MovieChat Forums > The Hunt for Red October (1990) Discussion > Just saw this again....it has been awhil...

Just saw this again....it has been awhile.


I believe this is probably my favorite submarine film ever made and one of my favorite movies of all time. Usually books are better than their film counterparts but I enjoyed this much more than the book. Although I like Harrison as Jack Ryan I believe I enjoyed Baldwin most as this character.

Does anyone know what they were using to film scenes on the deck of the Soviet Typhoon Class subs?

Lastly, I tend to agree with his officers.....it would have been best if he had not informed the Soviets of his plans to defect but I suppose the film wouldn't have been as suspenseful.

Scott Glenn was great in this. I usually always like his work.

Great film.

reply

Does anyone know what they were using to film scenes on the deck of the Soviet Typhoon Class subs?

A mock-up set on a Barge.

Usually books are better than their film counterparts but I enjoyed this much more than the book.

The Book is better than the film. You're just not much of a reader apparently.

The book goes into far greater details about his motivations, as well as a number of other great military confrontations between Soviet and American Forces that are not in the film at all.

A-10 Warthogs vs the Kirov

Forger vs AWACS

Forger Vs Tomcats (with Robbie Jackson (Samuel L Jackson's character in Patriot Games flying the Tomcat)

The other Alfa having a reactor meltdown while on the full power run to the American coast.

And many more.


Add to that... a great number of goofs and other errors are introduced by the film that does not exist in the book. like the stupidity of self destructing an air dropped torpedo for example. Impossible.



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

reply

Oh, apparently liking the book better is the only "correct" answer to this little troll. How dare I not share your exact same opinion.

You are quite a little prick aren't you? It is quite an accomplishment for you to make a single post without acting like a bitter little pill who smarts off and insults everyone on every board. Out of curiosity, after you acting like an ass in every comment you've made on any thread I'm involved in I read a little of your posting history. Man, what a know-it-all, obnoxious little troll who thinks his opinion of the world is the only one, what a little bitter ass you are. Your little dork picture kind of looks like I'd envision you to be.

Usually little know-it-all jerks like you think you are justified by acting like such a hateful, rude person to everyone they deal with but if you are acting like this with most of the people you reply to can it really be them every single time? It's probably you with the problem. I like talking about movies, books and shows I see/read and I like talking about them with others who've enjoyed them. You just want to belittle, bitch, piss and argue with everyone.

So long, I haven't enjoyed putting someone on ignore this much in quite a while. Wow, what an uncivil little troll.

reply

WOW!

I answered your question about where they filmed the Typhoon deck scenes.
I then offered MY Opinion that the book is better.
And gave examples as to why.
Other than an observation that you're not much of a reader (not an insult, just an observation) there is NOTHING in my post that even remotely resembles your statements.


And yet YOU offer up such things as...

Calling me a little troll, an ass, a bitter pill, obnoxious, hateful, rude, know-it-all-jerk,

Really? You got all that from my answering your question and offering my own opinion on the book?

Apparently it is I that am not allowed to disagree with YOUR opinion about the book.

Fraking Retard.
















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

reply

While that response was OTT, what probably set him off was:

The Book is better than the film. You're just not much of a reader apparently.


That's just incredibly patronizing.


The other information you gave was great, but that sentence ruined the tone.

reply

Well, this one thread by itself didn't draw that response from me but this post on top of another response to me and even with that I've read his responses for a long time before that and rude, hostile, belittling, patronizing sums up most of his replies which is why I told him off and put him on ignore. You are right that he was patronizing. You are right that, that one post in and of itself would not be enough to elicit an angry reply from me but take a look at his response on another thread which he also replied to at the same time as this one. I had posed the question of whether Ryan was the best choice to drive the sub. There were other options in the film since both Ryan and Ramius leave and go to other parts of the sub causing them to use a different commander and a different driver.

"I'm sorry if the situation does not hold up to YOUR expectations of reality which are based in absolutely nothing and zero experience as toWTFyou're talking about."

"Basically, your own lack of knowledge is leading you to an erroneous conclusion that is 180 degrees wrong and backwards from reality."

Do you not find that overly hostile for no reason at all? Is that not insulting? That response and then him going off again because I like the film better than the book elicited an angry response from me. It is common for him. It's not that he doesn't ever have informative responses he is just a tool about it 80% of the time. As with me, he could have said he liked the book better but that isn't his style, he had to insult me (I am not much of a reader apparently) in the process.

So I said me peace and put him on ignore. Anyway, it wasn't this one response by itself but this and other responses from him to me and to others that fueled this angry reply.

reply

Hanz has a history of asking or making incredibly ignorant statements.
The farmed and selected comments from me, Data-mined from a host of posts I have made, were specifically chosen because they appeared rude and condescending.
Were they?
Yes.

But keep in mind two things...
1) they're not the entirety of my posts.
2) You are only seeing my response, not the comment that triggered them.

The person I was responding to was posting the most Asinine statements completely lacking in logic.

In the case of the first quoted comment, Hanz here was playing armchair admiral and expounding upon what was and was not realistic about how hard or not it was to steer a submarine and what he decided in his infinite lack of firsthand knowledge what was in his mind a goof of the film.



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

reply

[deleted]

Oh what a pathetic little stalker troll stalking my posts and saying the same pathetic thing over and over.

Grow up child. You are really pathetic.


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

reply

I'm not really concerned about the history you two seem to have with each other. I just don't like the notion that liking a movie adaptation better than the original book is somehow wrong or intellectually inferior or makes them as you put it "not much of a reader". Everyone has their tastes. That's my only bone of contention, everything else is between the two of you.

"Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty."

reply

Each separate situation is its own entity. I liked the film better than the book in this case but I liked "Clear and Present Danger" the novel much more than the film. I didn't really like that film at all. It didn't do the book justice.

reply

I'm no fan of Clancy's books. I remember coming across a book he wrote about a US attack sub single-handedly destroying the entire Chinese navy. It was so callously written, I threw it on the fireplace.

Those giraffes you sold me, they won't mate. You sold me queer giraffes.

reply

I remember coming across a book he wrote about a US attack sub single-handedly destroying the entire Chinese navy. It was so callously written, I threw it on the fireplace.


The book is SSN. From what I can tell it is a book based on a video game and was probably ghost written. I would have burned my copy as well but it was loaned to me by a friend so I didn't want to destroy his property.

reply

Yeah, it was written by Martin Greenberg. the story idea was created by Tom Clancy.
And it was bad.

The other guy's loss if he judges Clancy based on that one book.
Though Clancy did kinda go downhill after a while. Red Rabbit was bad, and pretty much everything after The Bear and the Dragon.



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

reply

I don't think I have read anything by Clancy after Without Remorse. Red Storm Rising is his best in my opinion. When I read 1st read Red Storm RisingI was a grunt in the 82nd Airborne. I know the book didn't really focus on the land battle but it spelled out to me how quickly I would buy a farm if everything went hot.

Edit...I obviously did read part of 688 but you get my drift.

reply

you should try Debt of Honor and Executive Orders, together those are two of bis best works. Right up there with Without Remorse And Red October.

And very prophetic to todays headlines.

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

reply

Agree with CGSailor: try Without Remorse. It's a terrific book. I wasn't too fond of Executive Orders, but it's still an okay book (certainly better than any of the Jack Jr. books).

--
If I cannot smoke cigars in heaven, I shall not go!

reply