K-19: The Widowmaker
|
List Price: Our Price: $2.79 You Save: $6.20 (69%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.01 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Canada
Movie Reviews of K-19: The Widowmaker
Movie Review: A singularly impressive debut for National Geographic
Summary: 5 Stars
K19: THE WIDOWMAKER is a most impressive debut for National Geographic Feature Films, one of the movie's principal production partners. The story is based on a Cold War event kept secret for decades. It's 1961, and the Soviet's first atomic powered ballistic missile submarine, the K-19, is scheduled for an operational shakedown cruise in the North Atlantic. The USSR wants to show the United States that the latter is not the only world power with waterproof big guns, so to speak, seeing as how the U.S. Navy has put Polaris subs within missile-lobbing range of Leningrad and Moscow.
Filmed in Canada and Moscow, this "Hollywood" version of the story has Captain Polenin (Liam Neeson) as commander of the K19 while it's still under construction in Murmansk. In a bad career move, he's vociferously unhappy about the quality of the boat's construction, and outspokenly suggests it's not ready for its first sea trial. Enter Captain Vostrikov (Harrison Ford), an in-law of a Politburo big shot, who takes command with Polenin as his executive officer. The submarine is duly launched, though the champagne bottle fails to break - a harbinger of bad luck, and off it goes to prove itself as the newest protector of the Motherland. At first, it looks like the operational sea trial will be a smashing triumph when the K19 successfully launches one of its three ballistic missiles. Take that, you Yankee imperialist dogs! But then, on its way under new orders to take up a patrol station off the eastern U.S. seaboard, the K19 develops a leak in its nuclear reactor's cooling system that gives a new dimension to the phrase "in hot water".
Borrowing and fixing up an actual Russian sub on permanent display in Florida (only in America!) for the exterior shots, and re-creating ten submarine compartments accurate down to the smallest details for the interior camera work, the producers of K19: THE WIDOWMAKER have achieved perhaps the most authentic looking sub film since DAS BOOT. (The interior sets of the film make Sean Connery's "Red October" look like the starship Enterprise.) And, something you don't see every day, there are no female players to clutter things up with mushy stuff outside of a very brief scene where the girls left behind are kissing the sailors good-bye. Otherwise, this is all Guy Stuff spearheaded by two superb performances from Ford and Neeson. Though the former will be perceived as the actor in the leading role, Neeson is right there breathing down his neck, and an argument could be made to nominate both for an Oscar in the Leading Role category. Perhaps not since HEAT (Pacino and De Niro) have two major male stars played so powerfully well together.
K19 serves to remind Americans that in the Cold War, or any war, heroism, sacrifice, honor and duty are not attributes limited to just the home team. I consider it the best major film I've seen to date for the 2002 film season.
Movie Review: A fascinating look at a real historical event!
Summary: 5 Stars
As the reviewer Jeff Shannon says "It's not as viscerally thrilling as the classic Das Boot or U-571." (Do look up and read Jeff's entire review.) Still, it is an extremely interesting look at an incident that actually occurred on Russia's first nuclear-powered submarine.To me, it is interesting that here we have an American film about a wholly Russian submarine crew with Russian equipment and showing the making of Russian heroes. The reality of the cold war was that both Americans and Russians were constantly spying on and shadowing each other's submarines.
In this incident, the only American involvement was an offer for help. This offer was rejected, by the way. Try and figure out WHY help from the Americans was rejected. If the reason was as alluded to in the movie (I won't give it away here), it says a lot about the valor of the boat's captain.
This movie does clearly portray the making of heroes. While a member of the U.S. Air Force, a military history class covered an incident where a young airman in an aircraft threw himself on an incendiary device that lit off and which would have brought the plane and it's crew down. The man's bravery saved the aircraft and everyone on board at the cost of his own life. On K-19 you will see many equally brave and heroic men risking their lives for their fellow shipmates. (And any military member puts their life on the line every time they board a submarine. Look at how many have sunk whether by act of war or by some mechanical fault. Yes, statistically it may be far more dangerous crossing a typical city street - but I admire submariners nonetheless!)
Something to note before watching the movie - the director Kathryn Bigelow made sure she had not only a Russian on-hand to advise on correctness of submarine details, but the person was actually a former captain of a K-19 class submarine! No effort was spared in making the interior shots as absolutely accurate as possible. The extra features section of the DVD shows the various pieces of equipment being made - even down to correct Russian labeling! What the people acting as crew did on the mocked-up submarine mattered a lot to Kathryn. You don't see any absent-minded twiddling of dials, etc. Every action taken in the movie is as would have been done on a real submarine.
This movie, I have to say, didn't keep me on the edge of my seat. It plays out almost in documentary fashion rather than as a movie drama. But it was nonetheless a very fascinating account of a group of people risking life and limb for fellow man and for country. Kudos go to Kathryn Bigelow, Harrison Ford, Liam Neeson and all the other wonderful actors, makeup artists and special effects people for doing such an outstanding job on this film!
Movie Review: one of the best of the last decade
Summary: 5 Stars
This exceptionally well-made and well-acted movie drives home a very urgent point - how detestable ALL the wars are, may they be cold or not. These conflicts initiated by war mongrels and brass hats, tear families apart and scar the nations for life. Had it been not for the shameless propaganda on both sides, good people would not had to die. In this case, the constant struggle of the "leaders" to be on top, resulted in testing (!) the most dangerous technology out at sea next to US borders. The point of it was simple saber-rattling, an increasing common technique to convince one's enemies that they better not mess with us. Heck, it's used these days still.
I won't get into all the intricacies of the plot, but it's enough to say that the captain (Harrison Ford) deemed it necessary to sacrifice the boat and its crew to prevent a full-scale nuclear confrontation. At the time, this kind of decision bordered on treason, and it's a great surprise that the captain did not end up in GULAG (which had just began to fall apart following the death of Stalin and execution of Beria).
The actors do a magnificent job here. What comes across first is the stark difference between the two captains. Polenin (Liam Neeson) is a new generation reformist; he's a thinking man and, therefore, is a torn man full of internal conflicts. Vostrikov (Ford) is a polar opposite, his purpose is clear; he has no hesitations whatsoever, even when he disobeys the Party or his own beliefs, firmly impressed by the system. As the action takes a deadly turn, they both shine in their perseverance and their humanity.
The supporting cast, particularly the brass hats, is quite good as well. The sailors are just kids, but the director made it clear that they're all regular boys who could be our own children. Their chatter, their smiles, their lovely young faces make us think, "can WE send our boys to wars?" no matter what the cause is.
Some questions are left unanswered. Did Katya stay with Vadim through all the hell that a ray illness is? What happened to the submarine once it was back home?
Just a couple of drinking scenes did not strike as plausible. Are we still fighting the stereotypes here? They could have been safely deleted. Same goes for phony Russian accents, although I suppose they needed to match the English-speaking cast members with Russian ones (the split is approximately 70/30).
But overall, this is a convincing and powerful drama, first (in my mind) that did not show Russians as monsters or brutes, but first and foremost as the people whose historic fate might have been one of the most tragic of all.
Movie Review: Rare Insight Into Cold-war Realities
Summary: 5 Stars
Among the things for which this film was criticized was Harrison Ford's faltering Russian accent. Sure, his accent wasn't superb. But what we should really ask about that point is, why is speaking English with a Russian accent (as opposed to speaking English without a Russian accent) deemed a substantially more accurate representation of what would have in reality been dialogue in Russian? Characters who actually spoke Russian speak English in this movie so it can be understood by an audience that understands English but generally not Russian; once that much translation is part of it, accent is a minor issue. That matter aside, this movie is a remarkably revealing one about realities of the cold-war virtually unknown until now. A Russian submarine of the early nuclear era suffers a mishap in its reactor, a malfunction that threatens the crew and could well become an international disaster. The nearest help they would have had access to was at a NATO base. But their loyalty to their country vis-a-vis the Soviet system makes that appeal for help unthinkable. They were bound to protect their government's secrecy; in fact they would remain sworn to secrecy as long as the Soviet Union remained in existence. Of course it would have been better to accept the nearest available help and share their experience with the world. That would have been best not only in the interest of protecting their crew and reducing the risk of war, but also for sharing with the world knowledge of what could go wrong with nuclear reactors, in submarines or elsewhere. But the only view of patriotism acceptable to the crew at the time meant continuing in secrecy and repairing the reactor at a great price. That price involved several crew members venturing so close to the reactor's problem that they exposed themselves to deadly radiation. Some reviews have considered this a film that portrays the Russian sailors heroically, and considered that either groundbreaking or a sell-out, depending on their point of view. But either of those perspectives misses the real point. The important sense in which the movie is groundbreaking is that it lets a universal humanity be seen in the Russian crew members in the face of trial and deadly peril. Although there IS heroism on that submarine, by no means does the movie idealize the blind loyality to the Soviet system as one with that heroism. In fact the movie courageously follows up on the life of the survivors through to a day when they can at last have a new perspective on their heroism and how the clandestine Soviet government did or did not best serve them through their tribulation.Movie Review: A dramatic tale of an important, hidden chapter of history
Summary: 5 Stars
After scanning some reviews I've decided to add my 2 cents, since I just got the DVD & saw the movie for the first time. To those who say it has very similar elements already visited in films such as "Crimson Tide," "U-571", etc., my reaction to that is, yes, you're right. The first half hour of this movie I was a bit concerned about where it was going. It had the "been here, done that" feel to it in regards to other "sub movies." I didn't buy Ford's accent at first (why? Because I know him from other movies, whereas if some unknown actor played the role, I wouldn't have questioned the authenticity or even the accent delivery at all), but as time passed, I didn't notice it as much and thought it was fine. In regards to the why do Americans put accents on in the first place when speaking English, it's really no big mystery, it simply adds to the setting. I suppose if you went the other extreme and gave them all harsh U.S. Southern accents, it would pull you even further away from believing in who they are portraying, so it's just like an extra prop that enhances the presentation.
To those historic critics who try to rip up every attempt Hollywood makes to tell a story, I have this to say: Sad as it may be, but if I had not seen "Schindler's List," I would not have as much an appreciation for the Holocaust. I don't read much history, so if Hollywood with it's jaded glitz & glamour can emotionally move me to appreciate a moment of history, then so be it! And speaking of important moment's of history, you should check out "Uprising," another great historic drama that deserves attention (about the Jewish ghetto uprising).
At any rate, now for why I give K-19 five stars. I enjoyed the drama, the tension, the cast, and the story. It's that simple. I still think "U-571" is the best sub movie I've ever seen, perhaps because of how tightly the movie went with not a second of downtime, but K-19 is a more human, dramatic story that is important to see. The DVD has several documentaries on how they made the movie that should be seen by the history critics, as it certainly seems like they did much research on the topics & history before shooting the film. If the director had a gap, then it needed to be filled, and a story has to be interesting or it becomes a bad movie. Never will everyone be happy, and that's why most reviews will differ. So take it from a person who watches movies to be entertained, moved, and even educated at times, K-19 is an excellent movie.