Opiniones de usuarios

This is a made for TV dramatization of a true event in history, specifically the story of the Confederate efforts to develop a submersible boat during the civil war. The story opens in Charleston S.C. during the seize and naval blockade of that city by Federal forces. The Confederates were attempting to develop a submarine with a torpedo to be used as a weapon to break the blockade. This is the story of the successes and failures of that effort and follows the efforts of the crew in the development of the submarine (made from a converted boiler) and its ultimate deployment into battle.

The story is a fascinating piece of history; an event that clearly changed the course of naval warfare. Director John Gray did a good job in his portrayal of civil war Charleston during the seize, with citizens attempting to cope and go about the business of day to day living despite the daily bombardment. The scenes inside the boat were particularly well done, giving the viewer a good sense of the claustrophobic quarters in which they had to operate.

Unfortunately, the selection of Armand Assante for the lead character, Lt. Dixon was a mistake. Assante, the consummate tough guy, can be a powerful actor when placed in a suitable role for his skills like ‘Gotti'. But he does not have much range outside that type. In this film he was brittle in his portrayal, playing this role in typical tough guy fashion when the character required more subtlety and complexity. Also, his attempt at a southern accent was abysmal. No matter how he tried, he always sounded like a New York gangster.

Donald Sutherland was good as General Beauregard, but it was a minor role. The bright spot among the cast was Sebastian Roche who played Collins, the tempestuous Irishman. His cockiness and false bravado belied a vulnerable and frightened soul and he played it perfectly. His portrayal of panic during an oxygen deprivation drill was riveting.

I gave this film an 8, despite the miscasting of Assante. It was an entertaining drama with plenty of meat to keep most viewers interested and engaged.

Like "Gettysburg", "The Hunley" , is largely factual, shows incredible bravery, and has it's touching moments. The engineering feat alone is totally amazing for 1864. Even when the North gets word of the Hunley, their defense of nets and chains is overcome by a brilliant adjustment to the method of delivering the Hunley's torpedo. Much like Jeff Daniels wonderful performance in "Gettysburg", Armand Assante is terrific as the submarine project leader. Donald Sutherland is good, but more in the shadows, as General Beauregard. This movie is not easy to watch without generating emotions driven by the crew's bravery. Highly, highly recommended. - MERK

I saw the Premiere of this movie last weekend, and it is a very INTENSE movie, it is a historically accurate movie, and well worth watching. Armand Assante was made for this part it seems. He portrayed Lt. George Dixon, who was the last "ship's captain", and he did the part very well. In my opinion, everyone should see this one!!

The American Civil War is one of those times that history buffs love to revel in because of how tragic the war was. There have been so many personal stories revealed over decades about various people on both sides who fought the odds to prove themselves to others. Even in bigger events, there were people who had stories like this. Ronald F. Maxwell's Gettysburg (1993) and Gods and Generals (2003) were just a couple from a cluster of films made to shed light on these individuals. By far the most ingenious invention ever made during this period was the Hunley submarine used shortly by the confederates in 1864. Not long after, the Civil War would end in 1865. What's surprising is that not only was the Hunley the first of its kind to be a fully functioning combat sub, but it also vanished quickly after it was brought into the world. Discovered at the bottom of the ocean in 1995, it was then salvaged in 2000. In 1999, this TV Movie was made to try and explain what might have happened the last time it was used.

Written and directed by John Gray (White Irish Drinkers (2010)), the story follows Lieutenant George Dixon (Armand Assante), a real life officer who volunteered to be the leader of the Hunley sub experiment. After a couple failed launches, Dixon tries one last time and recruit a team that'll make the mission a success. Soon he finds Simkins (Chris Bauer), Collins (Sebastian Roché), Wicks (Michael Stuhlbarg), Miller (Jeff Mandon), Becker (Michael Dolan), White (Frank Vogt) and his second in command Lt. Alexander (Alex Jennings). After being given the "go-ahead" by General Beauregard (Donald Sutherland), Dixon begins his preparation with his crew to use the Hunley. The script was also co-written John Fasano, the same writer to some bad to decent films like Universal Soldier: The Return (1999), Sniper: Reloaded (2011) and Sniper: Legacy (2014). For a story based mostly on fact, it's a decent watch. The problem is that it is predictable in a war drama sort of way. It's rather obvious as to how it'll play out.

This can be troublesome for viewers because this does not permit the experience to be very suspenseful. It's unfortunate that that is how the story structure comes across. John Gray seems like a competent director but the execution follows a structure very close to other heroes who were believed to be a lost cause. However this particular issue does not take away the quality of the main leads. Both Armand Assante and Donald Sutherland emote correctly for the scenes required. They are also given backstories that allow the viewer to understand why they are who they are. Before Lt. Dixon went off on the Hunley mission, he was a regular infantryman and was narrowly saved by a gunshot that struck a coin given to him by his wife (Caprice Benedetti) before leaving. As time goes on, Dixon also realizes that he and General Beauregard share the same interests. The supporting cast is what suffers the most in development though. Although their actual histories were unclear, this gave the liberty to play with that.

Chris Bauer as Simkins is the brawn and misses his wife. Sebastian Roché as Collins is frequently combative with others. Alex Jennings as Lt. Alexander gets seasick easy but will loyally follow his first in command. Aside from those three, everyone else has brief backgrounds given just to give them one character trait. One can catch fish with his hands and another speaks French. Not exactly the most important of attributes. Even the individuals focused on more like Simkins, Collins and Alexander aren't that greatly developed. Visual aspects to the film were largely credible though. For 1999, there are some bits that contain CGI, but they're not extensive enough to carry a full act in the film. That goes for things like quick cuts to the Hunley submarine underwater or a few explosions. The rest of what was put on screen were mainly practical sets and props. Clips that had city structures and interior shots of the Hunley were impressive to look at. The team behind making that prop made an accurate representation of it.

The camera-work handled by John Thomas was relatively good. Although the film was made for TV and did not have a wide lens, the shots were nice to look at. Exterior scenes that contained the city sets look voluminous and the inside of the Hunley certainly looked cramped and uncomfortable for anyone to enjoy. Each shot gave what was needed in order to convey the correct setting to the audience that was watching. John Thomas would later shoot for big name movies like Sex and the City (2007) and Sex in the City 2 (2010). Randy Edelman composed the film score for sound. Being that Edelman had produced the widely underrated music to Gettysburg (1993), it's only appropriate that he scored this film as well. Since the story is not on large a scale, the music is not as grand in sound. The tracks contain more solo pieces from either trumpet or snare drums. Both contribute equally though and bring the right feeling for each scene especially dealing with Dixon. All in all it's a good watch but not as unique as one would think.

Structurally the execution is not anything special, the supporting characters are not well developed and a lot the suspense is removed since it is known what happened to the civil war sub. However the actors are believable, the visuals, cinematography and music all help bring it to a level that is doable for a civil war film.

As the first ever combat submarine at modern era CSS Hunley was conceived by Horace Lawson Hunley due the Confederates were sieged by Union in all coast hindering any trade with foreign countries strangling the southern economy, upon the scenario at civil war it was designed to sink the Union's vessels around at southern coast, it was the third and last version of submarines build, sadly the previous ones sank before action killing the own creator Hunley, this picture is fair accurate by the way focusing in the successful and final attempt aiming for turn the tides of a war already lost.

As expected the producers didn't touch in technical issues regarding the improvements in the still rustic underwater machine, instead just in historical events at Charleston between Lt. George Dixon (Armand Assante) and the womanizer Gen. Beauregard (Donald Sutherland) and all crew members involved in the task on tiny submarine, aside Hunley didn't change the fate of war, the successful Hunley was a paragon for upcoming generations of those silent underwater machine, in 1995 the Americans pinpointed its final location at Charleston's bay and at 2000 bring the Hunley back with all mortal remains of brave southern soldiers at last, fine portrait of a key chapter at fateful war between brothers.

Thanks for reading.

Resume:

First watch: 1999 / How many: 2 / Source: Cable TV-DVD / Rating: 7.

I have been a student of the Civil War for a great while and this movie moved me deeply. Although artistic license was no doubt taken with the personalities of the individual characters this movie is historically accurate. It was a very powerful production which should be shown in history classes in which the Civil War will be studied. Although the story of the C.S.S. Hunley is a small chapter in the Civil War it is a story which clearly shows the bravery and determination of the confederate soldier. Though I do take exception to the confederate cause I admire the men who died in the Hunley greatly.

Plain bad movie. I am sorry. I am a huge Civil War buff and watch every single film dedicated to this exciting topic. And the idea of making a movie about The Hunley torpedo boat in besieged Charleston seemed to be very very cool. Well, not with this film director, not with Armand Assante or even usually great (but here painfully weak) Donald Sutherland, not with such a meager budget, not with such cheese dialog, not with utterly predictable plot or very cliché'd events. From the very beginning we know the end and music helps to see it better. Well, war is all hell, we know, but here war is a boring, teeth-pulling affair of unbearable slowness. The film flopped on all levels and I am sorry, even 90 minutes were too long and too much for such a weak script. The video effects were at least amateurish, and very naive at large. The team tried but the film failed. And the very final is, well, outright sentimental namby-pamby. Do not watch it, not much to lose here

The subject matter was a fascinating surprise, but a bigger surprise was how emotionally involved and moved I was watching this picture. It is an exciting, thrill a minute, rousing and deeply moving experience. The performances are exceptional and the story is a remarkable tale of courage and sacrifice. The action scenes (which are many) kept me on the edge of my seat, I don't think I've ever seen a production this spectacular on television before. This is a big screen epic for the small screen. Congratulations to TNT for bringing this less known but very important part of history to television

Have you ever channel surfed when theres nothing in particuliar you want to watch,and you stop on a channel where theres a film starting.You dont bother to check the T.V guide,but you look at the synopsis,find it mildly interesting so you give it a try,and then after 15 minutes of viewing you become so engrossed that you forget that you were bored only a short time ago and you are now enjoying a film youve never even heard of before.This is such a film.I came across it one cold Sunday afternoon on cable,it drew me in immediately,quite a surprise for me as i normally avoid made for T.V movies,but sometimes you come across a product that has an interesting and unique story,a few old but well respected actors(Amand Assante and Donald Sutherland)and most surprising of all for a T.V movie,a lavish expensive looking feel and fantastic effects.The story,which is based on a true event,is set during the American civil war and centres on the confederate armies attempt to take the town of Charleston.The rebels fight back with a new invention,the first attempt at making a submarine that if successful would dive below an enemy ship with a torpedo in tow and sink the ship.The scenes involving the crew of seven men cramped inside the tiny banged together prototype sub are genuinely claustrophobic,and you can almost feel the tension and confinement they undoubtedly suffer.The crew themselves are a collection of intrigueing personalities that you will warm too whilst watching the film,and it is that coupled with the fact that this a true story which make the ending that much more harrowing.A true gem of a film.

If you're an American Civil War buff (or not) you should see this film. The sets, uniforms etc are superb for a TV movie - better than some huge budget films - how did they do it! The submarine appears to an actual working metal sub - it probably isn't but that's the power of good set design. The drama is also enthralling, some very disturbing scenes you won't forget for a while - this was a brutal war and nothing is papered over to protect the viewer. The acting is what stands out though, Armand Assante is a revelation as the haunted Confederate Officer going through the motions of the war, hardly focusing on what he's fighting for anymore. Donald Sutherland adds weight of course, but the lesser known actors are the real surprise. At times you actually think you're there in 1864, it grips you and keeps you there until the end. My only criticism - where Oh where is the DVD!!?

Really, one of the best movies EVER made for television. It's on my top ten favorites. Possibly my all time favorite. There were just so many drawing points. Performances are powerful. Sets are intriguing. The story is unique, and the direction sucks you into the movie.

It's a tragedy and a triumph. I don't think you'll be disappointed.

With that "Made for TV" stigma, I had low expectations for this flick. Instead, I thought it was extremely good, and had the feeling of an accurate historical representation. However, the Irishman's reference to the Englishman as "you Tea Bag" is wrong... Thomas Sullivan of N.Y. developed the concept of tea in a bag in 1908. Small matter.

Even the initial moments of this movie had me in awe. What a way to start. The cinematography was awesome, and practically indescribable. The sheer hopelessness of being trapped in such a confine was beautifully captured, and therefore, this movie is definitely worth a watch.

This is a great movie. I rented it on video and was amazed how well this made for television movie was executed. Donald Sutherland played his part very well, but the directors/writers did not have to rely on him to carry it. This movie is a must see for any history buffs or lovers of submarine flicks. A very good movie.

This is a wonderful film about the Hunley. The producers and directors make the movie come so alive. I had never even knew about the sub before this film and it made me feel like I was really there during the US Civil War. It was a great historical film and would recommend it to anyone.

The Hunley is a type of entertainment that we unfortunately don't have anymore. Ambitious made for TV movies that dramatize historical events and the people involved. Did they all succeed? Of course not. Even in their heyday most were mediocre at best. But the fact that they were made in the first place is reason enough to respect their attempt.

Having not seen The Hunley since it premiered on the TNT network in 1999, I was revisited it with a blank slate. I'll be honest, my expectations were not very high. But The Hunley surprised me and I love when films do that to me. This is a solid and entertaining historical drama. It's also one that carries very real levels of historical and educational value.

The story of the HL Hunley is a smaller and lesser known chapter of the American Civil War. Made for television movies often had to deal with monetary and time restraints. This was before the time streaming services and channels like HBO were willing to drop serious cash on their own original programming.

The Hunley isn't a masterpiece and its limitations are often apparent. But this actually makes me admire it all the more. The filmmakers involved are clearly trying hard to do justice to the story. To make the best movie as was possible.

The Hunley's direction is quite good. Some of its CGI is less than great but par for the course at the time. The characters are kind of interesting but Armand Asante's character gets most of the attention. I thought he was fine in the role and brings a humanity to the role that I found convincing. The historical authenticity is over all pretty good but it gets shaky at times. It's depiction of Charleston South Carolina circa 1864 looks quite good.

The Hunley works best during the underwater scenes. The claustrophobia and fear of the men operating that death trap is palpable.

Any student of the Civil War knows the story of the HL Hunley and won't be surprised by the ending. Nobody knows exactly what the last moments were like for the crew of the Hunley. This film takes a stab at it. The scene in which we part company with our characters was, in my opinion, a real gamble for the filmmakers. If read on paper it would seem mawkish and corny. The scene could have very easily been bungled. But it isn't, they were able to pull it off. In fact there's some real emotional heft to the scene and I found myself genuinely touched by it. That's no mean feat either.

So I say kudos to the makers of The Hunley. They did the very best job they could with the tools available. The results are truly admirable.

I am not a real history buff, but was very excited about this movie. It has a great line of performers, and the cinematography was wonderful. They always say that movies based on fact are the best...with this one they were definitely right! Enjoy.

The C.S.S. Hunley sank the U.S.S. Housatonic in February 1864, the first American submarine to sink an enemy ship. In August of 2000, I saw it return to Charleston Harbor, after it rested 136 years on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean. The TNT movie Hunley is a riveting, moving, largely true account of the sinking of the blockading ship, and of the training and trials of the crew of the Hunley. Sutherland is at his best, in a role like that in another made-for-cable film, the great, and also underrated, Citizen X. Armand Assante is magnificent. Watch for him to break that glass in his hand, and watch for him to drop under the bathwater, thinking of his wife who perished in a boat accident. This is one film I have seen many times, and one film I will see many times again. The scene of the bombardment of innocent civilians at the music recital, and the stirring recovery of the crowd's morale by Lt. Dixon (Armand Assante) as he, unable to sing himself, provokes the first violinist to start "Bonnie Blue Flag," will stir the blood of any true patriot, or at least any true Southerner. Check www.Hunley.org for news on the excavation of the Hunley-- last week they found Corporal Carlson's shell jacket buttons; next week they may find Lieutenant Dixon's $20 gold piece.

I remember being quite young when The Hunley first premiered on the now defunct TNT channel. It's a story about the Civil War where an increasingly desperate Confederacy was groping in the dark for a miracle. The HL Hunley was intended to break the mighty Union's blockade of Southern ports. The only problem was that The Hunley was a primitive early submarine , the first of its kind. It was also more dangerous to the men operating it than to the enemy. Who would get into such a machine? That's what this film is about.

I vaguely remember being somewhat lukewarm toward The Hunley. Even back then I was a history geek and would snap up anything that involved The Civil War. Maybe I thought it was too light on action and battle scenes. I couldn't honestly say. But after recently revisiting The Hunley, I found myself really enjoying it. I admired its ambition and how much it managed to accomplish with an obviously tight budget. Dropping tens of millions of dollars on a tv show isn't a wild concept today. But back then it would seem insane. Films like The Hunley had very modest budgets and their success or failure would usually depend on the fundamentals. Good writing, smart casting, and the talent of the filmmakers.

The Hunley is, even by today's expectations, much better than it seemingly has any right to be. The cast is solid and ably led by the great Armand Assante. The writing is good enough, although it isn't without weakness. The special effects aren't what some might consider "special," but in the 90s they would were competent.

The Hunley is admirable filmmaking. It sheds light on a small chapter in American history that deserves attention. In that respect it carries legitimate cultural and historical significance. It also really feels like the people making it were doing their best with what they had. Most notably a scene at the end of the film that depicts the ultimate fate of the Hunley's crew. The filmmakers made some ballsy choices in their handling of that scene. It could have so easily been an eye rolling schmaltz fest. But to their credit, they actually managed to pull it off. I was sincerely touched by it.

The old tried but true dangerous mission scenario that requires volunteers and initially gets no takers. Then after a misfit crew is assembled to man the Confederate States Submarine "Hunley" they get into scuffs with one another as they size each other up before they as a group are insulted which results in uniting them. They eventually go on their mission and pay the ultimate price. Sound familiar i.e. The Dirty Dozen, The Devils Brigade to name a couple. Armand Assante puts in a good performance as The Hunleys skipper. Donald Sutherland on the other hand seems uninterested in his role as General Beauregard.

The young good old boy who keeps showing up to join and demonstrates his swimming ability by belly flopping and swimming madly seemed to serve no purpose in the story other than to be a sort of Jethro Bodine wannabe. The redeeming factor in this film is that it does tell a story that many people probably had no knowledge of. TNT will probably make another film about the very first submarine "The Turtle" before long.

Armand Assante delivers big time, as the Confederates' Lt. Dixon of the C.S.S. Hunley. In reality, Lt. Dixon was much younger than the actor playing him. However, the weathered look and demeanor of Assante makes him a believable leader, much like Laurence Harvey's portrayal of Col. William B. Travis in John Wayne's epic, "The Alamo."

Donald Sutherland's performance should also be commended. General Beauregard, as portrayed by Sutherland was well done. More importantly, it occurs to this author that Sutherland has the penchant for going out on a limb and playing complex figures in history and myth.

While the film details many historical accuracies, it is safe to say that the depictions of the crew are fiction. The good news is that they are nicely done. Character development, which seems to be in scarce supply these days is fulfilled in, "The Hunley." To the man, I couldn't think of a single character, that I either disliked, or felt wasn't properly placed in the film. In fact, they were so different, with their own peculiarities, that I felt a kinship to each of them. I guess my favorite was the happily married man who was, according to Dixon, "dumb as a post," but "loyal." Honest men indeed.

The special effects are somewhat disappointing. First, it is clear that some of the action shots are less than cutting edge. This was obviously due to budgetary constraints. The good news is that the overly done Hollywood type explosions are happily missing. It is tiring to see 1990's style pyrotechnics in the middle of the 19th century. If you doubt me, go see, "Zorro '98." Big budgets do not equal great effects.

Finally, I thought it was original of the film makers in the awakening sequence which occurs at the end of the movie. This could have really gone south, if not done right. It is a moving experience for the viewer.

All in all, a fine movie. I will have it in my library.