An almost perfect reconstruction of an old war flick

Rating: Null/10 (22 May 2000)

U-571 is, for the most part, an almost good replica of one of those classic war movies we all know and love. Of course, there are two parts to "almost good".
First, we'll cover the "good". In brief: suspense, despair, historical reference, almost accurate reconstruction of the time period (servants on subs? I don't know, but they managed well), and most of the actors really looked the part.
That last point leads me to the second half of the anchor phrase (no pun): "almost". My biggest hang was with Bill Paxton and David Keith. I have a thing against actors who I see on screen a whole lot (hence my aversion toward Will Smith and Sean Connery movies and my attraction to Blair Witch Project).
Bill Paxton's less than riveting performance in Mission To Mars had left a bad taste in my mouth that really rotted the eggs (bad U-571 reference).
Worse was David Keith. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as an actor, you're supposed to 'act the part'. While everyone else did a fine job of adopting the language and mannerisms of the time, Keith just couldn't get over his gruff, burly, crude manner. Now, whether that was an exemplification of his position as a Marine amongst Navy men may be brought into consideration, but I felt he wasn't convincing.
Aside from the "almost" the "good" wins out. The movie is, if nothing else, honorable. Perhaps I should rephrase my initial statement to make the negative seem like an after thought. U-571 was good........ almost.