MovieChat Forums > The Hunt for Red October (1990) Discussion > Typhoon submarine in the Murnmansk openi...

Typhoon submarine in the Murnmansk opening scene

posted 14 years ago by octopusmagnificens
21 replies | jump to latest

How was filmed? It was Alaska, but the submarine? It's a real size model? I assume they filmed in a real Typhoon.

[–] ex250 14 years ago

It's basically a prop barge being towed out of either San Diego Harbor or Long Beach Harbor.

Promise me, no matter how hopeless things get, keep on trying, OK? Keep coming chin-up, OK?

[–] birdman2 14 years ago

I heard it was smaller than the real thing. I also heard that the demolished the "prop" Red October recently.

[–] vonmazur 14 years ago

Guys: I have one of the inflatable subs from the lobby display, you could use that in the swimming pool!!!

Dale

"If those sweethearts won't face German bullets--They'll face french ones!"

[–] Director-21 14 years ago

The dimensions always seemed a bit off to me. In the underwater shots & in real pics of Typhoons the boat just looks much longer and more slender. I'd imagine that the barge was close to accurate for the left-right dimensions but just looked way too stubby in the front-back dimensions.

[–] Blueghost 14 years ago

The actual Typhoon is a behemoth of a submarine. I thought the vessel in the movie for the exteriors was an actual Typhoon. Had me fooled when I was in the theatre... my friends too. But thinking about it, yeah, it did seem somewhat small compared to the real thing.

[–] CGSailor 14 years ago

The dimensions always seemed a bit off to me. In the underwater shots & in real pics of Typhoons the boat just looks much longer and more slender.

Red October was not your standard Typhoon. It WAS longer and therefore appeared more slender than a standard Typhoon.
Typhoons carried 20 SSN-20 Seahawks
October carried 26

Typhoons were 175m in length
October was 198m

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CGSailor 14 years ago

If you are answering the OP then respond to the OP, not me.
I was specifically addressing director-21's point in which he discussed the underwater shots. That has nothing to do with the mock-up used on the surface scene. I know full well that the surface shot used a towed mock-up.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] acecrisp-1 13 years ago

now the real asnwer.

its a prop siting on a wood bottom.

this was said in the making videos

in fact you can see the wood platform in a couple of shots

[–] magic8ball2112 14 years ago

The Red October seemed a lil too small to me when its being towed out to sea. A big 'sub' sure. But I was under the impression, in both the book and from the movie dialogue, that the ship was far longer than portrayed on the surface.

Still, it IS a movie and I didn't figure, then & now, that the studio would splurge on a prop that's only seen at the start of the flick (with a staged platform standing in for the conn tower at movie's end). Were the scene 'redone' via digitalization, a truly massive ship could be portrayed.

[–] instant_change 13 years ago

Were the scene 'redone' via digitalization, a truly massive ship could be portrayed.

But you know what? I'd STILL prefer the prop / fake sub, than a CGI version. There's actual people on an actual SOMETHING, not in front of a blue screen. I actually feel like I miss the way movies were made in the 80's and early 90's, the usage of actual SETS and PROPS. I feel like the constant overuse of CGI - and the supposed limitless possibilities it brings - has somehow taken something AWAY from the movie experience. Made it "distant" somehow.

Granted, the HD (+digital) age has taken a bit of the movie magic away, and in some cases watching a remastered Blu-Ray of an old movie is like playing spot-the-background-matte-painting.

There's a similar scene in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, when the Bird Of Prey lands in to the sea. To the viewer, it's pretty obvious from the get go (when the crew exit the ship) that it's just half a prop in some Paramount tank somewhere (which it was), but it doesn't matter, it's something REAL (ish).

It's a bit like when Spielberg replaced the puppet E.T. with a CGI version in the Anniversary DVD. It's like - yes we know it's a puppet, but the smooth computerized creation doesn't have even an ounce of the realism it had and is therefore WORSE.

It's the same with Star Wars (obviously), I prefer the miniature models to the CGI ones.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CGSailor 13 years ago

Another big problem with CGI is with HOW it is used. CGI can be great when used in moderation to recreate things either impossible or too dangerous to do with practical effects. But there is a tendency among directors (Bay first and foremost) to use CGI to amp up reality to the point of being idiotic. I'm referring here to when CGI is being used to create or recreate things that are real, not fictional. Bay can use CGI to have his transformers move and behave however he wants, but when he uses CGI to recreate P-40 Warhawks and A6M Zeroes, they must behave and move within the constraints of reality, not acting like something out a Japanese mecha anime like Gundam Wing or Macross.

There's just something to be said about seeing real Jap planes swooping in over the harbor (here you Brits can add a u) even if they're really AT-6 Texans. Bay's CGI planes? ... not so much.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CGSailor 13 years ago

True.

And how about that shot of Kido Butai. You know... the one with a modern US nuke carrier with angled deck, aegis equipped escorts and 688 class subs.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CGSailor 13 years ago

" The Red October seemed a lil too small to me when its being towed out to sea."

Point of correction.

Red October was not under tow. He was being "escorted" out to sea.
Red October was under His own power and not hooked up to a towline.

I'm talking "in story", not "how they filmed it"..

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] garrisonaw 10 years ago

Question: After Borodin says to Ramius "It's time", and they show panoramic shots of the ship from sea level, we can see men on the deck that look like they are hauling lines. If she was in fact under her own power the whole time, then what are the lines from/for?

And if she were not being towed, why would they use four tugboats and a fifth boat as escorts? Wouldn't that attract more attention from passing satellites? I would think it would be a lot less conspicuous for Red October to go out to sea unescorted if she weren't being towed.

I'll be the first to admit, I'm not a sailor. These little details just make me wonder.

[–] CGSailor 10 years ago

A lot wrong there. Both in your assertions as well as the film itself.

and they show panoramic shots of the ship from sea level, we can see men on the deck that look like they are hauling lines. If she was in fact under her own power the whole time, then what are the lines from/for?

First full shot of Red October after Borodin says "It's time", there is NO ONE on deck, Only the two of them on the bridge in the sail.
The subsequent shot has four men on deck, two each forward and aft of the sail.
The men are stowing away mooring lines from when they cast off from the Dock earlier.
It isn't a tow line.

It's a goof in that the mooring lines on a Sub are usually kept ashore with the pier, not aboard the sub itself as on a Surface ship.
It's also a goof in that the previous shot showed the decks completely clear of lines and men.

And if she were not being towed, why would they use four tugboats and a fifth boat as escorts?

Why would you tow a sub with four Tugs. The number of boats around the Sub in no way indicates whether it is being towed or not.
The presence of a tow line would.... and there is none. Nor is it practice to tow a vessel ANY vessel to sea unless it is a derelict. Target vessel, decommissioned, whatever. They may have lines to the vessels when they are maneuvering it into and away from the dock, but out in the channel the vessel will be under their own power, not towed.

Also the film scene is a goof as the number, type, and position of the other vessels change between shots.

The vessel that sounds it's horn looks like it's supposed to be an AGI. not a Tug.
The lead vessel is a tug, as is the other vessel beside it.
The trailing vessel is clearly an American yard tug.

The reason for all the vessels is security escort. not towing.

Wouldn't that attract more attention from passing satellites?

Not how it works.
If you want to avoid a satellite, you time your departure for when there is no satellite above the horizon. Satellites take still photos that an analysts can then pour over for hours to their hearts content looking for every little detail. Whether Red October was alone or had 100 tug escorts would not matter. It's not a matter of "attracting attention" as if someone was sitting up there live... and watching in real time.

I would think it would be a lot less conspicuous for Red October to go out to sea unescorted if she weren't being towed.

Conspicuous to who/what?
Not the satellites as I've already made clear.
The escort is security. Keeping anyone who should not be there clear of the sub. Which is not a very demanding job in Polyarnny Inlet where the whole of the water is a Naval security zone. not even fishermen. But sonarwise... all the noise from all those other escort vessels could serve to mask the Subs sonar signature from any snooping Western Sub.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] garrisonaw 10 years ago

Sorry, meant to make no assertions. As I said, I'm not a sailor, so what little I do know I learn from reading, and from asking questions - like this. And that is why I replied specifically to you. I was counting on you giving me a good answer. Thank you for the detailed reply.

It was mostly the men stowing the lines that I couldn't make sense of, since you didn't see the men or the lines in earlier shots. Anytime I've ever seen a sub leaving port, they always leave the lines on shore, so I couldn't figure out why they would have men stowing them on deck. It never even occurred to me (and I've probably watched this movie a hundred times) that she even MIGHT have been towed until someone else brought it up. Even then, as you mentioned, you can't see a tow line anywhere.

And yes, the "fifth boat" I mentioned would be the AGI you noted - the one sounding its horn. I knew it wasn't a tug, but didn't know what it was.

I didn't think about them using the escort ships to mask the sonar signature of the sub, but that's a good point.