Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

SoTrumpBelieve Must See Movie...

Cooktopi The acting in this movie is really good.

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Michael DeZubiria It will be hard for some viewers to look past assumptions that this is a documentary made by a Hollywood director trying to cash in on the success of Titanic by making documentaries like Expeidition: Bismarck, Ghosts of the Abyss, and Aliens of the Deep, but from his past as the director of Titanic and Thhe Abyss, I think it becomes genuinely clear that he just has a true, child-like fascination with the unreachable depths of the ocean, and he has achieved a level of success that allows him financially to travel miles down into the deep and show us parts of the world that no human being has ever seen before and may otherwise never have seen at all.Granted, I understand that Cameron is not solely responsible for our ventures to the bottom of the ocean, but his efforts have given us images and memories and knowledge about the wreck of the Bismarck, one of the most controversial shipwrecks of World War II, and has made a tremendous contribution to science and to history.This documentary goes into astonishing detail about the political climate of the world at the time the Bismarck was built by Nazi Germany and the jaw-dropping statistics that she boasted, both physically, from her deck guns at over 100 feet long able to fire thousand pound pieces of metal thousands of yards with frightening accuracy, to the tremendous number of ships that she was able to sink before was finally sank herself during a battle with British ships.The controversy comes in over who is to take credit for the actual, physical sinking of the Bismarck, as the British claim to have sunk her while the Germans claim that her crew destroyed her in a last effort to have some control over their own fate. The film features astonishing research and a detailed look at the history of the ship and the battle that sank her, as well as some incredible computer generated recreations of the actual sinking of the ship, edited together masterfully with the new footage of the 61 year old wreck.The addition of two of the survivors from the Bismarck, as well as the fact that old enemies now look back on the battle and the war and the lives lost with mutual sadness and regret add a poignant human element to the story, which was always there but which is easy to forget in the face of the sheer magnitude of the ship, her power, and the wrenching inhumanity of that war. This is a powerful documentary that only suffers from a goofy, highly over-dramatic narration that reminds me of the similarly goofy narration of the atrocious documentary Gunner Palace, which generated high expectations and satisfied none. This documentary is the exact opposite, and whether or not James Cameron is cashing in on any kind of success, if he keeps them this good, I say keep them coming.

rkehr As I watched this broadcast, I was surprised to see certain representations of damage and their explanations. I was also quite surprised that there was not adequate 'expert' witness present during the commentary. I am not a naval expert, but I do study these things, and consider wreck sites with a physics perspective. If I could come to an understanding of certain basic items, I expect that the on-site experts could as well. That the commentary shows otherwise leaves me questioning just who was where with what knowledge.A few points as examples: The tower, with the admiral's bridge, foretop director station, etc.. JC suggests in the film that the tower landed on the bottom upright, and was pushed over as the hull moved against it after impact. His graphics even show this. I can not accept that explanation. Considering that the entire tower broke away as the ship sank, most likely during the righting of the hull after leaving the surface, and that the tower at that time was extremely TOP-heavy, it's quite apparent that it plummeted to the bottom much like an arrow. The very heavy armored foretop station (a thick box of armor plate dominating the upper levels of the tower) would have lead the way down (tower upside down), with the relatively long body section acting as the arrow's shaft. It would have plunged into the bottom sediment top-first. The hull did not knock it over from an upright position.When JC's crew came across a hull section of the bilge broken away, they puzzled over just what it could be. It was obvious to myself and others that red antifouling paint, and a sharp near-90-degree bend in such a below waterline structure could only be the turn of the bilge. The uniform shape of the plating on either side of the turn, extending in both directions marks this wreckage even further as being the bilge turn near the center of the ship. No other shape could fit that area. To their credit, later in the documentary, they described this. What stood out to me was that no expedition member readily recognized this at the time of discovery.The views of the stern underside show a rudder jammed into a propeller. JC stated that the torpedo hit must have jammed the rudder over to this point. This can't be. The propeller, in that shot, was truly fouled. However, the survivor's testimony states that efforts were made at steering the ship with engines only. There was no mention of a jammed shaft. Ballard's initial study, matched with eyewitness records show that Bismarck sank by the stern. This is because the ship's sea intakes and engine room water passages were blown open. The rear of the ship settled first from the flooding. As the ship dove to the bottom, it likely went down stern first as well, since the flooding in this area was more complete. Bismarck's stern quite well could have hit bottom first, jamming the rudders hard over. The rudder could not have been pushed so hard as to bend the rudder shaft so far that it hit the propeller from a mere torpedo hit. The weight of the ship, through an angular impact would certainly be able to accomplish this, however.JC also states that the hull bent as it hit the bottom, like a shoe as the owner moves through a step. He says that this is what caused the bottom sides to blow out, assisted by hydraulic blowout. I can't see how this would be. His graphic representation is quite extreme. In order for the ship to bend as he shows, the very structure of the bottom would have to fail. You simply can not expect a warship to bend like that an not, a) compress the upper decks accordion style, and b) stretch the lower decks and double bottom to the point where they split. Bismarck sits intact (largely) and inline. No indications of hull warpage have been reported. Lastly, in order for this ship to bend like the banana move in the computer recreation, a large number of the huge armor plates on either side would have to be dislocated and /or removed. There is no way to bend 12' armor plate of that type against its plane! Warping it through the surface for hull fitting is one thing. Bending it along the thin edge several meters thick is impossible! You can watch and see that there are NO loose armor plates (only lower hull plates BELOW the armor line), and not even an open seem between the plates. The plates themselves could not be expected to work back into position and not leave evidence of having moved. Also, the inner torpedo bulkheads, which were so obligingly exposed, would have to bend as well (along with every other vertical longitudinal structure amidships). They did not. And if they had, they would never return to form since they were designed to flex and bend under stress in order to contain the torpedo blast, the following waterhammer jet, and still keep the citadel dry. The hydraulic blowout theory seems best, especially when you consider that German welding of the period was not the best. Reference the clean break in the tower base, the stern separation and the clean breaks at every point where lower hull sections are missing. Each break is at a weld joint.Of all the points raised and issues taken during this film, I was most pleased with the study of the inner torpedo defense. It has been my contention that the torpedos were NOT the cause of her sinking. The large hole in the deck, next to the catapult, seems to me to be a torpedo hit, as the ship was rolling onto her side. The torps arrived too late.The saving grace of this film is the quality of the video. One can draw his own conclusions from the clear images presented therein.

bruno-chereul It's a hard but wonderful documentary about the end of this war ship. James Cameron forgets one thing, a very important thing. Despite the first radars , the MI6 knew exactly the position of the Bismarck, owing to "Enigma machine" built by Turner. The Admiral Reder was so stupid to communicate from Berlin with the war ship.The results is knew: 2,500 dead sailors and a fall down during 12 minutes near the french harbour: Brest.But, fortunately, the liberty for all the english then U.S.Ships to help England and 3 years ago, liberty for the free Europe.

Ralph Michael Stein Two of the slightly more than 100 survivors of the 1941 sinking of the German battleship Bismarck accompanied James Cameron on a mission to determine the exact circumstances of the mighty warship's demise.In the early stages of World War II Britain's Royal Navy feared not only U-Boats (which, in fact, were in short supply) but surface commerce raiders, both disguised and conventional. In the First World War Germany's surface sea raiders posed a serious challenge to ocean-borne commerce and their rampages required significant diversion of British naval assets.Before television, Americans and Britons followed the war through newsreels at a time when very many attended movies at least weekly. Newspapers and magazines provided military and naval commentary, often accompanied by photos and maps.At the beginning of the war the German pocket battleship Graf Spee captured world attention as it raided the Atlantic before being hunted down and grievously damaged by British ships. The subsequent spectacular scuttling of the Graf Spee on the River Plate was filmed and later watched by millions.The Bismarck and its accompanying vessels posed an enormous potential threat to Britain's sea lines. One of the most powerful warships ever built, its mere existence was a daily factor in British naval plans. When it sallied forth in the spring of 1941 the Royal Navy successfully intercepted the vessel but in the first exchange of broadsides, HMS Hood was hit and it went down with all but three of its crew.James Cameron's documentary, supplemented with reenactments, barely conveys the shock felt in England when news that HMS Hood had been lost was received. HMS Prince of Wales, with the Hood, was damaged (HMS Prince of Wales would be lost in December of the same year to Japanese forces while under the command of an admiral who doubted that aircraft could sink battleships).A task force of Royal Navy vessels cornered the Bismarck which steamed in endless circles because a fortuitous torpedo hit from a British plane jammed the ship's rudder.Pummeled by the massed firepower of many ships, Bismarck went down. A continuing mystery, and controversy still alive, was whether the fatally stricken battle wagon went to its grave proximately through battle damage or whether the crew hastened the end by setting off scuttle charges and opening sea cocks. National pride - British and German - is still sufficiently alive for this issue to command attention.Whatever the answer the destruction of Bismarck was a relief for a stressed and weary England. A popular movie of the encounter was made years ago.Cameron basically adopts the approach, and most critically, the advanced technology that Robert Ballard has used so successfully in exploring the Titanic, the Lusitania and other famous maritime wrecks. It's interesting to watch him at work, both on the surface and in the deep diving craft housed on the Russian marine archeological vessel that has made many discoveries possible.Cameron briefly explores the history of Nazism and the two elderly German survivors explain that as little boys they grew up under the mantle of Nazi control and couldn't help but hate the British. They become emotional when talking about their lost shipmates and in one moving scene they throw a wreath into the ocean while expressing respect for their dead comrades and hope that there will be no more wars.The Discovery Channel premiered this film tonight and, of course, it was chopped up with commercials. It will make a greater impact when seen as an uninterrupted feature length documentary.The sea holds many mysteries and in the past decade research submersibles have uncovered some and answered a tantalizing few long- time questions. Cameron's passion for this project comes through here (as does more than a hint that he isn't as patient and at least as superficially easygoing as Ballard appears to be).This is a fascinating film that all interested in World War II and the sea will enjoy.9/10 (for this genre).