A little confused" - The Hunt for Red October (1990) Discussion

[–] detroit-velvet-smooth 9 years ago

He said it himself, "I give us one chance in three".

The entire plan was a gamble. He also referenced the burning of the ships upon arriving in the new world. Very poetic.

Ultimately though the real reason is that it makes the film more exciting. Without the Russians hunting there is no enemy because Ryan was talking the US side into the same gamble that Ramius was taking.

Also, what was the point of Ryan smoking when he boarded the Red October? You see him several times refusing a cigarette, saying he doesn't smoke. Why does he do so then. If it is some sort of gesture to put the Russians at ease, why not let one of the others who boarded take the cigarette?

Because Ryan is the one who drove everything that happened in the film to tame the response of his side enough to allow Ramius' plan to work. He actually believed in it, had no reservations really about his gut instinct. As the politician said, none of those other guys believes in it or would stake their reputations on a hunch. Ryan was throughout the film subverting the automatic responses of the military types because he and Ramius were a kind of like minded character. Ramius also subverted expectations. He constantly was being questioned and constantly proved right. Ryan constantly questioned, constantly proved right. The film builds up to that moment when they meet.

Ryan smoking the cigarette is not just a tactic to lighten the mood, its a gesture, a statement that he is making the first move to open things up. He also was the one who sent the message, so he had to be the one to break the ice. That encounter on the bridge between the two captains and crews was Ryan's show.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

Ultimately though the real reason is that it makes the film more exciting.

While it does succeed in doing that... it is NOT the reason at all.

Let me know if you cannot figure out why that line of reasoning is a big fail and I'll explain it to you.

EDIT: Nevermind, I'll explain it anyway.

The Scene's purpose cannot be to make the film more exciting because the scene is in the NOVEL. People tend to think the Film is the be-all-end-all of a story and forget the fact that the film is based upon a bestselling Novel. Or do you think Tom Clancy, in being just an Insurance guy who never wrote a book before in his life... thought to deliberately include that scene in his very first ever Novel, knowing that it would make the eventual Film "more exciting"?

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

reply

[–] detroit-velvet-smooth 9 years ago

Actually you can stop lecturing me and perhaps acknowledge the alternate theory here that I said film instead of novel because we're discussing the film and its a natural thing to say in this forum.

If I wanted to avoid obnoxious know it all nit pickers like you who lecture everyone as if they're idiots I'd instead have hedged my bets and said "story" and left myself invulnerable to your pedantic thrust.

Film, novel, story, whatever. The important part of the comment that did not in any way invite your rant was correct.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

I'd instead have hedged my bets and said "story" and left myself invulnerable to your pedantic thrust.

Film, novel, story, whatever.

That won't work for you because the Canon for the "story" is the Novel, not the film.

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

reply

[–] detroit-velvet-smooth 9 years ago

This is irrelevant. You just jumped on top of an opportunity to talk down to someone. You never paused to ask if your tone was warranted or consider the very reasonable explanation I gave you for why I said film instead of novel. I know that it was a book before a movie.

There was no reason for you to jump down my throat and its clear you just took advantage of an opportunity to do something you do regularly on any board where you can show off your knowledge.

reply

[–] justanicknamed 9 years ago

It isn't irrelevant seeing as how both the book AND the movie reference the same thing. "There will be no going back." Cortez burned the ships so the crew knew they couldn't just up and leave; they had to continue on. Same thing with Ramius. The crew would be going back to a country which didn't treat their regular citizenry all that kindly. It would be worse for people they suspected of not just being defectors, but of stealing a multi-million dollar piece of highly-sophisticated machinery which was meant to tip the balance of power in the Soviet's favor.

reply

[–] detroit-velvet-smooth 9 years ago

There is no argument over the significance of that part of the story, this diversion is entirely about how jerk face upstairs decided to jump on me with claws drawn over a semantic issue that I've already explained.

Book, film, in either case we've lost the importance of exploring this point because jerk face likes to strut around these boards wielding his knowledge like a weapon to gratify his ego. He turned a perfectly agreeable exchange of information and ideas into an adversarial exchange for no good reason.

As for my prospects of receiving an apology, I give myself... one chance in three.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

I did NOT, " jump on you with claws drawn over a semantic issue".

I merely pointed out the impossibility of the scene existing for the purpose of making the film exciting when the scene exists in the novel.

You then decided to take Umbrage and start a hissy fit like a child.

As for my prospects of receiving an apology, I give myself... one chance in three.

I think your chances are more like Zero chance in Infinity.

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

reply

[–] detroit-velvet-smooth 9 years ago

I merely pointed out the impossibility of the scene existing for the purpose of making the film exciting when the scene exists in the novel.

Which you used as a springboard to launch into an uncalled for "you think Tom Clancy can't write a book?" rant. All you had to do was say "actually it was in the book first if you didn't know already". Instead you couldn't help yourself and edited in a condescending summation of why you think I'm an idiot. You're just trying to save face here, any sane person can read the thread and decide for themselves.

I'm not interested in this conversation anymore. I'll leave you to hold court over your navy movies.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

I never said you're an idiot.

But apparently you do.

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

reply

[–] darrinoberhofer 9 years ago

Wow, you are the biggest jerk I have ever seen on any IMDB board. Congratulations.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

Actually... no matter how hard I try. there are a great many much MUCH worse than I. Sorry to disappoint.

I will try hard though, if you want.


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

reply

[–] Hanz-Willhelm 9 years ago

That's all he does. Seriously, that is all he does. He's a stupid ass hole to everyone on the board and he basically serves no purpose. Half of the crap he gets so bitchy about is the most meaningless stuff. Semantics are his specialty. It must be a sad life to explore the internet without ceasing looking for someone to argue with because that is all he's good for. I've seen these exchanges 100's of times. This is all he does. The majority of the time who even cares what the two are talking about, I don't. I'm able to just look at a thread and rightly identify poster A is being calm and respectful and poster B (CG I was in the navy decades ago) is just being a rude, deliberately antagonistic child. What the subject is about is usually lost but those not directly involved can see who the prick is. The thing is, it is never called for. You didn't call him out and insult him, that rarely if ever happens, it is always he who butts in and starts insulting people. It just shows pettiness, insecurity, childishness, lack of self control and just down right foolishness. He just behaves like a fool. The thing about being a fool is they are never able to see that they are a fool so they can't stop acting like one.

Checkmate!
Deutschland hat die Weltmeisterschaft zum vierten Mal gewonnen! 🇩🇪🇺🇸

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

He's a stupid ass hole to everyone on the board

"
That is quite obviously a lie.
I am not an "ass hole" to everyone on the board, Just to idiots like yourself.
You're butthurt because I have busted you on your ignorance on multiple other posts in the past, so now you just love to troll me.

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

reply

[–] avortac4 (3746) 3 years ago

"Let me know if you cannot figure out why that line of reasoning is a big fail and I'll explain it to you.

EDIT: Nevermind, I'll explain it anyway."

And then you proceeded to NOT explain it at all. When you accuse other people being 'trollers' (I can't make myself to use the erroneous word, 'troll'), maybe it'd be best if you checked your own writing etiquette and lies, first.

When you say you are going to explain something, maybe it'd be a good idea to actually EXPLAIN it, instead of just insulting someone for their lack of knowledge about the book. This discussion forum is about MOVIES, not books, so it doesn't matter what the book does. You are just projecting bias on others without any proof, so your submarine is not operating on all cylinders.

At least you could be honest, though - if you at least did what you SAID you were going to do, maybe people could forgive you.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

The reason he informed Moscow of his intent to defect was two-fold.

1) It was remotely possible that one of the Officers might get cold feet and change their minds, betray the rest. This was the reason for his comment about Columbus burning his ships to motivate the men. By informing Moscow of their intent, He destroyed any chance of one of the Officer's changing his mind and trying to claim he was not a part of it. The Soviets would be out to destroy the sub, not capture it. Thus the Officers were "well motivated" (Just like Columbus' men) to continue with the plan.

2) Reason one though is just a minor reason, an additional reason. THIS is his primary reason... And it all stems from his reasoning to defect in the first place. He blames the Soviet system for the Death of his love, his wife. He wants the Soviet to pay for what it's done. to his wife, to him. to Russia in general and it's people He wants to HURT the Soviet leaders. To this end... it is not enough for him to simply sneak away and let the Soviet think there was some onboard accident and all was lost. They had to KNOW that it was him, That he chose to do this, to hurt them and why.

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

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

You don't know jack sh!t, troll. Fetching your other sockpuppet account that stolen valor claims to be a Marine Naval Aviator Submariner... buys you nothing but more disgust for your loser self.

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

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

Wasn't it Cortez, not Columbus?

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

Historically, yes. But Ramius says Columbus.

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

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

Not according to
http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0003248/quotes

"When he reached the New World, Cortez burned his ships. As a result his men were well motivated."

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

Ah You're right. Been forever since I watched the film.

Cortez or Columbus though. The point stands as to his reasoning, as well as why the one poster above is wrong concerning the reason being to make the film exciting.

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

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

Sorry, CG. I didn't mean for that to come off like I was showing you up or anything. It's just that when you answered my question it still didn't seem right to me. I also haven't seen this movie in at least a couple of years so I thought maybe I just wasn't remembering it right. But, like I said in another thread, this is one of my favorite movies of all time so I felt like I needed to check it out. That's when I found that link.

Again, sorry. Didn't mean to come off like a know it all or anything.

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

Absolutely no apologies necessary. Cortez was the correct answer and no... you did not come off as a know-it-all.

It's actually good that you corrected me. A goodly percentage of my posts are directed at people posting complete and utter ignorance and bullsh!t. (take note of my own personal stalker troll above). As a consequence, stupid people don't like their stupidity pointed out and I constantly get accused by them as "Always having to be right"
No... I don't, and this proves it.
;-)

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

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

Ok then, glad to hear it. Perhaps, then, you'll also forgive me for this little observation. Maybe you wouldn't have the reputation you do if you maybe tried to be just a little less belligerent about correcting others when they goof. Not everyone you meet is a troll. You probably don't remember me, but you lit into me pretty good once (on another board) about something I admitted I had no real idea about but was just asking questions and inviting speculation. I like to think I was a little more gracious about our encounter than to hold it against you but I still remember it.

Maybe it's a case of things not "sounding" the way you intended in text form or maybe you don't even know you're doing it. Maybe you're completely different in real life but either way you can come off sounding a little mean sometimes. A lot of people on the internet don't have as thick a skin as I do so it bothers them. For me, I'm not online often enough for it to really matter a lot to me. I'm just offering a little advice so take it for what it's worth.

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

Yeah I fully admit I am quite a bit rough around the edges.

It started off just with targeting very specific jackwagons posting the most ignorant crap imaginable. You know the type. College students that can't find the USA on a Map of the United States... That sort.
Call of Duty playing wannabes, mouthing of with their "Expertise" on the military.
Etc.. Etc...

But as time goes by and more and more people stop thinking and just start getting diarrhea of the mouth without thought behind it.. I get more and more short tempered, less patient.
I have found myself becoming rougher and rough with those less deserving of it.

And yes... a Lot of people do read hate and anger into a great many of my comments where it is not intended at all. I usually trash only the blatantly stupid, Simple mistakes, or simply not knowing something isn't enough to set me off, but ofttimes my "corrections" are read with a tone injected into them by the reader and not myself.

If you could remind me of where we "clashed" before... perhaps I can make amends. You do not seem the type that I would trash for something stupid.

EDIT: You really got me curious as to where we clashed before. Your posting history is ONLY 2 pages and the only place we overlap is in this board and Alien, of which though I have been on the same threads as you, we did not even respond to each other. much less clash with each other. I sure as heck never "lit into you". At least not by anything in your post history.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

No need in making amends. As I said before, I wasn't really worked up over it and it could have just as easily been my misinterpreting your "tone" sort of like you were saying before. My post history is short because I'm not online often. Also, a lot of my posts on the more popular boards wind up sliding off as newer threads replace them. Where we clashed was on the Aliens board and that thread died in this way some time ago.

*Edit* I'm not sure what to think that I didn't leave a lasting impression on you. :)

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

*Edit* I'm not sure what to think that I didn't leave a lasting impression on you. :)

Actually that is kind of a good thing.
Most that make a lasting impression on me are the real super idiots. And the impression isn't a good one.

Like Grondig, the idiot above pretending to be some Prajee-Tej... a sockpuppet of his regular account which was Grondig66, but is now Daddy-tej. He's the worst form of internet scum. He likes to stalk me.

As for the rest, I post quite often and on a wide group of boards. so unless you are a regular poster and frequent the same boards on a regular basis... I wouldn't remember you.
(though I think that's about to change...LOL)

Actually, I do remember seeing your recent posts even before this thread, but for the life of me cannot remember one where we clashed. If you did not respond to it... And I do not remember it... then likely I was not slamming you... just making a statement you took wrong. Had I actually intended to "light into you", I would have remembered.

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

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

Well I would have thought my username would have at least made an impression on you since it's taken from this movie but I suppose I should be happy you forgot me. 

I try to get along with everyone, even people of widely differing viewpoints, on these boards. For the most part, people usually respond pretty well to me. I hear what you're saying about people making "lasting impressions" though. I remember once, on the Terminator board, I tangled with some guy and let's just say it's hard to keep a civil discourse when the conversation reverts to name calling. At least he didn't follow me around to other boards to bug me so I guess that's something.

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

Well I would have thought my username would have at least made an impression on you since it's taken from this movie

Coupled with your Avatar... I didn't even consider it as Crazy Ivan.
But yeah...that fits too I suppose.

I try to get along with everyone, even people of widely differing viewpoints,

I'll be the first to agree that everyone is entitled to an opinion. But there are fact based opinion, and pure opinion.

"I think blue is the most beautiful color"

Is pure opinion. For one person it may be blue, for another.. green. No one can possibly be right or wrong, to each their own. Arguing over pure opinion is pointless.

Fact based opinion on the other hand...

A guy might be entitled to his opinion, but when his fact based opinion is "The Earth is FLAT and Man did not go to the moon"....

He is a complete moron.

And at that point, calling him a complete moron is no longer namecalling... It is a direct statement of fact based on the evidence of his own statements.

Namecalling is calling someone a moron just to belittle them when they have done nothing to be called one.

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

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

Coupled with your Avatar... I didn't even consider it as Crazy Ivan.
But yeah...that fits too I suppose.

Yeah I suppose it isn't as obvious as I thought it was when I picked the name out. 

A guy might be entitled to his opinion, but when his fact based opinion is "The Earth is FLAT and Man did not go to the moon"....

He is a complete moron.

And at that point, calling him a complete moron is no longer namecalling... It is a direct statement of fact based on the evidence of his own statements.

Good point but, by that logic, it would have been ok to call you a moron for getting it wrong between Columbus and Cortez. I didn't think so, in fact I felt bad pointing it out to you in the first place. Of course there's also a really big difference between thinking the Apollo program was a hoax and getting a movie quote mixed up. That's just two completely different levels of "wrong."  I think it's more a case of, as you mentioned, when somebody holds onto a demonstrably false opinion and just won't let it go. I think the only time I've ever really been tempted to name-call was with that guy I mentioned from the Terminator board. He did kind of start it though.

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

I think it's more a case of, as you mentioned, when somebody holds onto a demonstrably false opinion and just won't let it go.

Exactly.
I don't go after people for simply being wrong. I go after those that have demonstrated a COMPLETE failure of reason and logic.

It's like the defining difference between ignorance and stupidity.

Ignorance simply does not know better.
Stupidity knows better, but does it anyway.

Conspiracy theorists are a prime example of completely stupid people that I will rip to shreds at the drop of a hat. They are a bane on society.

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

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

Yes, we agree on that but consider this. If you've chosen to eliminate stupidity wherever you go, you're going to be fighting an uphill battle all your life. Stupid people are numerous and often obstinate. You'll probably have lower blood pressure if you just let a few of them go every now and again. 

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

All it takes for evil to succeed, is for good men to do nothing.

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

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

And discretion is the better part of valor. 

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago

An example of the sort of complete fraktards I do attack...

On the Run Silent run Deep board, someone asked about blacks on Subs.
Despite a few complete racist idiots in complete denial of historical fact... Most (including me ) gave factual evidence, documentary and photographic evidence that yes... Blacks DID serve on US Subs in WW2. The last post was over a year old when this moron came on a dead thread and flat out stated...

Re: Black guy on sub
image for user ABetterDay
by ABetterDay » Sun Aug 2 2015 09:58:22 Flag ▼ | Reply |
IMDb member since October 2008
Absolutely not. There were zero Blacks on subs in WWII.

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

reply

[–] mallaverack 9 years ago

I've been enjoying the cut and thrust between you and Crazyivanova - or perhaps we should call it observations. Hope you hook up again soon.
Really concur about comments on the stupid and ignorant.

reply

[–] CGSailor 9 years ago



If you enjoyed that, I would suggest you look up this little gem of a thread...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086350/board/nest/133906896

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

reply

[–] mallaverack 9 years ago

Wow......that was some explosion!
And to think you didn't need to have 'the last word'.
Others stepped in for you and delivered the coup d'état.
Cheers.

reply

[–] crazyivanova 9 years ago

THANK YOU! (I think) 

I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate.

reply

[–] ozart2002-919-392694 9 years ago

CGsailor has been a condescending *beep* for a long time...everyone should do what I did and put him on ignore. Maybe he'll go into vapor lock at the shunning with no means to post a nasty reply (with his existing moniker.)

reply

[–] csimpkins53 8 years ago

Ramius does, however quote Columbus toward the end of the movie when he and Jack are aboard the Red October in the river in Maine. Perhaps this is what you were thinking of?

reply

[–] CGSailor 8 years ago

You are correct. Ramius quotes Columbus and then Ryan tells him, "Welcome to the New World, Sir".

That may have been why I mixed up Columbus and Cortez.

Thanks.

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

reply

[–] ExTechOp (2770) 3 years ago

CGSailor posts two reasons:

(1) to give the officers no choice but to plow ahead

(2) to hurt the USSR

The second I think could've been done AFTER arriving in the U.S.

But even upon first viewing, I thought of another reason: to send a credible message to the U.S. of his intent to defect.

A direct message might've been impossible, or been intercepted, or been disbelieved.

Just rolling up to the coast might be met with hostility.

But when the U.S. sees the Soviet navy going nuts, they know SOMETHING big is happening and it's not a bluff. Defection is the obvious (and correct) conclusion.

And now the U.S. has a chance to prepare for the Red October's arrival and concealment while Ramius runs his "war games" on the way across the Atlantic

Oh, and Ryan smokes as a way to build rapport, a kind of literal "peace pipe." And as a plot point, it allows us to learn that Ryan speaks Russian and Ramius speaks English

reply