do trash a film or TV show is in the MAGNITUDE of the goofs, Not simply for the fac there are goofs.

And when I do... fanboys always respond with some variation of your comment.

I get things from...

"Its fiction, not a documentary"

"Its called suspension of disbelief"

"Most wouldnt know and dont care"

etc...

These are fanboys making excuses in light of deserved criticism.

The explanative example I give on the difference in magnitude of goofs is this....

Ghost Rider vs Sons of Anarchy.

Ghost Rider rides his motorcycle up the vertical sides of tall buildings.

I don't care that it defies the laws of physics. Within the stories framework, the motorcycle is paranormal with demonic powers not found in the real world but do exist in the story's world, which allows it to do so.

Now if the gang from Sons of Anarchy were to ride their bikes the same way... you'd rightfully go apesh!t with WTF!?!? comments left and right.

Sons of Anarchy isnt a documentary.
Can't you just suspend your disbelief?

Fictional or not, Sons of Anarchy is set within the framework of the real world, unlike Ghost Rider and its demonic bikes.

The magnitude of such a goof is beyond the ability to suspend disbelief.

So do me a favor.
Stop using these tired excuses that don't hold water to respond to those pointing out a goof.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] strntz 8 years ago

So do me a favor.
Stop using these tired excuses that don't hold water to respond to those pointing out a goof.

Not sure if that was for me or the "fanboys" (I'm not).

I said:

Yeah, but I'm sure you realize that the vast majority of the fannies in the seats don't have a clue about those things you mentioned (I didn't).

I think you read too much in my statement. I wasn't saying you were trashing the film or that pointing out inconsistencies don't make for interesting conversation within context.

My point is that studios take some liberty in order to make a movie a bit more thrilling, liberties that most folks don't realize. For instance I didn't know that the underwater canyons you speak of are below crush depth of those subs, but the chase scene was pretty exciting.

I don't see that making a movie "goof" proof for the fraction of a percent of viewers with the technical knowledge to recognize them makes any economic sense for the movie studio. Despite Hollywood's messages against things like capitalism, they are most definitely a capitalistic enterprise. They sink millions of dollars into these hoping for a figure on the plus side of the ledger when all is said and done. To goof proof them or attempt to do so would only add more cost and likely result in a less interesting project. That was my only point. Well, that and I don't let these minor things bother *me*..

Is very bad to steal Jobu's rum. Is very bad.

[–] StrangeQuark (8) 6 years ago

I completely disagree. The worst part of the movie was when Jack and Skip we're doing research on the caterpillar drive and that phone... That phone that didn't have pauses between the Rings it was just one solid long annoying frustrating ring. It keeps me up at night.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

I can't say about the possibility of anything like that ever happening but Soviets took a ton of pride in their subs. Those boats were the pride of Soviet fleet. It makes sense that the best crew was placed and no expense (or technology) was spared in making them.

It was the best of the best and for the crew to disown it if it came through unscathed would have been more of a statement about the crew than the boat.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Indeed.