AMURSUS
Joined Apr 2006
Welcome to the new profile
We're making some updates, and some features will be temporarily unavailable while we enhance your experience. The previous version will not be accessible after 7/14. Stay tuned for the upcoming relaunch.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews13
AMURSUS's rating
The title pretty much describes it.
Pure self-complimenting feel-good Hollywood propaganda. It is precisely because of junk propaganda movies (and books) like this that the United States ended up losing its military advantage. Why bother learning anything or striving to do something new if we are this good by default?
Laughable story, unrealistic "silent" Soviet submarine, capable of outmanoeuvring hostile Soviet (not US!) submarines, weak Soviet Navy that couldn't even control its own fleet, Soviet officials incapable of locating their submarines and asking Americans for help to do that, the "devoted" Soviet captain stupidly blowing up his own submarine and crew and the traitor trying to defect outmanoeuvring everyone, even torpedoes. You've got the picture, it's pretty much over 2 hours of that drivel. Oh yes, not to forget - singing the national anthem in a submarine? Really? Has anyone been in a real submarine (or even a military ship, for that matter)?
Quite a few A-list actors (hence 2 stars, not 1), but practically all were miscast and could not have saved this dud.
As another reviewer noted, if you want to see a real submarine movie that makes you understand what would a person really feel in a submarine during a military operation, go watch Das Boot. After that, just forget every other water-muddying "submarine" movie.
Pure self-complimenting feel-good Hollywood propaganda. It is precisely because of junk propaganda movies (and books) like this that the United States ended up losing its military advantage. Why bother learning anything or striving to do something new if we are this good by default?
Laughable story, unrealistic "silent" Soviet submarine, capable of outmanoeuvring hostile Soviet (not US!) submarines, weak Soviet Navy that couldn't even control its own fleet, Soviet officials incapable of locating their submarines and asking Americans for help to do that, the "devoted" Soviet captain stupidly blowing up his own submarine and crew and the traitor trying to defect outmanoeuvring everyone, even torpedoes. You've got the picture, it's pretty much over 2 hours of that drivel. Oh yes, not to forget - singing the national anthem in a submarine? Really? Has anyone been in a real submarine (or even a military ship, for that matter)?
Quite a few A-list actors (hence 2 stars, not 1), but practically all were miscast and could not have saved this dud.
As another reviewer noted, if you want to see a real submarine movie that makes you understand what would a person really feel in a submarine during a military operation, go watch Das Boot. After that, just forget every other water-muddying "submarine" movie.
A strange film, where lots of extremes coexist. On the one hand, brilliant performances by Ralph Fiennes and - albeit in a much smaller role - Claudio Santamaria. A very good performance by Juliette Binoche, too - even though a full notch-and-a-half below those two, most probably just because of the specifics of the role.
On the other hand, the rest of the cast - with very minor exceptions - looks alike, acts alike, is dressed alike and speaks alike with some strange accents. It feels like they could be easily mixed and matched and no one would really notice. The only small exception is Telemachus - just because he is blond. Otherwise, he fully (and rightly) belongs to the same indistinguishable from each other mix-and-match crowd.
Going back to the two main characters. Yes, their performances are good (at times great), but to me, Fiennes' performance was reminiscent of Al Pacino in The Godfather. In the latter, Pacino walks, looks, sighs, sits and pretends to think and that has been peddled to a few generations of movie watchers as something extremely deep. I am not comparing Fiennes to Pacino - Fiennes is much more nuanced and multidimensional (to me, Pacino has had only one exceptional role and performance - in The Scarface), but here Fiennes does exactly the same and that again is supposed to symbolize deep thought and philosophical attitude toward everything that is happening. What happened with rationally expressing some deep thoughts in words for the beginners, instead of just putting a strained expression on the face and pretending to be thinking?
Binoche is a great actress who has consistently looked very good throughout her entire career (starting with the role of Nina in Rendez-vous at the age of 21 in 1985 - when I first saw her - to now, after turning 60 last year) and has a good history of working together with Fiennes. I think she mostly accomplished whatever she needed to do as her role of Penelope was not supposed to be that deep in the first place. Viewing it from that perspective, she has probably achieved more with her performance in this movie than anyone else.
A note on the South Park reference in the title. I am not sure whose brilliant idea it was to insert in the script that by trying the bow Telemachus "wanted to screw his mother" (I am trying to remain within acceptable boundaries), but, while I do not have any problems with such language or comments if they are indeed appropriate, I would not think the adjective "appropriate" and the sentence above could even remotely be a subject of discussion in relation to a Greek classic.
Manners, anyone?
On the other hand, the rest of the cast - with very minor exceptions - looks alike, acts alike, is dressed alike and speaks alike with some strange accents. It feels like they could be easily mixed and matched and no one would really notice. The only small exception is Telemachus - just because he is blond. Otherwise, he fully (and rightly) belongs to the same indistinguishable from each other mix-and-match crowd.
Going back to the two main characters. Yes, their performances are good (at times great), but to me, Fiennes' performance was reminiscent of Al Pacino in The Godfather. In the latter, Pacino walks, looks, sighs, sits and pretends to think and that has been peddled to a few generations of movie watchers as something extremely deep. I am not comparing Fiennes to Pacino - Fiennes is much more nuanced and multidimensional (to me, Pacino has had only one exceptional role and performance - in The Scarface), but here Fiennes does exactly the same and that again is supposed to symbolize deep thought and philosophical attitude toward everything that is happening. What happened with rationally expressing some deep thoughts in words for the beginners, instead of just putting a strained expression on the face and pretending to be thinking?
Binoche is a great actress who has consistently looked very good throughout her entire career (starting with the role of Nina in Rendez-vous at the age of 21 in 1985 - when I first saw her - to now, after turning 60 last year) and has a good history of working together with Fiennes. I think she mostly accomplished whatever she needed to do as her role of Penelope was not supposed to be that deep in the first place. Viewing it from that perspective, she has probably achieved more with her performance in this movie than anyone else.
A note on the South Park reference in the title. I am not sure whose brilliant idea it was to insert in the script that by trying the bow Telemachus "wanted to screw his mother" (I am trying to remain within acceptable boundaries), but, while I do not have any problems with such language or comments if they are indeed appropriate, I would not think the adjective "appropriate" and the sentence above could even remotely be a subject of discussion in relation to a Greek classic.
Manners, anyone?
Saw this movie before the 2020 pandemic and - even though I really liked it - was not planning to review it, as it is a very deep and nuanced piece of art and to do it justice, one would need to write quite a bit to at least begin to convey the impressions, feelings and memories this movie makes permanently stick with you.
However, saw in the news that Émilie Dequenne passed away yesterday, at the age of 43, and was compelled to leave this review. Her performance in Une vie après (as practically in every single movie I have seen her) is nothing short of breathtaking. She doesn't play the role of Marion, she simply lives it and does it brilliantly! Amazingly, it all comes very naturally, without any visible effort on her part. A fantastic performance and a fantastic actress. What a loss!
Returning to the movie, I am not going to belabor the point and will just say that the last scene, with Dequenne's Marion on the bus, is, probably, one of the best and powerful ending scenes I have seen in any movie. In the past 5 years or so I have recalled it countless times.
However, saw in the news that Émilie Dequenne passed away yesterday, at the age of 43, and was compelled to leave this review. Her performance in Une vie après (as practically in every single movie I have seen her) is nothing short of breathtaking. She doesn't play the role of Marion, she simply lives it and does it brilliantly! Amazingly, it all comes very naturally, without any visible effort on her part. A fantastic performance and a fantastic actress. What a loss!
Returning to the movie, I am not going to belabor the point and will just say that the last scene, with Dequenne's Marion on the bus, is, probably, one of the best and powerful ending scenes I have seen in any movie. In the past 5 years or so I have recalled it countless times.