lost in it

Marcellus 2022-03-21 09:01:56

To tell the truth, the background music rendering of the scene atmosphere of this film is very brilliant, it can be seen that the director's skills are not bad. But the plot is not true, it can't stand scrutiny, and it doesn't conform to the logic of reality. The story setting is very pleasing to Europeans and Americans. It uses typical Western stereotyped thinking as the introductory tone of the film, and designs a very confusing background. As for the main characters, although The actors tried their best to perform, but the behaviors between the characters were illogical, and the behavioral motives between the characters were deliberately contrived and even very confusing and brainless. If the U.S. military is at this level of combat in reality, the level of trust and unity between each other, leadership and subordination. The relationship looks like the boss and the younger brother of the underworld. They scolded and beat them, and threatened with a gun to their heads? ? As the captain of a boat, he and the co-captain are so at odds with each other that they completely ignore the feelings of others, and even disrespect each other and fight against each other, regardless of everyone's safety. Then the US military is too rubbish and too undisciplined. Although it is for the plot of the movie, it is too illogical. things that people really can't appreciate. What's more, the low-level military coup in the film, which is hard-mouthed but surrenders without a few waves, doesn't need you to be involved in the United States. Even if you want to control it for the sake of your own interests, you will at best send one or two Los Angeles-class ships. Attack the nuclear submarine to send out two Tomahawk missiles and that’s it, send an Ohio-class strategic missile nuclear submarine alone to launch strategic missiles on other people’s territory without being escorted by other surface ships or attack nuclear submarines? You really don't take other countries seriously, and you really don't care about the safety of the world. I don't know what it means when a strategic missile with a nuclear warhead is fired? This kind of low-level military coup still uses strategic missiles? Fighting mosquitoes with a cannon, this director and screenwriter thinks that the US Department of Defense and Congress are both mentally ill, don't you know how far the Trident missiles on the Ohio-class are? Need to travel so far to launch? You underestimate strategic missiles. Having said that, let's take a look at the protagonists in it, especially the captain, who is so foolish when it concerns the safety of the country and the world. It is because of his own so-called patriotic feelings. American hubris. This reminds me of Tom Clancy, the American military novelist, whose works are full of the American theme in this film. Except for some good works, what about most of his works, except for Jin Yuqi, Among them, the content of the work can be said to be very cunning and clever, a typical twisted product of Western arrogance, full of distortions that cater to the tastes of European and American people and stereotypes of other countries, and it is difficult for people to appreciate it. Guo Xiaosi wrote some delicate and pretentious bad writing to fool middle school students, Yuan Tengfei wrote it himself

View more about Crimson Tide reviews

Extended Reading

Crimson Tide quotes

  • Rear Admiral Anderson, Board of Inquiry President: Now, based on the testimony from personnel on board the Alabama and, in no small measure, to that of the senior officer, Captain Ramsey, I am prepared to make my recommendations to SUBPAC.

    Hunter: Without my testimony, sir?

    Rear Admiral Anderson, Board of Inquiry President: You have a problem with that?

    Hunter: I might, sir.

    Rear Admiral Anderson, Board of Inquiry President: I have known Captain Ramsey for almost 30 years. We served together on more than a few occasions. If he is lying this will be the first I've heard of it.

    Hunter: Yes, sir.

    Rear Admiral Anderson, Board of Inquiry President: My primary concern here is the breakdown in the system. In this instance the system failed because the two senior officers did not work to resolve their differences, while preserving the chain of command. Now you may have been proven right, Mr Hunter, but insofar as the letter of the law is concerned, you were both right, and you were also both wrong. This is the dilemma that will occupy this panel, this navy, and this country's armed forces as a whole, long after you leave this room. Off the record... you've both created one hell of a mess: a mutiny aboard a United States nuclear submarine, violation of nuclear launch protocol.

  • [repeated lines]

    Zimmer: Message is authentic.

    Lt. Darik Westergard: I concur, sir.