I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Such a frustrating disappointment

It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Fantastic!

Very early in this movie I could feel the tension in that plotting room, and realise that the cast and crew had captured all the drama, the surprises, the realities, and sometimes, some emotion too.Kenneth More as the newly appointed director of the op's room is a stickler for discipline. He expects all the rules of the Navy to be observed and he doesn't hesitate to tell people off if they transgress.All the acting is superb, I feel like I'm really there too. As the new information comes in and we see the situation develop. We all know the basic story, and the outcome, but this movie goes into the hard work and hard thinking that ensured the final result. The initial planning of the German Navy was over-ambitious? Surely they knew that unless one has a secure coastline, with well equipped bases all over the place, then a Navy is a bit of a waste of time, and effort? Britain had all that, and had the tradition of centuries, and knew how to use it (mostly - the later demise of Prince of Wales near Singapore showed how narrow the thinking was?). Perhaps silly Hitler just assumed that the world power he was aiming at, just HAD to have a big navy? Raeder and other admirals should have advised him?Later in the movie, we see the officers of both sides staring across the ocean at their target - a target that has BIG guns pointing straight at them, ones that when the puff of smoke comes, means that very soon, a huge shell will come screaming straight at them and their comrades - that must have been so scary. The British knew that their "Hood" had been sunk, would they soon be next? And the Germans knew they were hopelessly outnumbered and out-gunned.In some respects, perhaps the whole incident has been over-rated? Was the Bismarck such a terrible threat? I don't recall ever seeing any attempt at a "what-if", ie, if the ships had got to Brest, would they ever have been able to get out again? The British would have lost a lot of aircraft and crews as they attacked, (as they did against the other German ships there) but my guess is that the idea of using battleships to attack the convoys was fatally flawed both from that "bases" point, and also from the "resupply" issues.Germany did arrange for tankers and other ships to meet Bismarck for fuel, ammunition, food, but, the British, through the Enigma cracking, knew where these ships were, and simple sunk them - later. If Bismarck had not been damaged and sunk, perhaps it might have done some damage, but then, would have to return to Brest... and stay there (Yes, but the other ships did scoot through the Channel later)I've read somewhere that half of Germany's submarines never even saw a target ship! So, would the surface ships do any better? Maybe, maybe not? We'll never know.Something else that if different, is the quality of the acting. I've seen other movies from that era and been so disappointed by the Stewart and Niven and others. Is this a difference between Hollywood and Britain? Maybe. Much much later (2001!) Robert Redford, in a DVD bonus feature of "Spy Game", says, (of Catherine McCormack) ..."She has the benefit, as so many English actors have, of... craft, of solid training". So very true.

The style of "Sink the Bismarck!" is a bit unusual for a war film. Much of it is not set on the frontlines on the open sea but within the underground confines of the Cabinet War Rooms--a fortified bunker well below the streets of London. In fact, if you want to visit this site today, you can--and it makes for an interesting couple hours.Within the underground complex, a Captain (Kenneth More) is in charge of coordinating the British Navy's pursuit of the dreaded Bismarck-- one of two incredibly powerful German battleships which terrified the British because its guns were more powerful and armor plating much thicker than on the British naval counterparts. In addition, you do see some battle scenes and while they were done mostly with models (along with a bit of stock footage), they do look rather realistic.So is the film worth seeing? Yes, especially if you enjoy seeing war films AND don't mind the rather cerebral behind the scenes style of the film. By the way, while the acting was very good, I was surprised how bad and unconvincing the voice actor was who pretended to be Churchill. It didn't even sound close. Also, as you see the torpedoes going through the water, look carefully and you can see that in some clips you can see the ropes pulling them through the water!

Yes, my children, there was a time when movies knew nothing of CGI, and very difficult scenes of violence and destruction were given over to names like Buddy Gillespie, Wally Veevers, and Warren Newcombe, Howard and Teddy Lydecker. These men looked deep inside their childhoods, and started using miniatures, filmed at slow motion camera speeds to proportionately smooth out the movement of model ships, water, model airplanes, collapsing and exploding buildings, even crash model cars.The most difficult miniature work was with water and the look of the water in relation to a miniature ship.It was found that the larger the model ship, the more realistic the water looked, and in Columbia's "Sink the Bismarck", the ships were anywhere from 40-60 feet in length. The water body was an indoor pool over 300 ft. in diameter, surrounded by wind machines and under the floor of the tank, large hydraulic pistons created waves.Can you imagine what fun that was? Blowing up and sinking these huge models.....it was a dream of mine for years.Today, a scruffy kid sits in front of a computer and creates sea battles and catastrophes that are astoundingly realistic. He uses 1's and 0's.....nothing of the physical world.Still, the destruction of the Bismarck, and the capstone piece, the massive explosion of the H.M.S. Hood amaze and awe anyone who watches this film today.This is a WWII film for the ages, and a centerpiece of a very fun special-effects era.

Sink the Bismark! (1960)A smart, steady as she goes WWII film in stately, wide screen black and white. There is little to flaw in it, and equally little to lift it above its quiet perfection. I don't mean it's a perfect movie, but that it manages perfectly to hold its tone, from the war rooms to the sea battles, from the English side to the German, with intelligence and historical accuracy. The terror the large, high tech battleship caused is legendary among those who lived through it. It was a symbol of German military and engineering prowess. When it knocked out (sank) Britain's largest and best ship early in the war, it looked invincible. And the prime minister made a point of saying, in a key early moment, that they had to do whatever it took to sink it. And so risks were taken and more lives lost and until, eventually, it was sunk.Not to give away the end, but this is history, and war is serious. As a sign of how the movie remains sombre through it all, there was no cheering and really not even a smile among the British when they saw the Bismarck finally go underwater. Which is admirable, the stiff upper lip thing, but it's also a little unbelievable. Indeed, the German boat leaders are constantly shown to be arrogant and cocky, worried more about letters from Hitler than the fact they are leaking oil. I suppose it might be true to some extent, that the British were all good chaps and determined to win and the Germans were all ruthless and tireless and determined also to win.Such is war.But this is maybe the largest tilt the film makes in the wrong direction. It is filmed with great control, and it mixes a little existing footage with the new shooting really seamlessly. The acting is first rate, with no heroes in the Hollywood sense, just a large cast of focused talent. As for accuracy, it seems that scholars find it quite good in the large picture but riddled with little errors, including the portrayal of the German captain as a cocky Hitler worshiper. There is some question about whether the Germans scuttled the ship themselves or if it was sunk, and there was apparently no Norwegian spy involved. Some of the errors have to do with the use of updated ships for the filming, but most of this is too fast to worry about. There is the hinted at turning away after the sinking, without picking up Germans in the water, and apparently the rescue effort was minimal, so a hundred Germans died in the water. Great detail is found at the Wiki entry for the movie (as well as the entry for the ship). Another page to pursue is at www.kbismarck.com.The main character, Captain Shepard, and his son on a navy ship, are fictional. The wreck was discovered in 1989 by the same team that discovered the Titanic, and James Cameron made a documentary on the ship (and its wreckage) in 2002.