dark light

Ghostboat

I know this topic is only slightly relevant to this forum but what did you all think of “Ghostboat”? I thought the first episode was very good especially the last 10 minutes when three (CGI) Bf 109s strafed the sub. At that point I thought the plot was that the sub had travelled back in time to 1943 (as in “The Final Countdown”) and that episode 2 would have lots of WW2 action.

In fact in Ep 2 we learned that was not what had happened and the second episode was a bit like that Hollywood movie “Below” about the haunted sub.

I suppose ITV deserve some credit for doing something different but it all ended up a bit predictable. Here are some of my gripes about the production –

1) Like most CGI aircraft the 109s didn’t move right. To my eye they moved too slowly. Also the production was set in Dec 1943 yet the 109s were obviously 109Es with 1940 style markings. Should they not have been Gs or some other type?

2) The scenes supposedly set in a Scottish naval dockyard were obviously filmed in Malta as the buildings in the background were in that familiar beige Maltese stone.

3) One crucial plot point – about the sub travelling forward in time from 1943 to the present – was never explained properly. And what happened to the crew? Perhaps I wasn’t paying attention.

Overall I felt the story left rather a lot of questions unanswered. What did you all think?

Colin

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,604

Send private message

By: Pete Truman - 13th April 2006 at 12:24

Unfortunately we only started watching it half way through the first episode and never managed to work out what the hell was going on, why make CGI of 3 Messerschmidts when a single JU 88 would have sufficed.
Das Boot is an amazing film but let down by it’s use of a/c, surely at the time of filming, there were more usable, suitable a/c than Harvards, it’s a while since I read the book, but wasn’t the final attack by Mitchells, or was it Mosquitoes.
However, glad it boosted entry into the Gosport Museum, an amazing place, while watching Ghostboat, my son recalled his experience of sitting in the preserved sub at Gosport with the klaxon sounding and the red lights on in the control room during the mock depth charge attack when he had the honour of manning the periscope, quite chilling.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

4,836

Send private message

By: Manston Airport - 12th April 2006 at 22:06

I know this topic is only slightly relevant to this forum but what did you all think of “Ghostboat”? I thought the first episode was very good especially the last 10 minutes when three (CGI) Bf 109s strafed the sub. At that point I thought the plot was that the sub had travelled back in time to 1943 (as in “The Final Countdown”) and that episode 2 would have lots of WW2 action.

In fact in Ep 2 we learned that was not what had happened and the second episode was a bit like that Hollywood movie “Below” about the haunted sub.

I suppose ITV deserve some credit for doing something different but it all ended up a bit predictable. Here are some of my gripes about the production –

1) Like most CGI aircraft the 109s didn’t move right. To my eye they moved too slowly. Also the production was set in Dec 1943 yet the 109s were obviously 109Es with 1940 style markings. Should they not have been Gs or some other type?

2) The scenes supposedly set in a Scottish naval dockyard were obviously filmed in Malta as the buildings in the background were in that familiar beige Maltese stone.

3) One crucial plot point – about the sub travelling forward in time from 1943 to the present – was never explained properly. And what happened to the crew? Perhaps I wasn’t paying attention.

Overall I felt the story left rather a lot of questions unanswered. What did you all think?

Colin

I understand the 1st episode but i did not understand the second it made me :confused: but the 1st episode was brilliant.

James

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

147

Send private message

By: Aeronut - 12th April 2006 at 20:45

Made a visit to the Submarine Museum at Gosport today. From what I overheard the programme was a spur for some of the visitors to make their visit – not a bad thing then. From what I saw of the programme they had made a passible attempt at making a replica U boat look like an S class boat, certainly around the conning tower. Any other moaning would be like complaining that the Battle of Britain was only fought by aircraft powered by Merlins – must be true coz I saw it in a film.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

4,074

Send private message

By: Arm Waver - 12th April 2006 at 10:34

Likewise Moggy – I understand you points and perhaps as you say the research people didn’t go to as much detail as they could. I just don’t watch stuff that closely as long as the story keeps me interested then that’ll work for me.
Gary

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 12th April 2006 at 09:32

Hear what you say, but if you are doing an historical story the little details (Not costly, not difficult) are what establishes the atmosphere.

Nothing I carped about needed a penny extra spending on it. It was just evidence that nobody on the production really cared.

Moggy

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

4,074

Send private message

By: Arm Waver - 12th April 2006 at 08:40

I also enjoyed it. Also a refreshing change not to have wall to wall swearing in it.

Get real folks – It was only TV not real life…. Sheesh.
It is a work of fiction – a story – not meant as a 100% accurate piece of history. Who cares if there were inaccuracies. Made a refreshing change from the usual crud we see on our TV’s…

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

4,649

Send private message

By: Rocketeer - 11th April 2006 at 22:25

Well I liked it! So there…had me on the edge of my seat…I sometimes think that maybe we sometimes expect too much and criticise too much too….makes us sound like anoraks?! Suspend belief!!!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

676

Send private message

By: mjr - 11th April 2006 at 22:11

I thought the first half was ok, started out quite well, all pointing towards some mysterious time shift, then the second half! what happened?! it was like the director decided he couldnt be ar@”ed to fininsh it, and just rushed the second half with some dodgy cop out. As for comparing it with Das Boot….. I dont think so, not even in the same league.

The CGI wasnt bad for a low budget production, some of the cgi in pearl harbour was no better, bearing in mind that the budget was probably 10 times bigger, I thought the underwater shots were less convincing than the 109’s.

mjr

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

338

Send private message

By: Russ - 11th April 2006 at 21:53

Yeah the 109’s were awful….I know it was supposed to be a ‘Ghost’ story thing so not up my street to start with but it was just…well….how can i say…..not very good! 😮

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

676

Send private message

By: sea vixen - 11th April 2006 at 21:49

it was good TV i thought but….WAT HAPPEND TO THE ORIGANAL CREW!!!!!!. and them 109s looked so fake it was unbelivable..and why was the ruskies scrambeling su-25s to attack the scorpian……they are tank busters arnt they….

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

197

Send private message

By: ian_st - 11th April 2006 at 21:38

Compare & contrast with “Das Boot”….

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

338

Send private message

By: Russ - 11th April 2006 at 19:52

Watched both, thought it was really poor. NOT one of David Jasons best roles….

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 11th April 2006 at 19:44

It was shoddy.

Smoking was never allowed below decks on a submerged boat. Only once the boat was open on the surface and running on its diesels would the smoking lamp be lit.

The second a boat surfaced the lookouts would be on the bridge scanning all quarters. Several times the boat was running on the surface with nobody on the tower. Jason was sent up to an empty bridge to take a star sight at one point.

When the boat blew itself up (in periscope sight of the Gdansk docks) the explosion was about three hundred yards from the survivors, who were at that time just boarding the Oakland (?) from where nothing could be seen other than bare horizon. The Ruskies were very relieved as the submarine threat had disappeared, but seemed unable, on their sophisticated monitoring equipment to spot the Oakland at all.

etc

etc

etc

Moggy

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,029

Send private message

By: Flanker_man - 11th April 2006 at 19:36

Apparently the Sub is the one they used for U571 but they modified the exterior, shame really, when I saw the photo I was hoping there was an ex-RN WW2 sub around somewhere

See my question over on the forum ‘TV Programs & Films’ :- http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=55855

Ken

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,541

Send private message

By: Rlangham - 11th April 2006 at 19:32

Apparently the Sub is the one they used for U571 but they modified the exterior, shame really, when I saw the photo I was hoping there was an ex-RN WW2 sub around somewhere

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

870

Send private message

By: Dave T - 11th April 2006 at 19:26

Well, i didn’t understand it either, especially after 3 hours. 😡

Wonder where they got the Sub though ?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,885

Send private message

By: Bob - 11th April 2006 at 18:46

I suppose the reuse of the props from U571 should be applauded – but thats about all IMO. David Jason turning into Uncle Albert was the last straw….

Sign in to post a reply