"Discovery of U-Boat Wrecks Rewrites the History Books"

[Aristaeus]

I agree Stearman. I refuse to watch that U 571 movie precisely because of that. It was the Royal Navy that first obtained the items, not the U.S. Navy.

I do hope to someday see the U 505. I'm glad they moved her into a 'bunker' of sorts...a large room to keep her in so she stays better preserved.

A movie about these real life events, without allot of revisioning like in the movie U-571, would have made a real boring movie. You guys just have to take U-571 for what it is, entertainment. The movie was never intended to rewrite history or to protray the Americans as the first and only captors of Enigma, yet some here seem to credit Hollywood as Americas history teachers. They are not, they are our entertainment makers.

"until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Winston Churchill.

 

[The Lonely Navigator]

I agree.

Although, when I was reading through my U-Boat books, I was surprised to find all the fuss with regards to Das Boot. I have two books that currently cover the issue - Wolf by Jordan Vause, and Count Not the Dead by Michael Hadley. Both these books actually devote a whole chapter to it.

The U-Boat veterans were divided on it. Some supported it, like Erich Topp (he also helped with the development of the Silent Hunter game and served in the post war Bundesmarine). Others, thought in the main it was good, but there were exaggerated parts (the extreme drunkenness shown by the character Thomsen, the firing of the pistol in the cafe, and things of that nature - as well as some of the incidents that occurred while on patrol - like the Chief/LI getting the boat up from the depth that it was at [that part was disputed in the book 'Another Place, Another Time'). Others were opposed to it altogether.

There are three different versions of Das Boot - the TV series, the Director's Cut, and the Uncut Version. I prefer the uncut version to the director's cut, but would like to see the tv series.

A bit fftopic: here but - for those looking to find good deals on books, even though I've listed the Amazon site (which is nice because you can get descriptions and ratings of books) I buy using the Allbookstores.com search which covers all online book stores.

And there is a UK site http://www.allbookstores.co.uk/

 

[Stearmen]

yet some here seem to credit Hollywood as Americas history teachers. They are not, they are our entertainment makers.

I think you are giving our fellow Yanks to much credit! Remember, these are the same movie goers who when asked what they though of the movie The Madness of George III replied, "it was a good movie, what were part 1 and 2 like?" TV, talk radio and the movies are their primary source of history, and I don't mean the History channel!

 

[Smithy]

The movie was never intended to rewrite history or to protray the Americans as the first and only captors of Enigma,

The problem is that the movie did portray the Americans as the first and that was insulting to the members of HMS Bulldog who were still alive. In fact the movie was viewed as so insulting that it was even brought up in the House of Commons.

As an American it probably doesn't worry you but I'd suggest you tried to look at it from a Briton's point of view. How would you feel if a movie was made about 9/11 where a bunch of British firefighters who happened to be on holiday in NY, took control of the situation when the NVFD was too shocked to act. But the plucky Brits dived into the collapsing WTC and rescued hundreds of people.

That might be drawing a long bow but the point is, the appropriation of another country's achievements as one's own is wrong. Even in the name of entertainment.

A movie about these real life events, without allot of revisioning like in the movie U-571, would have made a real boring movie.

I'd disagree with that entirely. The events leading up to the capture, and the events themselves are very "un-boring".

 

[LordBest]

Or Royal Marines raising the Union Flag on Iwo Jima.

The problem is that the movie did portray the Americans as the first and that was insulting to the members of HMS Bulldog who were still alive. In fact the movie was viewed as so insulting that it was even brought up in the House of Commons.

As an American it probably doesn't worry you but I'd suggest you tried to look at it from a Briton's point of view. How would you feel if a movie was made about 9/11 where a bunch of British firefighters who happened to be on holiday in NY, took control of the situation when the NVFD was too shocked to act. But the plucky Brits dived into the collapsing WTC and rescued hundreds of people.

That might be drawing a long bow but the point is, the appropriation of another country's achievements as one's own is wrong. Even in the name of entertainment.



I'd disagree with that entirely. The events leading up to the capture, and the events themselves are very "un-boring".

 

[MisterCairo]

It wasn't the Royal Marines who took Iwo Jima?????

 

[The Lonely Navigator]

Smithy: The problem is that the movie did portray the Americans as the first and that was insulting to the members of HMS Bulldog who were still alive. In fact the movie was viewed as so insulting that it was even brought up in the House of Commons.

I do remember having read that somewhere ('that' being it having been brought up in the House of Commons).

Smithy: appropriation of another country's achievements as one's own is wrong. Even in the name of entertainment.

I fully agree with that!

Smithy: The events leading up to the capture, and the events themselves are very "un-boring".

I have to agree with that too.

I also remember coming across articles regarding the director who had said that 'Das Boot' was a lie with regards to the portrayal of the U-Boat crews. Here is a link from IMDB with reviews on U 571.

 

[The Lonely Navigator]

Smithy: The problem is that the movie did portray the Americans as the first and that was insulting to the members of HMS Bulldog who were still alive. In fact the movie was viewed as so insulting that it was even brought up in the House of Commons.

I do remember having read that somewhere ('that' being it having been brought up in the House of Commons).

Smithy: appropriation of another country's achievements as one's own is wrong. Even in the name of entertainment.

I fully agree with that!

Smithy: The events leading up to the capture, and the events themselves are very "un-boring".

I have to agree with that too.

I also remember coming across articles regarding the director who had said that 'Das Boot' was a lie with regards to the portrayal of the U-Boat crews. Here is a link from IMDB with reviews on U 571.

 

[Ruptured Duck™]

I'd disagree with that entirely. The events leading up to the capture, and the events themselves are very "un-boring".

Absolutely, Smithy. I agree...I think people get caught up with thinking that Hollywood needs to insert a love story in the Titanic/Pearl Harbor to make history interesting. History - by itself - when told with accuracy - at least in my opinion - is way more thrilling than any screenwriter can imagine.

The movie was never intended to rewrite history or to protray the Americans as the first and only captors of Enigma, yet some here seem to credit Hollywood as Americas history teachers. They are not, they are our entertainment makers.

I think it's important to note that there are two different types of American filmmakers, the type that make films with some degree of respect for history and then the type that is merely trying to make money.

U-571 was nothing but an attempt to make money. American filmmakers generally target an American audience for their films and assumed no American would be as interested in a story about a bunch of Britons. I think it's pretty straight forward as that. I don't think Mostow or anyone else involved in the film ever really wanted to dupe the world and revise history. Heck, they even acknowledged -on screen- that the real events were led by the RN.

Additionally, HMS Bulldog Lt. David Balme even thanked Hollywood for making the film, as he knew that without someone in Hollywood taking up the reigns and initiating the project that it probably wouldn't have been made.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/774427.stm

While I am not a fan of the film, I believe it's important to not label all of Hollywood as bastardizing history. While they are all in the entertainment biz first, I think it's important to note that some also take history pretty seriously. The only problem is differentiating between the two. (But for that matter, the same can be said of varying history books/historians etc....we all have our biases!)

 

[Aristaeus]

I think you are giving our fellow Yanks to much credit! Remember, these are the same movie goers who when asked what they though of the movie The Madness of George III replied, "it was a good movie, what were part 1 and 2 like?" TV, talk radio and the movies are their primary source of history, and I don't mean the History channel!

You can find Idiots in any society or nation so this isn't a good measuring stick. Yes I do prefer to give the majority of Americans credit, instead of insulting them.

"until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Winston Chruchill.

 

[Aristaeus]

The problem is that the movie did portray the Americans as the first and that was insulting to the members of HMS Bulldog who were still alive. In fact the movie was viewed as so insulting that it was even brought up in the House of Commons.

I would have hoped that the house of commons would have had more pressing issues to tend to.

As an American it probably doesn't worry you but I'd suggest you tried to look at it from a Briton's point of view. How would you feel if a movie was made about 9/11 where a bunch of British firefighters who happened to be on holiday in NY, took control of the situation when the NVFD was too shocked to act. But the plucky Brits dived into the collapsing WTC and rescued hundreds of people.

Or Royal Marines raising the Union Flag on Iwo Jima.

Hollywood has been rewriting American history for decades, American culture, history and achievments have been rewritten, criticized, marginalized and ignored, so no it would not bother me to the point of demanding Congress to get upset about it. I would simply consider it a laughable joke.

"until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Winston Chruchill.

 

[Smithy]

Hollywood has been rewriting American history for decades, American culture, history and achievments have been rewritten, criticized, marginalized and ignored, so no it would not bother me to the point of demanding Congress to get upset about it. I would simply consider it a laughable joke.

I'd suggest that the reason why it doesn't bother you is because American history and achievements have not been appropriated in mainstream cinema by another country to any real extent. The reason why U-571 doesn't worry you is because it's not your history so it doesn't bother you, you obviously have no empathy for how the Brits might feel about it or especially the members of HMS Bulldog. "Who cares, it's not my history" eh?

But you honestly think that if such a movie was made about 9/11 as I proposed above, it wouldn't be an insult to those members of the NYFD who were there and especially those who gave their lives that day? Or such a movie as Lord Best suggested wouldn't be insulting to those US Marines who stormed the beaches and were killed and maimed?? Come on

Taking another country's achievements as your own is wrong, no matter which way you look at it. To use the "it's just entertainment" excuse is a total cop out.

 

[Chas]

What about when American filmmakers make a travesty of their own history, like when Mel Gibson makes a load of poo like "The Patriot" and portrays the British as SS in red coats?

It's pretty much past time for film makers from other countries to make films about important events in US history and see where it takes us.

 

[Aristaeus]

LOL Seriously guys? Warning British pride was hurt in the making of this movie
Chas I am sure that the Red coats were just as sweet as you could be while quailing the rebellion and establishing a world empire that the sun never set on.

"until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Winston Chruchill.

 

[Smithy]

* Decided to remove that remark. Maybe not in keeping with the discussion at hand *

 

[The Lonely Navigator]

I wanted to let others, but mainly Ruptured Duck, know about the book Iron Coffins by Herbert Werner. While many praise the book, I do not recommend it.

This is from the book Count Not the Dead on Iron Coffins:

"Jurgen Rohwer, Germany's premier naval historian, savaged the book in a scathing review. 'If one wanted to underline the factual errors [in red], almost every page would be like a blood bath,' he observed."

"Significantly, the Association of German Submariners had fully supported the findings of Jurgen Rohwer's debunking review; it had dissociated itself from any claims in the memoir and had rejected Werner's 'hack-work as totally without foundation.'"

 

[MisterCairo]

LOL Seriously guys? Warning British pride was hurt in the making of this movie
Chas I am sure that the Red coats were just as sweet as you could be while quailing the rebellion and establishing a world empire that the sun never set on.

Chill Winston. Make all the movies you guys can appropriating the acts of others as your own if that's what it takes to make you feel better for being two and half years late to the war.

As for the Red Coats, perhaps if they'd been even worse, we'd have a continental Canada right about now.

 

[Aristaeus]

Chill Winston.

Name calling now?:eusa_clap

for being two and half years late to the war.

The U.S. wasn't late for anything, it wasn't our war, we didn't start it. If you are implying that the U.K. along with France could not handle Germany at the time then just come out and say it. It is a double edge sword isn't it? On the one hand you criticise the U.S. for not running to your aid and when we did get there you act as if you could have handled it yourselves. Which is it?

As for the Red Coats, perhaps if they'd been even worse, we'd have a continental Canada right about now.

lol
"until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Winston Chruchill.

 

[The Lonely Navigator]

Actually the U.S. was helping quite early on by the Lend Lease. Even though not 'officially' involved - there were U.S. destroyers escorting convoys and Erich Topp wound up sinking one - the Reuben James. So not only was there help in the form of material, but also in the form of escort.

Postwar examination of Kreigsmarine documents and logs conclusively attributes the sinking of Nerissa to U-552 under the command of Erich Topp. Topp and U-552 claimed notoriety by torpedoing and sinking the American destroyer Reuben James on October 31, 1941, over a month before the United States' entry into the war.

From: SS Nerissa

 

[p51]

I’m working with a movie company right now, tweaking parts of a screenplay which might not ever see a camera. One thing I’ve found out in this process is that although you can have any disclaimer you want at the end, you need to be careful when portraying specific people, especially a group when there are survivors and family members still around. When the “Memphis Belle” movie was made in the 80s, they used that name because they could track down the members of that crew. Originally it wasn’t going to be called that at all, but the name of the plane they wanted to use had several historical matches and the moviemakers didn’t want a fight with several veteran crews when the movie came out. I’m sure that was the case with U571. It was easier to make up the whole story and boat name, that way, nobody could say a specific person wasn’t portrayed to suit them later on.
I saw U505 in 2002 when I was in Chicago on business, before they built the building over it. It’s just as impressive as I’ve always heard and it’s a very popular exhibit. Be prepared to wait when you go to see it.