Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
MysticalShip

what do you think about supporting the movie GreyHound to introduce the sub line or around the same time ?

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
72 posts
14,110 battles

https://youtu.be/zN2iULAs8Os

 

Greyhound is a great movie about a Fletcher class destroyer that encounters a wolf-pack at sea while protecting a convoy featuring Tom Hanks.

It shows some great examples of ASW warfare and what it might have been like in World War 2.

When the subs make it to the game this movie would be a great tie in to get people excited to play subs and fight against subs.

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
274 posts
5,115 battles

I was surprised they didn't have a Kidd tie-in or something. Considering how all-out WG went with Dunkirk, a movie where naval combat didn't even happen, I have to question how Greyhound didn't get any digital love.

I blame Apple TV, they're probably clinging to the rights for whatever reason :Smile_sceptic:

  • Cool 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,539
[HINON]
Members
13,276 posts
1 hour ago, MysticalShip said:

Greyhound is a great movie about a Fletcher class destroyer

Unless the film changed it, in the book the USS Keeling is a Mahan class DD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,101 posts
6,704 battles
1 minute ago, RipNuN2 said:

Unless the film changed it, in the book the USS Keeling is a Mahan class DD.

The movie changed it, presumably because they filmed on Kidd, so Hanks's character specifically says he is taking command of a Fletcher.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,539
[HINON]
Members
13,276 posts
2 minutes ago, RainbowFartingUnicorn said:

The movie changed it, presumably because they filmed on Kidd, so Hanks's character specifically says he is taking command of a Fletcher.

Ah good to know as I haven't seen it yet but want to when I have time.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,922
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
14,118 posts
19,213 battles
2 hours ago, MysticalShip said:

Greyhound is a great movie

We can start here, as I really don't share this opinion. My opinion is that Greyhound was a rushed movie that was too short and had poor character development. I'll give you this: the action scenes were good. Very good, and the CGI was done very well, especially the torpedoes. But when you compare this movie to other films about the war you see that ALL this movie had going for it were the combat scenes, and that a lot of things you wanted to know about never even got mentioned. Compare this movie to a classic like "The Caine Mutiny" or "Das Boot" and the differences become glaringly obvious. Character development was weak, there was almost no background on the captain or crew, and certain things in the movie were just made up and totally unrealistic. I got the impression the movie was both rushed and underfunded. But, like I said, the action scenes were good.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,090
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,035 posts
11,620 battles
3 hours ago, MysticalShip said:

When the subs make it to the game this movie would be a great tie in to get people excited to play subs and fight against subs.

Problem is liable to be relevancy - I don't think I've seen anything from the last test of people going 'yeah, subs are ready lets go'. Odds are given some of the consistent complaints they'd have to address from testing, it'll be another 2-3 months before we have another round of it with the next set of changes - that testing should take at least 3-4 weeks, plus time to look at data, feedback, etc, and assuming it went anything close to right make tweak adjustments before release. Unless the Dev's are moving faster, or more time has passed then I though on the sub test - if we get subs this year, it'll be around Christmas - more likely the earliest we'll see them is 2021. 

Unless of course they haven't actually learned from the CV rework debacle in which case they go 'screw it we do it on live' and enrage the player base again.

But by the time they're done - the movie will have come and gone. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
72 posts
14,110 battles

Actually i was hoping Wargaming would see this and go we better get on the subs while the film is still relevant hehe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,101 posts
6,704 battles
9 hours ago, Umikami said:

We can start here, as I really don't share this opinion. My opinion is that Greyhound was a rushed movie that was too short and had poor character development. I'll give you this: the action scenes were good. Very good, and the CGI was done very well, especially the torpedoes. But when you compare this movie to other films about the war you see that ALL this movie had going for it were the combat scenes, and that a lot of things you wanted to know about never even got mentioned. Compare this movie to a classic like "The Caine Mutiny" or "Das Boot" and the differences become glaringly obvious. Character development was weak, there was almost no background on the captain or crew, and certain things in the movie were just made up and totally unrealistic. I got the impression the movie was both rushed and underfunded. But, like I said, the action scenes were good.

I agree but also disagree. The scope of this movie wasn't the same as "The Caine Mutiny" or "Das Boot." It's not as ambitious, and I think the rushed feeling and length may have been deliberate choices, as they contribute to the mood of the movie - near-constant threat over a short period of time that feels like a lot longer. That combined with the alternating claustrophobic cinematography with the more sweeping shots that seemed to emphasize how small and alone the convoy was were very effective in my book.

I agree that "The Good Shepherd" was a character study that "Greyhound" didn't manage to live up to fully, but I do think Hanks is a good enough actor and writer that he was able to convey a great deal of Krause's character - his feelings of imposter syndrome, his faith, the burden of commanding troops in combat and making life-and-death choices without enough information. As a baptism-by-fire movie, I think it was good. I would have liked to have seen more of a character change or transformation as a result, but overall I still think it was really good.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,922
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
14,118 posts
19,213 battles
2 hours ago, RainbowFartingUnicorn said:

I would have liked to have seen more of a character change or transformation as a result, but overall I still think it was really good.

You have made good points, but for myself I would have liked this movie to provide more character depth; I would have liked to have seen Hanks meet and get to know his crew, and find out more about them also. There were so many threads in this film that were just left hanging. I agree that the feelings of being small on a vast ocean while trying to perform an impossibly large job were well conveyed, but the film acted like that was all they had time for, in a 90 minute film. It could have done much more. My opinion.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×