Captain Philips

[sam sen]

Watched this at Central Festival yesterday.

160 baht to view a film there now ?

The price of cinema ticket seems to increase on each visit I make.

Scala cinema, Siam Square 100 baht and original 1960's theatre. cant beat it.

[Phil Conners]

Not Pattaya related. Moved to Farang Pub

[Ulysses G.]

About time!

Edited January 12, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[wonder6281]

Very good movie .. also check out Escape Plan and The Book Thief.

[keemapoot]

Agree, it's a very good movie. Also had high hopes for American Hustle. It just ran too long and wandered, but good try.

Edited January 12, 2014 by keemapoot

[sustento]

I was rather disappointed when i saw it, not the great movie it's hyped to be.

When i can't understand is in this age of satellites, drones, attack helicopters etc how a few rag heads in a speedboat can highjack modern liners. I mean one sniper at the back of the ship could have taken out those 4 high jackers before they got within 1/2 mile of the ship.

Merchant ships tend not to have snipers as part of the crew

[rsokolowski]

Watched this at Central Festival yesterday.

160 baht to view a film there now ?

The price of cinema ticket seems to increase on each visit I make.

Go on a Wednesday TaaSaparot - it's only 120 Baht.

I thought Captain Phillips was awful. Tom Hanks played the same role he plays in all his films - Mr Faultless, the epitome of the apple-pie, mom-loving, stars and stripes flag-waving, better than anybody else American. Throw in millions of dollars worth of hardware (3 warships, a helicopter and a team of Navy Seals) to take on 4 (that's just four) Somali pirates. 3 of the pirates were shot dead and the 4th ended up being sentenced to 33 years in a high security prison in Terre Haute, Indiana. I left the cinema feeling empty. I've visited the USA many times and there are many, many wonderful people and places there. They are horribly misrepresented by this film. It essentially says "We are the mighty USA and if you cross us we will crush you mercilessly, no matter what the cost". Tom Hanks best film was Turner & Hooch, though the dog was the better actor.

What exactly is wrong with crushing you mercilessly, at any cost if you cross us (hijack our ship, kill our citizens, etc.)? Seems to me if the USA did this consistently that there would at the very least be less people on this planet that had hijacked are ships and killed our citizens.

[chris2004]

I was rather disappointed when i saw it, not the great movie it's hyped to be.

When i can't understand is in this age of satellites, drones, attack helicopters etc how a few rag heads in a speedboat can highjack modern liners. I mean one sniper at the back of the ship could have taken out those 4 high jackers before they got within 1/2 mile of the ship.

Merchant ships tend not to have snipers as part of the crew

The cost of posting a sniper on dangerous trips like this would be much less than paying ransoms to pirates. The US army must have thousands of trained snipers sat around doing nothing. Why have an army (costing $700 billion) if they can't protect American property and lives.

Edited January 13, 2014 by chris2004

[Spoonman]

Watched this on TV last night, was pretty good.

[inzman]

Watched it at home last night, Really enjoyed it!

[sustento]

I was rather disappointed when i saw it, not the great movie it's hyped to be.

When i can't understand is in this age of satellites, drones, attack helicopters etc how a few rag heads in a speedboat can highjack modern liners. I mean one sniper at the back of the ship could have taken out those 4 high jackers before they got within 1/2 mile of the ship.

Merchant ships tend not to have snipers as part of the crew

The cost of posting a sniper on dangerous trips like this would be much less than paying ransoms to pirates. The US army must have thousands of trained snipers sat around doing nothing. Why have an army (costing $700 billion) if they can't protect American property and lives.

Because lots of places won't allow armed ships to go alongside. Merchant ships can't transit the Suez Canal if they have weapons on board.

[WyattEarp]

I was rather disappointed when i saw it, not the great movie it's hyped to be.

When i can't understand is in this age of satellites, drones, attack helicopters etc how a few rag heads in a speedboat can highjack modern liners. I mean one sniper at the back of the ship could have taken out those 4 high jackers before they got within 1/2 mile of the ship.

Merchant ships tend not to have snipers as part of the crew

The cost of posting a sniper on dangerous trips like this would be much less than paying ransoms to pirates. The US army must have thousands of trained snipers sat around doing nothing. Why have an army (costing $700 billion) if they can't protect American property and lives.

Because lots of places won't allow armed ships to go alongside. Merchant ships can't transit the Suez Canal if they have weapons on board.

The soldiers should only be on board as long as the ship is in the pirate waters. Then they could be airlifted to another ship going though that area. I'm sure USA has warships with both helicopters and soldiers semi-permanently stationed in the area.

[sustento]

Because lots of places won't allow armed ships to go alongside. Merchant ships can't transit the Suez Canal if they have weapons on board.

The soldiers should only be on board as long as the ship is in the pirate waters. Then they could be airlifted to another ship going though that area. I'm sure USA has warships with both helicopters and soldiers semi-permanently stationed in the area.

I suspect that many of the crew manning those ships might disagree. I certainly would have done while I was at sea.

Without armed guards they face kidnap and release. Once the bullets start flying the risks are much greater. Merchant seamen aren't trained in fighting. They're just glorified delivery drivers who use ships instead of trucks.

[Ulysses G.]

Also had high hopes for American Hustle. It just ran too long and wandered, but good try.

I thought that American Hussle was very decent movie, but not great.

[thehelmsman]

The maersk Alabama was closer to land than the Co. wanted. I heard the some of the crew filed lawsuits because of that.

Now, The movie pissed me off because they let the pirates get on in the first place. They were forwarned, they knew they were coming. And, the best plan they could come up with was hiding the crew. I know they don't carry weapons but the crew could have done so much more.

[sustento]

The maersk Alabama was closer to land than the Co. wanted. I heard the some of the crew filed lawsuits because of that.

Now, The movie pissed me off because they let the pirates get on in the first place. They were forwarned, they knew they were coming. And, the best plan they could come up with was hiding the crew. I know they don't carry weapons but the crew could have done so much more.

http://eunavfor.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/bmp4-low-res_sept_5_20111.pdf

[keemapoot]

The maersk Alabama was closer to land than the Co. wanted. I heard the some of the crew filed lawsuits because of that.

Now, The movie pissed me off because they let the pirates get on in the first place. They were forwarned, they knew they were coming. And, the best plan they could come up with was hiding the crew. I know they don't carry weapons but the crew could have done so much more.

I agree. Even without carrying lethal weapons, aren't there some methods merchant ships could use besides turning on water jets to repel an attack? How about small drones that could go try to sink their skiffs or something?

[sustento]

Merchant ships are just trucks that float. They have no means of self-defence and their crews are ordinary civilians who have NO training in weaponry. If you want your cargo to be protected by missiles, drones and guns then you are going to have to pay for your armed forces to build ships that carry both guns and cargo at the same time. It's not as if merchant shipping isn't threatened elsewhere on the high seas and haven't been so years before Somalia reared its ugly head. Anyone remember the Malacca Straits?

http://www.ibtimes.com/pirates-attack-tanker-malacca-strait-one-worlds-busiest-shipping-channels-asias-most-strategic-oil

Edited January 16, 2014 by sustento

[sustento]

Anyone tell the difference?

[kurnell]

Tom Hanks movie....no thanks.

I lost all respect for Tom Hanks after his whining response to Rocky Gervais' brilliance at the Globes

[thehelmsman]

Because lots of places won't allow armed ships to go alongside. Merchant ships can't transit the Suez Canal if they have weapons on board.

The soldiers should only be on board as long as the ship is in the pirate waters. Then they could be airlifted to another ship going though that area. I'm sure USA has warships with both helicopters and soldiers semi-permanently stationed in the area.

I suspect that many of the crew manning those ships might disagree. I certainly would have done while I was at sea.

Without armed guards they face kidnap and release. Once the bullets start flying the risks are much greater. Merchant seamen aren't trained in fighting. They're just glorified delivery drivers who use ships instead of trucks.

You have no idea what a merchant seaman is trained for so don't speak. Who do you think supplies the Navy with everything needed while the Navy is at sea. You have union sailors who do the job you see in the movie and you have another sector who are also merchant seaman who work with the military - These guys are small arms trained and when in persian gulf area carry full blown navy security teams w/ 50 cals.

[sustento]

You have no idea what a merchant seaman is trained for so don't speak. Who do you think supplies the Navy with everything needed while the Navy is at sea. You have union sailors who do the job you see in the movie and you have another sector who are also merchant seaman who work with the military - These guys are small arms trained and when in persian gulf area carry full blown navy security teams w/ 50 cals.

10 years in the British merchant navy says different.

In the case of the British Navy it is supplied by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary which is a fleet owned by the Ministry of Defence but manned by civilians with a few naval ratings on board. They bear no relationship to other merchant ships managed by British companies. Don't assume that what's true of the merchant navy in your country is true across the world.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-fleet/royal-fleet-auxiliary

[thehelmsman]

You have no idea what a merchant seaman is trained for so don't speak. Who do you think supplies the Navy with everything needed while the Navy is at sea. You have union sailors who do the job you see in the movie and you have another sector who are also merchant seaman who work with the military - These guys are small arms trained and when in persian gulf area carry full blown navy security teams w/ 50 cals.

10 years in the British merchant navy says different.

In the case of the British Navy it is supplied by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary which is a fleet owned by the Ministry of Defence but manned by civilians with a few naval ratings on board. They bear no relationship to other merchant ships managed by British companies. Don't assume that what's true of the merchant navy in your country is true across the world.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-fleet/royal-fleet-auxiliary

I'd have to say same - same. The US has the same basic set up as you stated about the RFA. The documents needed by Coast Guard for either sector is the same in the US.

I took offense to the poster saying seaman are JUST glorified delivery drivers. That's all.

Edited January 17, 2014 by Phil Conners
Fixed botched quote

[sustento]

You have no idea what a merchant seaman is trained for so don't speak. Who do you think supplies the Navy with everything needed while the Navy is at sea. You have union sailors who do the job you see in the movie and you have another sector who are also merchant seaman who work with the military - These guys are small arms trained and when in persian gulf area carry full blown navy security teams w/ 50 cals.

10 years in the British merchant navy says different.

In the case of the British Navy it is supplied by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary which is a fleet owned by the Ministry of Defence but manned by civilians with a few naval ratings on board. They bear no relationship to other merchant ships managed by British companies. Don't assume that what's true of the merchant navy in your country is true across the world.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-fleet/royal-fleet-auxiliary

I'd have to say same - same. The US has the same basic set up as you stated about the RFA. The documents needed by Coast Guard for either sector is the same in the US.

I took offense to the poster saying seaman are JUST glorified delivery drivers. That's all.

Sorry if I offended you. I wasn't meaning to be derogatory. I was just trying to point out the difference between merchant navy personnel and military personnel to the readers on here who perhaps don't understand the difference. Edited January 17, 2014 by Phil Conners
Fixed botched quote