← Back to Reviews
in
The Hunt for Red October
War Drama / English / 1990
WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I thought I'd reviewed The Hunt for Red October, but apparently not.
WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
A submarine thriller with a star-studded cast including Sean Connery, Alex Baldwin, Sam Neill, James Earl Jones, and Tim Curry? Sounds fantastic.
Alas, I found it underwhelming. Despite all the talent a movie budget could buy, this movie doesn't lean too heavily on the "acting" side of things. Not that it isn't there or the characters don't emote, but it's very very subdued. Comparing the naval encounters side-by-side with Greyhound, despite sharing the same lingo, there is much less intensity and much less technical concern for the small moving parts of the equation that keep that fragile chain of command one game of telephone away from killing everyone.
The only way I can think to describe it is it's way more "Hollywood"; the protagonists verge on that too-cool-for-school level of concern you expect Scharwzenegger or Stallone to show with a slow-motion explosion going off behind them. About the only concept really introduced is the idea of a "caterpillar drive" that allows a sub to operate virtually silent, thus allowing it to deliver a nuclear package practically undeterred. When Connery, the ship's Russian captain appears to go rogue, you have the premise of the movie, where Baldwin plays the CIA submarine nerd tasked with convincing the US military to risk the opportunity to attack the sub on the belief that Connery's actually defecting, which he is.
This whole plot about Sean Connery's character defecting to the Americans and America questioning whether he can be trusted is honestly such a dull concept. This absconds with the notion of submarine battles (except for the couple brief encounters they have with Russians trying to stop them) and this isn't even the sort of drama where you can expect some incredibly tense exchange of hostages or something.
No, it's just a sub full of incredibly fluent English-speaking Russkis that are just way cool about going to America and experiencing capitalism, man.
The atmosphere isn't there, the action isn't there, the drama isn't compelling... It's just a bunch of solid actors standing around expounding on their characters' goals and speculating about other characters' goals and... that's about it.
The Sonar Guy stands out because he seems to be personally interested in investigating and tracking the invisible new sub. He's also the one who ends up explaining some of the more interesting features of sub combat, such as how they have to be cautious going dead to pick up noises because even stopped, the sub could drift into the enemy revealing their position, or even worse, revealing their awareness of the enemy.
Meanwhile Baldwin's playing the whole "I know this Connery fella, I'm basically married to him. I have physically subsisted on his thoughts and dreams for twelve millennia so trust me when I say I know his motives.".
Fortunately, the only thing that stretches plausibility for me is Baldwin's trope of a role.
I do appreciate the jab at the end where the President(?), probably knowing full well that a Russian sub was lead to torpedo themselves, goes "you lost ANOTHER sub?" When it's brought up.
Overall, Satisfactory Movie terms like "funny" and "exciting" and "cool" never really came up when I watched this. I actually think I saw this fairly recently but genuinely forgot everything about it. Everyone I recognize in this movie has been in far better films.
I'd rather watch Under Siege.
Final Verdict: [Meh...]
The Hunt for Red October
War Drama / English / 1990
WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I thought I'd reviewed The Hunt for Red October, but apparently not.
WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
A submarine thriller with a star-studded cast including Sean Connery, Alex Baldwin, Sam Neill, James Earl Jones, and Tim Curry? Sounds fantastic.
Alas, I found it underwhelming. Despite all the talent a movie budget could buy, this movie doesn't lean too heavily on the "acting" side of things. Not that it isn't there or the characters don't emote, but it's very very subdued. Comparing the naval encounters side-by-side with Greyhound, despite sharing the same lingo, there is much less intensity and much less technical concern for the small moving parts of the equation that keep that fragile chain of command one game of telephone away from killing everyone.
The only way I can think to describe it is it's way more "Hollywood"; the protagonists verge on that too-cool-for-school level of concern you expect Scharwzenegger or Stallone to show with a slow-motion explosion going off behind them. About the only concept really introduced is the idea of a "caterpillar drive" that allows a sub to operate virtually silent, thus allowing it to deliver a nuclear package practically undeterred. When Connery, the ship's Russian captain appears to go rogue, you have the premise of the movie, where Baldwin plays the CIA submarine nerd tasked with convincing the US military to risk the opportunity to attack the sub on the belief that Connery's actually defecting, which he is.
This whole plot about Sean Connery's character defecting to the Americans and America questioning whether he can be trusted is honestly such a dull concept. This absconds with the notion of submarine battles (except for the couple brief encounters they have with Russians trying to stop them) and this isn't even the sort of drama where you can expect some incredibly tense exchange of hostages or something.
No, it's just a sub full of incredibly fluent English-speaking Russkis that are just way cool about going to America and experiencing capitalism, man.
The atmosphere isn't there, the action isn't there, the drama isn't compelling... It's just a bunch of solid actors standing around expounding on their characters' goals and speculating about other characters' goals and... that's about it.
The Sonar Guy stands out because he seems to be personally interested in investigating and tracking the invisible new sub. He's also the one who ends up explaining some of the more interesting features of sub combat, such as how they have to be cautious going dead to pick up noises because even stopped, the sub could drift into the enemy revealing their position, or even worse, revealing their awareness of the enemy.
Meanwhile Baldwin's playing the whole "I know this Connery fella, I'm basically married to him. I have physically subsisted on his thoughts and dreams for twelve millennia so trust me when I say I know his motives.".
Fortunately, the only thing that stretches plausibility for me is Baldwin's trope of a role.
I do appreciate the jab at the end where the President(?), probably knowing full well that a Russian sub was lead to torpedo themselves, goes "you lost ANOTHER sub?" When it's brought up.
Overall, Satisfactory Movie terms like "funny" and "exciting" and "cool" never really came up when I watched this. I actually think I saw this fairly recently but genuinely forgot everything about it. Everyone I recognize in this movie has been in far better films.
I'd rather watch Under Siege.
Final Verdict: [Meh...]