Come Sail Away with Me

Tom Clancy's novel The Hunt for Red October is a military "thriller" known for its glacial pace. Does the movie sail any quicker?

Foresight: The Hunt for Red October (1990) Directed by John McTiernan 

Baggage tags: The Hunt for Red October (1984 novel), Rainbow Six (1998 novel), John McTiernan's Criminal History

Before watching the classic Cold War submarine thriller, The Hunt for Red October, I decided to tackle the source material, Tom Clancy's first novel (1984) of the same title.

Sometimes, when an author writes their first novel, lightning strikes.

Other times, something much slower does—like, say, a children's carousel - destined to go around in slow, endless circles… like a lost submarine, adrift with no port in sight.

In Tom Clancy's The Hunt for Red October, it was the latter. A 'thriller' about a renegade Russian submarine so punishingly slow, I considered leaving it unfinished more than once.

To 13-year-old me, Tom Clancy was the fucking man. He published Rainbow Six, a book about an international counterterrorism unit, three years before 9/11. After 9/11, I was naturally drawn to a story about a special ops team traveling the globe and taking out bad guys.

The book itself was a slog though - it took 300 pages for something exciting to happen. When it finally did—a group of terrorists takes over an amusement park in Germany—it was genuinely compelling. Alas, I wasn’t about to wade through another 300 pages of techno-military babble just for a few more bursts of action. Suffice to say, I never finished it.

Tom Clancy, it would seem, perfected that blueprint back in 1984 with The Hunt for Red October. It’s 500 pages of slow-moving Cold War maneuvers leading to what is, to his credit, a truly spectacular finale. This time, I stuck it out so I could see how the movie would compare.

The film adaptation of The Hunt for Red October (1990) stars Alec Baldwin and Sean Connery. Two of the greats in their absolute prime. It was nominated for three Academy Awards (winning Best Sound Editing) and was directed by my favorite action director-slash-convicted felon: John McTiernan.

John McTiernan movies have grossed over $1 billion worldwide. He's the director of beloved action classics like Die Hard and Predator. But the critically reviled Rollerball (2002) ultimately led to his incarceration. Rollerball was so cursed it got him ensnared in a federal wiretapping scandal. (He hired a PI to illegally wiretap his producer's phone because he thought they were fucking him over.) John didn’t just get a slap on the wrist, either. He served real time: in 2010 he was sentenced to 365 days (which, in millions, is coincidentally about what Die Hard with a Vengeance grossed during its theatrical run), of which he served 328 in the federal prison camp in Yankton, South Dakota.

Back in 1990, though, McTiernan was at the height of his powers. He was riding a wave of critical and commercial success following Die Hard, and The Hunt for Red October was his direct follow-up.

After slogging through the novel, I’m less excited than I was before—but with Baldwin, Connery, and McTiernan at the helm, there’s hope this submarine moves a hell of a lot faster onscreen.

Check back in next week for our hindsight review of The Hunt for Red October.

"Hello, I'm Captain Ramius and I'm actually speaking Russian but when you hear it, it will sound like English with a Scottish accent."

Hindsight: The Hunt for Red October (1990)

Well, shit. 

Watching McTiernan’s film adaptation of The Hunt for Red October immediately sent the book up in my esteem. Turns out the book really is always better — even when you didn’t particularly like the book and the movie is Academy nominated. I recognize the lack of logic in that observation, but it’s true. (And it makes more sense than my lightning-carousel metaphor earlier…)

Right off the bat, the film does something remarkable that I’ve never seen repeated. It opens aboard the Red October with Captain Ramius (Sean Connery) and his crew speaking Russian. Then, with a simple, smart camera push-in on an actor’s face and pull-out, the dialogue seamlessly transitions to English. This completely breaks the fourth wall, trusting the audience to understand the reality (they are speaking Russian) while allowing the film to proceed in English for accessibility. It’s weird, but it works — brilliantly. This completely avoids the awkwardness of phonetically accented English you get in similar movies, like K-19: The Widowmaker. And crucially, it allows Sean Connery to command his Soviet submarine in his natural, authoritative Scottish brogue. Honestly, it blows my mind no one else has copied this.

The film opens with a booming Russian anthem, and the pacing immediately feels brisker than the book's slow crawl. Without Clancy’s dense prose, the narrative unspools faster than a roll of toilet paper your cat got hold of. But it turns out that cutting all the technical detail also cuts a lot of the stakes — the tension of the submarine hunt gets flattened, and the movie ends up feeling rote and unsatisfying.

It’s the cast that keeps this ship from sinking. Beyond Connery and Alec Baldwin as Jack Ryan, Sam Neill, Tim Curry, Scott Glenn, and James Earl Jones all receive high billing. Scott Glenn is particularly convincing as Commander Mancuso of the USS Dallas, embodying the pragmatic American counterpart to Ramius with ease. He fits right into the steady, competent military types he plays so well.

The actors bring more depth to the characters than Clancy, who writes them all drier than a sandbag. But not every casting choice lands. Tim Curry, as a Russian ship’s doctor, is completely unconvincing. While every other member of the Russian cast plays stoicism, Curry looks legitimately scared just to be on set. Not ideal for someone playing a calm, stoic, authoritative Soviet doctor.

Then there's Jack Ryan himself, played by Alec Baldwin. The film rushes his transition from CIA analyst behind a desk to a guy navigating the frontlines of a Cold War naval standoff. Baldwin does his best, but Ryan’s whole vibe feels like Randal from Clerks muttering, "I'm not even supposed to be here today," except it’s infinitely less relatable. When your protagonist starts as a wealthy CIA analyst, you’ve got to work a little harder to make the audience root for him.

With McTiernan directing, I expected at least one standout action set piece. The finale — a submarine chase, sonar tracking, and a torpedo shootout — should have been that. But it lacks the pulse-pounding suspense of the novel’s climax. Sometimes, tension just builds better on the page than it does on the screen.

All I really wanted from the movie was Cold War tension delivered at the speed of a Happy Meal. Sure, the pacing issues were solved — but too much got lost in the process.

Would I have enjoyed the movie more if I hadn’t read the book first? Probably.

But that’s not how I do things.

Final verdict:

I don't recommend The Hunt for Red October — book or movie — to anyone.

If you're craving underwater military drama and action, just watch Das Boot.

Hindsight:

Well shit. Watching McTiernan's film adaptation of The Hunt for Red October immediately sent the book up in my esteem. Turns out the book really is always better, even when you didn't particularly like the book and the movie is actually pretty good. I recognize the lack of logic in that observation, but it's true. (And it makes moresense than my lightning-carousel metaphor earlier...)

Right off the bat, the film does something remarkable that I've never seen repeated. It opens aboard the Red October with Captain Ramius (Sean Connery) and his crew speaking Russian. Then, with a simple, smart camera push-in on an actor's face and pull-out, the dialogue seamlessly transitions to English. This technique completely breaks the fourth wall, trusting the audience to understand the reality (they are speaking Russian) while allowing the film to proceed in English for accessibility. It's weird but it works! This completely avoids the awkwardness of phonetically accented English heard in similar movies, like K-19: The Widowmaker. This decision crucially allows Sean Connery to command his Soviet submarine in his natural, authoritative Scottish brogue, signaling that this is how we, the audience, will "hear" these characters speak. It honestly blows my mind noone else has copied this technique.

The film opens with a bombastic Russian anthem, and the pacing instantly feels considerably more brisk than the book. Without Clancy's dense prose, the narrative unravels faster than a roll of toilet paper your cat got a hold of. But it turns out cutting out all of the technical detail lessens the stakes of the titular submarine hunt in a way that ultimately makes the film feel rote and unsatisfying.

The cast that keeps this ship from completely sinking though. Beyond Connery and Alec Baldwin as Jack Ryan, Sam Neill, Tim Curry, Scott Glenn, and James Earl Jones all recieve high billing. Scott Glenn is particularly convincing as Commander Mancuso of the USS Dallas, embodying the pragmatic American counterpart to Ramius with perfection, fitting right into the military types he plays so well.

The actors bring more depth to the characters than Clancy, who writes them all dryer than a sandbag. However, not every casting choice lands. Tim Curry is not convincing as a Russian sailor. While every other member of the Russian cast was playing stoicism, Curry looked legitimately scared to even be on the set. Not a problem if Curry's character was meant to be a reluctant sailor, but he's playing the authorative ship doctor. He's not supposed to be scared and delicate.

Then there's our protagonist, Jack Ryan, played by Alec Baldwin. The film rushes his transition from CIA analyst behind a desk to being thrust into the heart of the naval operation tracking the Red October to defend his controversial analysis. (The America military is convicted the Red October is trying to start WW3, Ryan believes the crew simply wants to defect.)

While Baldwin does his best, Ryan's demeanor throughout much of this rapid ascent isn't far off from Randal's disaffected "I'm not even supposed to be here today" from Clerks – but it's infinitely less relatable. When your main character starts as a wealthy CIA analyst, you're going to have to work a little harder to get the audience to relate to him.

With McTiernan directing, I expected at least one of his expertly crafted set pieces. The finale involves a high-ish (they are submarines after all) speed chase, sonar tracking and a torpedo shootout, but it all lacks the oomph and suspense that the books finale had. Sometimes suspense just builds better across a page then a screen.

After the book, all I was really hoping for was some Cold War tension with delivered to me at the speed of a Happy Meal instead if a Michilin Star Restaurant (in Europe). All of my pacing issues were resolved but too much was lost in the adaptation. Would I have enjoyed the movie more if I hadn't read the book right beforehand? Probably, but that's not how I do things. 

I don't recommend The Hunt for Red October (book or movie) to anyone. If you're looking for underwater military action, just watch Das Boot. Sure, it's three and a half hours long, but if you watch it you can skip every other submarine movie ever made.

We needed more to ground his sudden shift into the field commander role for the stakes to feel truly personal through his eyes.

My main hope coming out of the "Foresight" section was that this submarine would move a hell of a lot faster onscreen than it did on the page. Thankfully, the movie delivers a narrative that moves at a much brisker clip than Clancy's often dense prose. While it cuts down on some of the exhaustive technical detail (which, to be fair, did heighten the stakes of the hunt in a way I didn't fully appreciate while reading), it maintains the core tension of the Cold War premise.

Beyond that clever piece of filmmaking, is this otherwise a "fairly rote submarine thriller" as my rough notes suggested? Not entirely. While it doesn't reinvent the wheel, the film benefits immensely from its stellar cast. 

Then there's our protagonist, Jack Ryan, played by Alec Baldwin. The film rushes his transition from CIA analyst behind a desk to being thrust into the heart of the naval operation tracking the Red October to defend his controversial analysis. While Baldwin does his best, Ryan's demeanor throughout much of this rapid ascent isn't far off from Randal's disaffected "I'm not even supposed to be here today" from Clerks – but critically, it's infinitely less relatable here. We needed more to ground his sudden shift into the field commander role for the stakes to feel truly personal through his eyes.

Coming into this, I had the baggage of knowing John McTiernan, my favorite action director responsible for classics like Die Hard and Predator (and yes, the cursed Rollerball that led to his... legal troubles), was at the helm, fresh off Die Hard. I expected the tension and expertly crafted set pieces he's known for. While there are moments of suspense, particularly early on, the core action sequences involving sonar tracking and torpedo evasion ultimately felt surprisingly underwhelming. For all the technical detail retained from Clancy, the visual and auditory execution of the underwater confrontations didn't quite generate the pulse-pounding threat I anticipated from McTiernan, especially considering the book built towards a truly spectacular finale on the page.

So, after laying out my baggage and diving into McTiernan's film adaptation, where do I land? The Hunt for Red October on screen certainly moves faster than its literary counterpart, delivering a narrative that maintains interest. Some filmmaking choices, like that ingenious language trick and the strong central performances, truly stand out. However, the film rushes critical character development, particularly for Jack Ryan, and the core suspense of the submarine chase, despite McTiernan's pedigree, felt surprisingly muted compared to the tension built in the book's finale. While the book's ending was spectacular on the page, the film's conclusion, while tying things up efficiently, couldn't quite replicate that punch. Is The Hunt for Red October worth watching? Yes, absolutely. As a piece of tense Cold War cinema and for its unique technical touches and strong central performances (Connery and Baldwin, despite the script's handling of Ryan), it's still a worthwhile watch, even if it doesn't quite live up to the full potential of its premise or its director's reputation for explosive action.

Well shit, watching the movie immediately sent the book up in my esteem. Turns out the book is always better. Even when you don't like the book and the movie is good. I recognize the lack of logic in the observation but it's true. (Makes more sense than my lightning-carousel metaphor earlier at least...)

Right off the bat, this movie does something I've never seen done before. Sean Connery plays captain Romulus and the movie opens with him speaking to his crewmen (including Sam Neil and Tim Curry) in Russian. It initially appears as though the entire cast learnt Russian for their roles! Now that is incredible!

A few minutes later, on the Russian sub, the political officer is reciting a novel in Russian to Captain Romulus. The camera pushes in on the actors face, landing on his lips as he continues speaking, then, as it begins pushing out the language transitions into English.

This simple camera movement makes the audience understand, yes, they're speaking Russian on board the ship, but for our sake, it will be spoken in English. It's completely breaking the fourth wall and trusting the audience to go along with it, and it works geniusly. I watched K-19: The Widowmaker recently, Harrison Ford and all the actors speak English with phony Russian accents and it comes across as silly, because obviously they'd just be speaking Russian in real life.

This allows Sean Connery to play a Soviet submarine commander in his natural Scottish accent while signaling to the audience - in reality these men are speaking Russian.

That's really the only groundbreaking technique in this otherwise fairly rote submarine thriller. The movie opens with this bombastic Russian anthem, it's effective in psyching you up for what's to come, and as the cast credits begin to roll onscreen the excitement builds.

I knew about Baldwin and Connery but Sam Neil, Tim Curry, Scott Glenn and James Earl Jones all recieve high billing alongside the two stars.

Scott Glenn is convincing as the commander of the USS Dallas, he's Connery's American counterpart and always plays these military types to perfection. On the other end, Tim Curry is hilariously miscast as a Russian sailor. His presence was distracting.

In general, the actors brought more depth to the characters than Clancy was able to do through his writing. The fucker writes dryer than a sandbag, but what he lacks in character development he more than made up for in techincal exposition. That tech expo heightened the stakes of the submarine hunt in a way I didn't fully appreciate while reading.

Our main character, Jack Ryan (Alex Baldwin) is a CIA analyst thrust into taking point on the hunt for the Red October in order to defend his analysis. He believes the crew of the Russian sub wants to defect, while the rest of the US military is convicted it's sailing to their coast to start WW3.

The film moves Ryan way too quickly from cubicle, to situation room, and eventually into the naval brigade tracking the submarine. Ryan's demeanor the entire time is not dissimilar to Randal's "I'm not even supposed to be here today" from Clerks, but in this case it's infinitely less relatable.

McTiernan, known for expertly directing action sequences, gets a few exciting set pieces here, but ultimately something feels missing. Using sonar to detect evasive submarines underwater comes across as underwhelming. Torpedoes are fired but don't feel threatening.

Conclusion still needs work, write a concluding paragraph on how you felt about the ending of the movie, and if you recommend the movie or not.

Turns out all that jargon and babble helped the set up and payoff for the final act. The suspense just wasn't there at the end here.

There are things that made the movie a satisfying experience. The film opens with this bombastic Russian anthem and it immediately gets you excited for whats to come. Combine that with the cast list, which I honestly didn't know other that Alec and Sean. Sam Neil, Tim Curry, Scott Glenn and James Earl Jones all get high billing, seeing those names come across the screen had me excited. 

 Fucker writes dryer than a sandbag, .

Sam Neil quote.

Other things that worked: set design, submarines looked great, the push for language.

Ending was flat.