Review 568: Greyhound
Based on the war novel, The Good Shepherd by C. S. Forester, During the early days of the United States involvement in WWII, an international convoy of 37 Allied ships, led by Commander Ernest Krause (Tom Hanks), crosses the treacherous North Atlantic while being hotly pursued by a wolfpack of German U-boats. The film focuses on Krause, a career officer who was finally given command of a destroyer, USS Keeling (Call sign "Greyhound"). Unlike the prototypical hero, he must his own self-doubts and personal demons to be an effective leader of the defenders.
The original novel illustrated the difficulties of the Atlantic war: the struggle against
the sea, the enemy, and the exhaustion brought on by constant vigilance.
It also details the problems of the early radar and ASDIC equipment available and the poor communications between the fleet and Admiralty using HF Radio & early manuel cryptography.
One of the film's premises more intelligent elements is to focus on a specific aspect of WWII that hasn't been touched on before in other films in its genre. The Battle of the Atlantic was the longest continuous military campaign in WWII, lasting the duration of the War. It wasn't just one battle, it was a number of battles occuring during that time.
There were thousands of ships that were operating at any given time, trying to make the perilous journey from the West to Brtain, sending what was needed to liberate Europe. And they were all potential targets of the Nazi submarines. These convoys would have to make long, zigzagging courses, hopefully avoiding these submarines. But they were reduced to the speed of the slowest ship in the convoy and the Nazi submarines were just as fast when they were on the surface.
During the early years of the war, the American ships had radar. They could see what was on the surface. But it was a spotty radar; It often didn't work very well. So these men were relying on their eyes and their ears with sonar and hydrophones. All of which can play tricks over time.
Unfortunately, the execution of the topic proves to be less than the sum of its parts.
Greyhound was directed by Aaron Schneider whose two previous credits are the short film Two Soldiers and the drama Get Low released just over a decade ago. One thing that these two films and Greyhound have in common is that they have a runtime of under 2 hours which suggests that he doesn't possess enough experience for long form storytelling nor the mettle required for this sub-genre of war film.
The cinematography is dire, framing the destroyer in an unmitigating sea of dreary grey drizzle. No doubt that's how a stormy, Atlantic Ocean is meant to look like yet it can’t escape its dull visual style and the results are (to quote Roger Ebert.com) depressingly sterile. There's nothing wrong with Greyhound that a more seasoned director like Steven Spielberg, Robert Zemeckis or Ron Howard couldn't fix.
The score by Blake Neely (whose usually dependable thanks to his work on the "Arrowverse" shows) is far too loud and intrusive for this type of film. It does nothing to enchance the action or immerse us into the experience.
Setting this film almost entirely on a destroyer out at sea should be a bold and dareing gamble that should pay off by showing us the activety and intensity that goes on aboard. Props to Schneider for shooting this film on USS Kid. But it somehow only contributes this films lack of veriaty.
Tom Hanks is a man of many talents (he wrote and stars in this film) but his writing for Cap. Ernest Krause and his crew is so thin that hardly anything abou them stands out and they come off as such blank slates. This is a man who has been given a lot of responsibility as a first time commander (Which is bizzare. You would think that a man of his age would have had a long and illustrious military career and would have the experience required.) He's someone who has a lot of preasure on himself because he has a lot of lives at his hands and every descision he makes determines the outcome of his whole crew and the other vessels.
The only thing we get close to resembling to characterisation in regards to Krause is the fact that he's a religious man and that's it. To quote Rolling Stone, "it feels like the beginning and the end of his character."
No attempt is made to portray any comradery amongst Krause and his fellow officers. They never develop a distinct rapport between themselves and we as an audience end up feeling indifferent towards them as a result. Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk and Sam Mendes' 1917 had minimal characterisation but both made attempts to get a sense of who these people were through their actions, emotions and interactions; Dunkirk also suceeded thanks to it's different perspectives, on the ground, in the air and on the sea. Whereas with Greyhound, I can only assume Hanks' intent was to tell a more traditional story of heroism but the
There were thousands of ships that were operating at any given time, trying to make the perilous journey from the West to Brtain, sending what was needed to liberate Europe. And they were all potential targets of the Nazi submarines. These convoys would have to make long, zigzagging courses, hopefully avoiding these submarines. But they were reduced to the speed of the slowest ship in the convoy and the Nazi submarines were just as fast when they were on the surface.
During the early years of the war, the American ships had radar. They could see what was on the surface. But it was a spotty radar; It often didn't work very well. So these men were relying on their eyes and their ears with sonar and hydrophones. All of which can play tricks over time.
Unfortunately, the execution of the topic proves to be less than the sum of its parts.
Greyhound was directed by Aaron Schneider whose two previous credits are the short film Two Soldiers and the drama Get Low released just over a decade ago. One thing that these two films and Greyhound have in common is that they have a runtime of under 2 hours which suggests that he doesn't possess enough experience for long form storytelling nor the mettle required for this sub-genre of war film.
The cinematography is dire, framing the destroyer in an unmitigating sea of dreary grey drizzle. No doubt that's how a stormy, Atlantic Ocean is meant to look like yet it can’t escape its dull visual style and the results are (to quote Roger Ebert.com) depressingly sterile. There's nothing wrong with Greyhound that a more seasoned director like Steven Spielberg, Robert Zemeckis or Ron Howard couldn't fix.
The score by Blake Neely (whose usually dependable thanks to his work on the "Arrowverse" shows) is far too loud and intrusive for this type of film. It does nothing to enchance the action or immerse us into the experience.
Setting this film almost entirely on a destroyer out at sea should be a bold and dareing gamble that should pay off by showing us the activety and intensity that goes on aboard. Props to Schneider for shooting this film on USS Kid. But it somehow only contributes this films lack of veriaty.
Tom Hanks is a man of many talents (he wrote and stars in this film) but his writing for Cap. Ernest Krause and his crew is so thin that hardly anything abou them stands out and they come off as such blank slates. This is a man who has been given a lot of responsibility as a first time commander (Which is bizzare. You would think that a man of his age would have had a long and illustrious military career and would have the experience required.) He's someone who has a lot of preasure on himself because he has a lot of lives at his hands and every descision he makes determines the outcome of his whole crew and the other vessels.
The only thing we get close to resembling to characterisation in regards to Krause is the fact that he's a religious man and that's it. To quote Rolling Stone, "it feels like the beginning and the end of his character."
No attempt is made to portray any comradery amongst Krause and his fellow officers. They never develop a distinct rapport between themselves and we as an audience end up feeling indifferent towards them as a result. Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk and Sam Mendes' 1917 had minimal characterisation but both made attempts to get a sense of who these people were through their actions, emotions and interactions; Dunkirk also suceeded thanks to it's different perspectives, on the ground, in the air and on the sea. Whereas with Greyhound, I can only assume Hanks' intent was to tell a more traditional story of heroism but the
Apart from Hanks, the only other major star in this film is Elizabeth Shue (fresh off of Season 1 of Amazon's The Boys) playing Krause's love interest Evelyn. Their relationship is... underdeveloped to say the least. As Richard Roeper aptly stated in his review "Even though the 64-year-old Hanks and the 56-year-old Shue look amazing, we can’t help but wonder: What’s the story with these two characters? They look like a couple who have been together for 30 years, but they’re just now in the courtship stage?" https://chicago.suntimes.com/movies-and-tv/2020/7/6/21312573/greyhound-review-tom-hanks-appletv-movie-world-war-ii-navy-uss-keeling
Stephen Graham and Rob Morgan round out the films small cast wind up being mostly interchangeable. Another interesting aspect is the fact that it was a guys job to repeat what they just heard to the captain or repeat what the captain just told them to whoever he is talking to and it had to be exact otherwise one lapse in concentration could be the difference between life and death. But that's their only role in the film.
2/5.
The Anonymous Critic.
Stephen Graham and Rob Morgan round out the films small cast wind up being mostly interchangeable. Another interesting aspect is the fact that it was a guys job to repeat what they just heard to the captain or repeat what the captain just told them to whoever he is talking to and it had to be exact otherwise one lapse in concentration could be the difference between life and death. But that's their only role in the film.
2/5.
The Anonymous Critic.
Comments
Post a Comment