USS Indianapolis: Men of Courage

Set in mid-1945 during World War II, the USS Indianapolis, led by Captain Charles McVay (Nicolas Cage), was secretly tasked to deliver parts of an atomic bomb (which would later be dropped on Hiroshima) unescorted to a naval base in the Pacific. Back in open sea after successfully delivering their cargo, the ship was torpedoed and sunk by a Japanese submarine in the Philippine Sea. The sailors spent five gruelling days with minimal supplies floating on life rafts in shark-infested waters. Only 317 of the original 1,196 crew members survive the ordeal.

The first hour of the film was quite brisk and eventful. The main storyline was laid out within the first scene. The backstory about some of the young sailors were introduced, oddly not too much on McVay himself. The USS Indianapolis embarked on its mission, torpedoed and sunk all within that first hour. However, this meant that the entire second hour would only be dealing about the survival ordeal of the sailors among the sharks awaiting rescue. It got maudlin and repetitive after the first few shark attacks. This was definitely not the war action film people were expecting to see.

The actors all seem to have come from the Nicolas Cage school of hammy acting. The major side story was about two friends who were in love with the same girl back home. Another side story was about a couple of sailors, one white, one black, constantly at odds with each other. There was also another side story about an arrogant young officer and his despicable attitude. All these rehashed side stories just served to fill out the rest of the running time before and after the sinking. The best actor for me would have to be Yutaka Takeuchi, the Japanese actor playing court-martial witness Commander Hashimoto, who displayed dignified subtly in his brief role.

For its Philippine release, this film's subtitle "Men of Courage" was replaced with "Disaster at (sic) Philippine Sea." However, for Filipino moviegoers expecting to actually see some part of the Philippines or see Filipinos in action in this film, they will be disappointed. The Philippines was mentioned but was never actually shown except for scene labels to establish the location. There was an extra card interrupting the closing credits stating how the search for the wreck of the Indianapolis was undertaken in 2001 in cooperation with the Philippine government and National Geographic. That was all about the Philippines here, nothing more. 5/10.

Years ago I read "Abandon Ship" the story of the sinking of the USS Indianapolis by Richard F. Newcomb. It 's not the book the film is based on.

In some ways that's a pity. Although Newcomb's book was first published in 1960, it is a masterly account of the disaster and recounted events that are not in the film. I always remembered his description of the strong swimmers who rode herd on their weaker comrades pulling them back when they drifted away until they themselves used up their reserves of energy and drowned - many of the bravest acts of WW2 were not necessarily in the heat of battle.

Somewhere along the way, much of the drama leaked from this film.

It's unusual these days to see a movie where the special effects are not absolutely dazzling. They might be a cut above the old Hollywood bathtub effects, but the limitations of the effects in this film draw attention away from the story.

But that isn't the key weakness in "USS Indianapolis: Men of Courage".

Although Nicholas Cage gives a fine performance as Captain McVay, and the ending does have some punch, the filmmakers weren't content with what really happened, and added some very predicable fictional elements. Was it really necessary for Craig Tate and Johnny Wactor's characters to duplicate the scene from "Titanic" where Kate Winslet saves Leonardo DiCaprio from imprisonment in the nick of time? It's the forced backstories that rob the film of stature.

There was no need to expend so much energy on the fake elements. Here is a passage from Newcomb's book describing what happened when Lieutenant Gwinn, the pilot of the PV-1 Ventura who first spotted the men in the water was taken aboard the hospital ship "Tranquility" and introduced to the survivors as the guy who found them.

"Men in all stages of recovery, some weak and hollow-eyed on their beds shouted cheered and whispered. Those who could, crowded around and thumped him on the back, laughing and jumping. Some merely turned their heads on their pillows and cried softly, and the quiet, reticent Gwinn himself broke down under the flood of emotion".

I think I would have had that scene in my movie.

I was really interested in this movie but oh boy, what have these people done? This is one of the worst CGI works I have seen in years, they simply destroyed the movie as a whole. The ship appears washed out, never matches the surroundings. Every action scene is CGI'd, in a cheap way. Scenes on the deck, when explosions happen are clearly fireworks!!! I could not believe my eyes. And some scenes are repeated! I never reviewed on IMDb but created an account just to tell others what a bad work this was. I was really interested in the movie but the lousy work that has been done simply could not pass without being noticed. Watch it and see for yourself. What a disappointment!

Men of Courage is not meant to be anything more than a generic mid- budget war movie with sharks, but it underdelivers even if you keep your expectations low. The script follows historical events pretty closely, but writing has lots of flaws, and romantic storyline is disappointing. Nicolas Cage gives a sensible performance, but his character doesn't move anywhere from "good captain" cliché. The writers add lots of voice-over narration to add depth to characters, which makes things worse. The Japanese captain is reduced to ridicule near the ending, where the two captains burst into tears while saluting each other.

If you only look for special effects, war scenes and sharks wreaking havoc, this movie won't be any less disappointing. Warship effects are of acceptable quality (for television at least), but man-eating sharks are either roughly made CGI, or replaced with smaller sharks which are obviously harmless. Not a single scene shows sharks biting humans; edits carefully avoid that part. No attention is given to the actual details of shark species present on the site of USS Indianapolis demise. For a movie that closely follows actual events (and even includes documentary footage), Men of Courage has an unacceptable number of inaccuracies. It's also badly edited, with scenes interrupted and tied together in strange places. Two hours last like four.

The story of USS Indianapolis appears more fascinating when you read the sources and memoirs, and it certainly deserves a better adaptation than one made by this movie's screenwriters.

Well, I don't think this movie was quite as bad as some reviewers are making it. I do agree that the direction left something to be desired. Some of the early part of the film was a little sloppy. There were short scenes that seemed to come out of nowhere, and didn't seem to have anything to do with the flow of what we were seeing. As a former military man, I was astonished to see a scene where Nicolas Cage wore a mis-matched khaki naval uniform. Never happen, folks. However, I thought the movie got a little better as it went along. I was very disappointed that race had to be inserted into this. There didn't seem to be any reason why race had to play ANY part in this story. I don't know why so many directors (& producers and writers) seem to feel the need to do this (well, I have my suspicions, but that's a story for another day). The scene of the cook spitting on an officers piece of pie was despicable, and I wondered why that was even included in this. It served absolutely no real purpose. This was, supposedly, a crack naval ship and crew, entrusted with a top secret mission, and a sailor is spitting on an officer's food? But the survival scenes were done fairly well, and it was clear the incredible suffering & tragedy these men were exposed to. I thought the movie started rather poorly, but improved as it went along. I think, perhaps, Van Peebles is lacking in experience, and bit off a bit more than he could chew, but, all in all, I thought it was a decent enough movie. Cage played a fairly stoic, controlled character, but I think that was a good choice on his part. The story was what needed attention, not some overblown character. He seemed to hit the right note as a Naval Ship Captain. The actors all did adequate jobs, and it wasn't exactly a terrible movie.