"Greyhound" was watched with great expectations. After watching for more than an hour, the destroyer led by Uncle Tom Hanks made military exploits but was asked to leave the line of fire. Uncle slept on the bed tiredly. At this time I felt that there was another German submarine attack below, maybe the destroyer sank? Maybe the uncle died?
Just waiting, the subtitles came out, the movie is like that. . . Done.
This is called unfinished business, and in fact it also represents the thinness of the film's plot.
War films have been filmed to this day, and I am embarrassed to come out and meet people without the unique skills (such as "1917"). The uniqueness of "Greyhound" is a single point of view and a single storyline. The camera locks the captain on the Greyhound from beginning to end. The scene is just a short distance from the dark bridge. At most, the same dark military intelligence room and captain's cockpit are cut. The film insists on not showing Germans in enemy submarines, nor the British and Americans in friendly fleets. Single point of view, Tom Hanks, one person to the end.
The creator has his reasons for adopting such a minimalist narrative method. For example, if you want to go to the battlefield, you can only be in one time and space. Therefore, the film insists on creating enough tension and suspense from a single perspective, which is also silly stubbornness---a single perspective has limitations, the audience has long been accustomed to the omniscient perspective of God, how can they have the patience to listen to only one captain from beginning to end Shout out some incomprehensible naval professional orders there.
And not to mention the character of this captain, how can a captain who is on the North Pacific battlefield for the first time be so brave? This problem is gone.
Of course, the naval battle of World War II is quite similar, but the audience is not all military fans, is it? (Not to mention that real military fans have picked out a bunch of bugs)
I thought it was a movie "based on true events", but it wasn't, no wonder!
Later, when I saw that the screenwriter of the movie was actually Tom Hanks himself, I laughed in my heart and said it again: No wonder!
View more about Greyhound reviews
