I've been binge watching Submarine movies the past week, and watched one movie which was one of my father's favorite, but I've forgotten 
what it was since I was 13 or 14 long ago.
It's called U-571, and released in 2000, way back when Hollyweird under Harvey Weinstein's Molesting 
leadership still released spectacular action thrillers, with interesting premises and plots. Our action warmovie of the day involves one Kraut U-boat which manages to get wounded by a destroyer, and while the Germans manage to survive and escape, their Diesel engines got damaged by the depth-charges, and all their mechanics/engineers got 
burned alive. While most of the crew remained alive, without engineers, the krauts were basically stranded in the middle of the Atlantic, so the captain decides to break protocol and break radio silence and phone home 
for aid and for another Supply sub to come and repair them.
The movie follows the yanks intercepting the unguarded message and inferring the sub damaged, and making a hasty Special Operation to come and capture this wounded sub, with a hastily disguised Yank sub jury-rigged to look like a kraut on at first glance, so they can come close enough to board the German sub, and capture the all important artefact of the Enigma code-encryption machine!
Very cool plot
HISTORICALLY INACCURATE:
Like many (most) of yank movies released in the 1980s-2000 period, the yanks positively did not give a frick as to whom they would offend lol, the coked up executives of Hollyweird were pretty ideologically neutral from my experience, and had one usually priority, to make money, and in their brain addled minds, no movie could succeed in Burgerland 
unless yankoids were the main protagonist heroes of the movie.
So basically the big sneed is that the Historical inaccuracy is that Yanks, according to the Bongs, completely erased the lionshare of the contribution the Bongs made to the actual real life events in which the Bongs had captured the most out of a total of 15 Enigma code-encryption machines, and more significantly the accompanied undamaged codebooks throughout the war. In fact out of the total 15 Enigma machines captured, two had been by Canadian ships, and only one by a yank ship, out of the total 15 for the duration of the war, and the yank capturing was of one of the least significant. (Doesn't even include the influence the Polacks had)
So you can see if you are neurodivergent enough to care about History, then this movie stretched the actual yank contribution to the Enigma code-breaking efforts like a slinky down the stairs. 
The hilarious part of these types of Hollyweird movies, changing events to cater to dumbass yank audiences, was that they had not intended that they were deliberate propaganda-pieces for the sake of presenting yanks as the all saviours of mankind, but that the coked-up Hollyweird executives were really just that r-slurred and were chasing what they believed was the winning formula for making the most amount of money! 
https://screenrant.com/war-movies-experts-criticized-military-mistakes/
"U-571has been criticized by war experts and even former Prime Minister Tony Blair called the film an "affront" to the British sailors who were really responsible for the seizure of the machine (via BBC). Despite this, the film earned an Academy Award nomination for Best Sound Mixing and Best Sound Editing and is still a tense and clever movie with some fantastic cinematography."
"U-571 was directed by Jonathan Mostow and told the story of a World War II German submarine boarded by American submariners to capture her Enigma cipher machine. Though U-571 doesn't represent real events, it was called out 
for its many historical and technical inaccuracies. From the latter category, military experts have pointed out that Kriegsmarine destroyers rarely ventured out into the open Atlantic Ocean (German Destroyers, by Gordon Williamson) and the website Uboat shared various inaccuracies related to U-boats, though Sub Lt. David Balme, who led the boarding party on U-110, called U-571 a "great film" (via BBC News), but added that it wouldn't have been financially viable if it hadn't been "Americanised"."
That's right Bongcucks movies are not financially viable unless Americanised! 
BONGS SNEED: 
Bongs didn't see it this way though.
https://old.reddit.com/r/history/comments/1ycmux/most_historically_inaccurate_movies/
10 years ago brit redditors still sour about it
Also even the Prime Bong would condemn the movie!
=======
https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/781858.stm
=====(from BBC article)
The hit Hollywood film U-571 has been condemned by the prime minister for its rewriting of history.
Tony Blair said that the film - a huge success in the US and number four in the UK box office chart on its opening weekend - was an "affront" to British sailors.
The film portrays the capture of the Enigma coding machine from a Nazi submarine - an event which changed the course of World War II - as an American rather than British, operation.
It was described in the Commons as an "affront" to British sailors killed in the operation. Mr Blair said that he entirely agreed.
The Culture Secretary, Chris Smith, has already said he will raise the issue in Hollywood for inaccurately glossing over the real story. He described the film as a "little galling".
Speaking during Question Time on Wednesday, a Labour MP, Brian Jenkins, said the film, was an "affront to the memories of the British sailors who lost their lives on this action".
Mr Blair responded: "I agree entirely with what you say...we hope that people realise these are people that, in many cases sacrificed their lives in order that this country remained free."
According to U-571, it was the US Navy that recovered the code machine, but the device was really captured by the crew of HMS Bulldog.
They disabled and seized German submarine U-110 to retrieve the device.
FICTIONAL:
At the end of U-571, prior to the credits, it is made clear that the movie is fictional but inspired by real events.
[The end of the movie has a week blurb about some accrediting of of acknowledging Allied sailors like the Bongs, but it still makes the events of the movie appear that Yanks did the Lionshare of the capturing of the Enigma machines and the codebeaking, when the reality was reversed]
Critics have pointed out the film-makers could have made successful movie, which would have been just as enjoyable, by creating some new incident rather than distorting history.
A group of MPs, led by Chorley's Lindsay Hoyle, has already expressed "regret" about the film in a Commons' motion.
They noted: "(That British sailors) risked their lives to board the stricken submarine, facing the danger that it might sink at any time.
"That members of the boarding party were decorated for their heroism in retrieving the encoding device and that King George VI described their actions as perhaps the most important single event in the war at sea.
"And regrets that Hollywood has chosen to distort the truth and detract from the valour of the British sailors concerned by appropriating the story for its own financial gain."
And Mr Smith has said: "I think one of the things we need to make clear to Hollywood is, yes you're in the entertainment business but people see your movies, they're going to come away thinking that's information not just entertainment.
"You've got to make it clear where the dividing lines between these things lie."
=====(END ARTICLE)
What made the Bongs especially sneed 
was that the events of the movie seems to parrallel events in the capture of U-110, a British accomplishment, which was perhaps the most significant Enigma capture out of the 15 captured during the war,
and instead of creating a fictional event of yanks capturing an Enigma machine like an alternate universe event of a yank sub, this close resemblance of the real life capture of U-110 and its associated Enigma encryption-device really bussy-blasted the Brits.
MORE SNEED OF THE TIME:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/feb/25/u-571-reel-history
"This 2000 film about a US submarine crew's attempt to steal an Enigma machine from a German U-boat was so inaccurate that it was darned by the UK parliament as an affront to the real sailors. And to make matters worse, it stars Jon Bon Jovi" 
https://www.deseret.com/2000/6/11/19512108/britons-say-u-571-distorts-history/
====(from article)
There's just one problem. As depicted in the film "U-571," the sailors speak with American accents. 
And that has aggrieved many in Britain, whose sailors really did capture an Enigma in 1941-- before the United States even entered the war. Since the film opened in London last week, the controversy has filled newspaper columns and resounded in Parliament. Even Prime Minister Tony Blair and President Clinton have been drawn into the fray.
In the House of Commons on Wednesday, Blair said he "agreed entirely" with a lawmaker who denounced the film as an "affront to the memories of the British sailors who lost their lives on this action."
"We hope that people realize these are people that in many cases sacrificed their lives in order that this country remained free," Blair said. 
In The Times newspaper, columnist Simon Jenkins decried "the deluge of historical hokum coming out of Hollywood."
The critics point to Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan," which excised the role of British and Canadian troops on D-Day. And columnists already have derided a planned U.S. remake of "The Colditz Story" that would depict American POWs escaping from the notorious German prison camp. In fact, not a single American escaped from Colditz. [Lmoa Bongs were still sneeding from Saving Private Ryan 
]
But British moviegoers may be voting with their feet: "U-571" has not matched its boffo U.S. success in Britain.
"It has had a limited impact at the box office," said Emma Cochrane, editor of the film magazine Empire.
Universal defends the film as a fictionalized account of the Allied effort to break Nazi communications.
And, in fact, Americans were involved in one seizure of an Enigma machine, near war's end in 1944. But the events depicted in "U-571" most closely resemble those of the 1941 sub capture.
Britain's culture minister, Chris Smith called the film "a little galling" -- and urged American filmmakers to take a more responsible attitude toward history. 
=====(end)
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hollywood-heroism-under-fire/
====(from CBSnews article)
But director Jonathan Mostow and writers Sam Montgomery and David Ayer deemed that American heroism was more likely to attract American audiences.
The heroic truth, the British say, has been torpedoed in the interest of profit. The rage has even surfaced in parliament.
In the House of Commons, the movie was called "an affront to the memories of the British sailors," a description that Prime Minister Tony Blair says is warranted. There was even a motion deploring the movie.
"If suddenly Iwo Jima was the British Royal Marines raising the flag after a fight with the Japanese, there would be an outcry," says Lindsay Hoyle, a member of Parliament.
But Balme is not bit bitter. 
Ironically, the controversy over a film about make-believe heroism has brought more attention to the real hero. The film honors his exploits - and he even visited the set.
=====(end)
https://spyscape.com/article/us-code-wars-inside-americas-epic-battle-with-the-enigma
=====(from spyscape)
The US Navy did capture the German submarine U-505 and two Enigma machines on June 4, 1944, though. So what's the fuss all about? SPYSCAPE took a deep dive into the drama behind the scenes.
The pivotal moment came on June 4, 1944, as Germany's U-505 sub cruised off West Africa on the prowl for American and Allied ships. U-505 was a familiar and fearful name but on this day, the dynamics shifted. The German predator found itself in the surprising role of the prey. Under fire by depth charges from destroyer escort Chatelain and two F4F 'Wildcat' aircraft, U-505 surfaced and surrendered.
It was a historic capture. It had been more than a century since any US naval force boarded and captured an enemy vessel at sea. The German crew of 58 were captured, eventually transferred to a PoW camp in Louisiana, and segregated.
THE BRITISH WAR OF WORDS:
The premiere of the movie U-571 in 2000 brought the decades-old war story into the mainstream media: 'Hollywood's Worst Historical Errors', the Daily Mail sneered. 'U-571: You give historical films a bad name,' The Guardian claimed. Even the UK Parliament darned the movie as an affront to the real sailors.
The British media gleefully pointed out the movie's errors, among them that the Allies had several Enigma machines and rotors by 1940 and that HMS Bulldog captured the first naval Enigma decoder from U-110 in the North Atlantic in 1941.
Enigma was deciphered seven months before the US even entered WWII. The 'Yanks', Britain sniffed, seemed to base the movie's 'true story' on Britain's 1941 Operation Primrose involving HMS Bulldog and the triumph of recovering the codebooks. 
====(END)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Have you watched the German cinematic expirience that is Das Boot?
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082096/
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I didn't like it, and it weirdly has it's own inaccuracies
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You have been debunked.
Anyhow. I haven't watched ithe film yet, my friend recommended it and I liked the music. I may finally commit to it this weekend.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
My issue lies with the depiction of depth-charges. My understanding was that one lucky basic barrel depth-charge could completely break the metal spine of a U-boat if close enough, less than 50 meters, as the implosion negative forces cause catastrophic stress upon the metal bulks of the subs.
While it was true that most U-boat subs didn't actually explode from one singular depth-charges, but from the strain of multiple ones, the actual depictions of the movie seemed so fricking Hollywood to me that it took me out of the experience. Again lucky shots from 30m from the center of the hull was devastating for the luckless crew, but there are in the extended 3.5 hours version of the movie, not one, not two, not three, NOT FOUR, NOT FIVE, BUT FRICKING 6 depth-charge BARRAGEs SCNENEs, it took me out of the experience.
Like it seemed like the kraut filmmakers wanted to make the movie more intense with all the sailor actors screaming in panic and jostling about with fakeness, like the 1960S Star Trek episodes where clearly Kirk and Spock and crew jostled themselves about, and the camera man was just shaking the camera, and this was to heighten the emotion, instead of the real world portrayal of long periods of boredom and sudden shocks of panic when submariners were under dire threat of Destroyer ships.
I actually went on a research spree just to check how deadly exactly the depth-charges were in WW2 in the Atlantic, because i wanted to check.
https://www.britannica.com/technology/depth-charge
"They consisted of a canister filled with explosives that was rolled or dropped off the stern of a ship in the presumed vicinity of the submerged submarine. The canister would sink through the water, and its explosive charge would be detonated at a preselected depth by means of a hydrostatic valve. The depth charge rarely exploded close enough to sink the submarine, but its shock waves loosened the submarine's joints and damaged its instruments, thus forcing it to the surface, where it could be finished off by naval gunfire. An attacking ship would try to drop a pattern of depth charges around a submarine to increase the chances of one exploding near enough to damage the sub."
So in this sense the actual portrayal of Destroyers whittling down Subs instead of just the lucky one-shot bangs (which did happen on occasion however), was realistic for the movie.
https://www.quora.com/How-effective-were-depth-charges-in-WW2
There were also reports of one Kraut sub surviving as many as SIX UNDRED CONSECUTIVE charges and still limping back home.
The issue I have is that in the film, the actual charges as depicted as exploding from as little as 10 meters away from the sub, and doings so consecutively for I think about 50 fricking snap shots. While charges would be less deadly the deeper the sub went, because the increased pressure meant that less water was displaced for an implosion force after, they were still catastrophic when so close. Additonally, many submariners would overinflate their survival and the amount of depth charges they survived, and how close these things would actually explode (even if they could actually realistically discern how close these frickers were going off underwater during high stress) to make themselves more heroic onshore
Also no other nation had as many sub-to-destroyer survivors and testaments to the actual combat in WW2, the Japs which yanks sunk all pretty much died. And post-WW2 it is now famous amongst actual historians that Yanks basically gobbled up all of the testaments of Kraut veterans uncritically because they wanted experience in how to counter the soviets, so the krauts would write a lot of BS to cover their poor performances in the WW2, and many public figures just took their word for it. This included Nazi High commanders, to tank aces to submariners. Back in 1981 when this film released would still have been at the height of people, including yanks just fricking swallowing Nazi/kraut propaganda/tall-tales fully.
Additionally, an afrikaans paper I read criticizing the movie stated that even the Kraut submariners giving critical acclaim to the movie when it was released back in 1981, was maybe not 100% correct or fully in mind ,because they would have been overehusiastic to have a film depict their warefforts with such glory, and may have had their traumatizing memories overinflate the circumstances of their bombing by depth-charges, not because they were deliberately lying but because they've had 30 years to have their dark thoughts cook with the trauma.
Most depth-charges were actually wildly ineffective, not because the depth-charges were not deadly, but because the ocean is immense. Most subs killed were counter-torpedoed or blown to bits by destroyer main guns, when they surfaced due to damage and didn't surrender.
Movies like Greyhound made blowing up subs seem easy, but it was like trying to shoot a bird out of the sky with a slingshot.
https://www.quora.com/How-effective-were-depth-charges-in-WW2
Even late-war advanced depth-charge weapons which used multi-bomb sprinkling scatter cluster munitions, instead of the dumbfire barrels, like this thing below had trouble landing hits
My issue it shows the depth-chargers to be fricking point blank, and to be point blank for SIX SCENES, multiple fricking times. Realistically by SA submarines writing in afrikaans papers even just one such a run would have damaged an equivalent U-boat enough to the surface, if not utterly break her fricking metal spine.
Also it has other weird needless inaccuracies, apparently the krauts never ever resupplied in Spain (whom were careful to be neutral in the war surrounded by Bong ships), and only ever did so in France - why on earth this easily rectified detail remains in the movie as it never enhances the movie or detracts from it is weird, and showcases that the movie as a whole is just as prone to historic errors as its Yank counterparts.
The movie also exaserbates the conflict between the Old Guard, the submariners whom were only doing their duty, and all hated Hitler apparently, and the new Hitler Youth replacements, whom were mocked by the old gaurd, and is a sort of borderline "Clean Wehrmacht" type apologist mythos. To make the german audience pine after and root for the submariners whom were only doing their duty, and thus is palatable to have as heroes 30 years after the war,
when in reality most submariners were indifferent or loyal to the regime to the same degree as the rest of the WW2 kraut armed forces, which was very much so up until the end of the war!
What the movie does well is depict average life aboard subs every well, the long periods of boredom, followed by excitement in combat and the dread when subs were being hunted by allied Destroyers. It showcased actual behaviours and tactics very well and accurately - like submariners quite literally running to the front of the sub during a general "Alarm" call (an emergency call the sub to sink beneath the surface to avoid being bombed by allied planes or ships) in order to make the front heavy
It also depicted the general leakiness if pipes and how the whole thing was kept afloat by constant massive effort by mechanics, and how the submariners would spend large amount of times on the surface with actual binoculars to check for enemies and find their bearings, and how subs would actually surface for torpedo actions and not spend all of their time underwater. Additionally the submarines would get frequently wet from these excursions.
I liked some parts of the movie like the last ending 10 minutes, when the sub of the movie, gloriously and heroicly returns home, only for all the high command to be killed by Bong airstrike, increasing the horror of war.
But in general the movie REALLY REALLY shows its age. It's way too long, and adds nothing by its extreme length (i should know), it is the single most overpraised war movie which i had personally seen, and while it may have earned its reputation for its time as a trailblazer in 1980, movies have come a long way, and equivalent good movies have massively surpassed it. It's not even that I personally dislike old movies.
I have a high opinion of old Movies like Kelly's heroes and All Quiet on the Western Front (1979) which came from the same era, and have aged much more gracefully like fine wine - this movie has not, and only american-movie hating contrarian r-slurs who dont watch many movies from this era can tell me in a straight face that this is THE best submarine movie ever made and since, it is not
!historychads discuss if I'm full of shit
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
True, the best submarine moving pictures experience is episode 1 from season 4 of Stargate SG1 "Small Victories", where Replicators take over a Russian submarine.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
NO TEAL'C Marsey!?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This site is dead to me.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I CAN FIX U, RUN
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
You cant have the funko pop when its inside someone! You're stealing funko pop rights!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
i didnt like that they were all somehow anti-hitler except for 1 (one) guy lol
west german revisionist nonsense
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Reminder the Kriegsmarine was highly politicized as every other Wehrmacht branch
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
The characters are more morally ambivalent in the book. The captain nearly torpedoes a 1000+ person neutral civilian ocean liner. He then confesses that had the torpedo hit the ship, he would have slaughtered every single survivor to protect Germany's image.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
You should
watch 
Yellow 
Submarine instead. The effect sequences are much more realistic.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
My goodness, you wrote the equivalent of an entire effortpost on submarine warfare inaccuracies divided in several sections to answer one question
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
my autism got activated after i felt i had been bamboozled by so man people telling me this was the GREATEST of historic movies, i immediately got triggered, I wonder how many people actually watch this, and dont just regurgitate the film's excellence out of historic film yuppy pressure
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I watched it only once, same with U 571, both were boring with a few good scenes (U 571 is mediocre war slop, at least Das Boot was innovative in terms of filmmaking at the time). Honestly I don't find war movies appealing unless they have a more political angle (Der Untergang or Lawrence of Arabia) but let's be honest, most of them are very mid.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
ye i agree
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
!effortposters
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
What submarine kino would you reccomend?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Is this just a case of them needing to make everything really close together so it will fit on camera? Like how in movies you can have mortar shells exploding 5m from a guy and he's totally fine. Because to make it realistic you would have to zoom way out.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Ignore everyone. It's fricking amazing. I watched the 3.5 hour version last week and cumd my pant. The interior of a U-boat is a great setting. It's so claustrophobic. One turlet for 50 men. Watching all the crazy 1940s steampunk engineering at work is wonderful. Granted, I was pretty amped up on U-boats because I've been reading this book Shadow Divers about deep wreck divers who found an unidentified U-boat, so it helps if you can truly appreciate how fricking sweet U-boats were and how harrowing it was to serve in one during the sour pickle era.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
same, massively overrated imo
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The single most overpraised Warmovie I have watched in my lifespan, it has aged very badly
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ive watched it so many times. The extended TV version is best
Most intense and realistic feeling submarine movie ever
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'd say the movie version is better, the 3.5 hours version adds nothing, and the actually cinema released version cuts much of the fat
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This scene was in the cut down 1981 (149 minutes) version??
Not the 3,5 hours version ???
U are proving my poiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiint
WHAT ARE YOU SAYING
@nuclearshill
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It was partially cut. In the theatrical version it stops at
"Alles Klar"
"Jahwohl Herr Kaleun" while in the long version he introduces Werner and says he even brings a camera with him
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I just wanted it to never end
Something about very technical, grimey, atmospheric movies full of angry tough males on an important mission is my thing
I also love The Abyss and The Thing for the same reason
The 80s did that genre the best
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Hey I'm not trying to take away from your enjoyment, I absolutely believe you when you say you had a fantastic time.
I just thought the film had aged since then and that peeps who overpraise it have been blinded by nostalgia and have lost much grip with how film making has improved over the past
Which is why I personally was disappointed ☹️ but still recognize the exceptional nature of the film 🎥
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
You truly are a weirdo.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
who ME?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
ALAAAARRRRRMMMM!!!!!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Das boot? Ooh Ja
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context