More Loose Documentary than Summer Entertainment

Rating: 7/10 (20 July 2002)

K-19 is, at once, both worthy and betraying of the National Geographic brand it bears. On the one hand, some scenes unfold with excruciating detail. Early on, we see no fewer than five drills ordered by the Captain and played out by the crew, and the director disproportionately treats these with the suspense of a Jerry Bruckheimer climax or, appropriately enough, a National Geographic WWII feature. On the other hand, these very details reek of "poetic license" and downright falsehood. Too many military cliches arise over the course of K-19 for the dialogue to be within a respectable distance of accurate. It is in essence a blockbuster the way National Geographic pedants would make one.
That said, much was impressive about the script and the performances. The whole idea of Soviet patriotism expressed so earnestly is novel to me (I never saw Enemy at the Gates), but wholly believable and imparting on the crew. It added a bizarro-American feel to the Soviets, and helped the audience relate to their idealism, their novice, and their youthful energy. The prominence of politics, both informal between Ford and Neeson and formal through the Kommisar, also added a dimension not explored by many submarine films. Ford is excellent, but Neeson comes across as too one-dimensional, and I think this is the script's fault. While I can empathize with the weight of the pressure on Ford's character, Neeson's role requires little more than the cliched "stick up for the crew in front of the captain" attitude. We never learn much about Neeson's past, and his grand turning point happens with less than twenty minutes left in the film and nary a satisfying explanation for his actions. Ford, on the other hand, is unusually cold, calculating, but motivation by a inner warmth that he hints at only occasionally in this film. I wouldn't say he carried the picture, but it's one of his best performances. The crew was also well-portrayed and, barring the episodic Russian accents, could have been a crew on an American submarine. I think this casting vision was intentional, so that we could see just how universal the fears of submarine warfare really are. Whether this choice was accurate or not... well, I wasn't there.
The plot is obviously an event the National Geographic scholars found fascinating, but which doesn't translate well onto celluloid. Cursed omens? Repetitive drills? Core meltdowns? This might as well have been called "Cold War Submarines 101," a survey movie that spices up dry subject matter to convince the populace to run over to their local library and read about the Scorpion, the Kursk, or, at the very least, read Hunt for Red October. I love naval history, but if the groans and sighs around me were any indication, I was near alone in that theatre.
My advice? See it if you appreciate Harrison Ford as more than a fine piece of meat. See it if you're in the mood for a good docudrama. See it if you love submarine movies. See it if you like guy bonding movies. But don't expect an exceptional history lesson or an edge-of-your-seat thriller. Expect a flawed but decent film that despite its short comings manages to instill a nice balance of intellect, emotion, and entertainment.