Leaky... and sinking.

Rating: Null/10 (4 July 2000)

It's interesting that people (both on this site and elsewhere) seem to have reacted so bitterly against this movie for distorting the historical facts. Is it because there are still people alive who lived through the Second World War? Is that why it's alright for "Braveheart" to be utter nonsense (albeit supremely entertaining nonsense) and for this to be so heavily criticised? Maybe there's something else. I wonder...

It doesn't bother me as much as it seems to many others. I certainly don't think we Britons can take the moral highground when we're about to put out our own terrible Enigma-related picture - in this case the movie is called "Enigma" and no matter how good the acting, direction, production values and score, it will be a dog (with fleas) because the abysmal novel on which it is based almost totally overlooks the fascinating goings-on at Bletchley Park in favour of a cheesy romance and an implausible spy subplot. Talk about not honouring the memory of those who did the work and won the war... Though frankly, I have never had a significant problem with movies being historically inaccurate - I see it as a necessary limitation of the medium. So fine, "U-571" isn't historically accurate, but so what? Is it any good?
Frankly, it is not. Clearly a great deal of effort has been put into the production, hence the sets look authentic, the special effects... effective, and even the much-maligned performances from the likes of Matthew McConaughey and Jon Bon Jovi didn't cause me any problems. However, the script gives us no discernible characters about whom to care, and the sequence of events therein is completely and utterly feeble. From moment one, it is pretty clear what will happen to our intrepid hero, a man unfit to be a captain because he can't send a man to his death... Thus there is not one moment of genuine tension to be found amongst the impressive looking depth charges, where there should be plenty - all the more disappointing since writer-director Jonathan Mostow conjured so much tension from nowhere in his previous feature "Breakdown". And, as others have noted, the score is intrusive and distracting, obliterating rather than heightening the drama.
Also, the film is completely humourless. I'm not saying that this situation would engender wisecracks aplenty from these characters, but there is surely scope in the movie for the occasional moment of levity shared between frightened crewmates? Anything to dispel the notion in the audience that this is a film taking itself unerringly seriously. If there were some respite from the empty intensity, I probably would have enjoyed the film and written it off as big, dumb, summertime fun. But I suspect that this is meant to be taken seriously, which makes it all the more irritating.
"U-571" is undeniably quite an accomplished film in terms of its visuals, but not many films these days aren't. Many people will no doubt be able to enjoy it if they can suspend disbelief totally, but for anyone with a brain working in their head, it will cause problems; more so if they use that brain to think about the script rather than the historical truths bent therein. Others have said it, but I can only concur that anyone hankering for a decent salty yarn and thinking about seeing this movie should see "Das Boot" or "In Which We Serve" instead.
(4.5/10)