Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Excellent, smart action film.

A Disappointing Continuation

I'm almost lost for words - but I'll give it a go. In all fairness I gave up after 35 minutes, so if there was a miraculous turnaround - I missed it. In Enemy Hands feels pretty much where a roll of film ended up, it presents the sort of craftsmanship we first saw when talking films took over from silent movies. This film provides little more than the fact that the characters actually can speak. The acting is, unexpectedly, poor. The dialogue is, almost amusingly, bad. The direction is below comment - so I won't.It would be nice to be able to come with a few pointers along the line "if you liked that film you may enjoy In Enemy Hands" but I cannot think of any redeeming quality. I have heard that there are people who enjoy it - so that makes this review as useless as the film. If there are different qualities of bad - this is a saddening bad film. It not the aggressive "what the hell was that" it more of a "what just happened there" - I don't know, I just know it wasn't good.

It was bad. It was really bad. The whole vague pretension to reality just went right out the window.There is one part at the end that had me completely and utterly lose any shred of suspension of disbelief.I don't care how much you would like the individual Germans. I don't care if you feel so close about them that you would stop a bullet for them. You would not let that closeness prevent you from helping the Allied side by deliberately sinking a very critical piece of intelligence, that U boat and the codes. Letting those code books get sunk would have cost thousands of allies their lives. To do so would be nothing short of an act of treason.

It is 45 minutes into the movie. The torpedo that was launched by breakaway prisoners has exploded within 5 seconds of launch. The thought that occurred to me 15 minutes earlier suddenly became stronger then my headache – "This movie is so bad that I don't want to waste any more time on it". Yes, this is movie is so bad that it does not deserve a "points for effort", because there was no effort involved in creating this movie. Production is so bad that neither bad acting nor bad directing can compete with it. First of all, all younger actors (apart from those that portray German officers) are already known as bad actors. Furthermore, I cannot stand the actors that think they are so big stars that they are above such trivia as having a navy haircut that corresponds to the period, or even to behave as real naval officer. Instead, they behave like in the crappy TV series they appeared before, and their interpretation of navy officer resembles to the occasions they were daydreaming about becoming an officer. William H. Macy behaves the same way as in "Fargo", but this is no "Fargo" and he should be a Chief of boat. The crew of German submarine looks and behaves like bunch of hooligans spiced up with few skinny drug-addicts. And that is all worth mentioning about acting. Being a history/military/WW2 fan, it hard to me to swallow thingies that are out of order. I'm not talking about replicating technical details – that is sometimes just to expensive. I'm talking about basic things like chain of command, crew number (there was about 100 men on a German sub, and only 2 are in torpedo room?!?), ridiculous orders, no one checking on vomiting prisoner and the pearl of the all (typical example of numerous inconsistencies): Radio operator (or navigator?) – There is no one! There is no supply ship! There is nothing on radio! Captain – Really? OK, lets bring the periscope up! Now… This, together with the fact that there was no mention of surface watch, means that the submarine was submerged. In that time, and today as well, there is no way a submerged submarine could receive a radio message! The sub should surface!Despite me being a history fan, I have to admit that having so many "historical" captions during movie is just way too much. There's ate least 10 captions saying "X days later, Y miles of the coast" during first 30 minutes of movie, and about 4 of them within 5 minutes. If we disregard crappy interpretation of naval rules, behavior and technology, this is still a very bad movie with awful acting. Do not waste your time, just skip to the scene where guy that looks like Borat plays another German captain. And behaves like Borat.

At the height of Hitler's U-boat war during WWII, a courageous crew of the U.S.S. Swordfish carry out their duties under Captain Rand Sullivan(Scott Caan)and chief of the boat Nathan Travers(William H. Macy). A victory against an enemy boat is short lived; they encounter U-429 commanded by Jonas Herdt(Til Schweiger)and lose the confrontation and abandon their sinking ship. Sullivan, Travers and few survivors are taken aboard the U-boat as P.O.W's. An outbreak of meningitis spreads through the German ship. The only hope for survival for both the American's and German's is to stop the infighting caused by a mutiny; after the death of both commanders...Travers takes control of the German ship.This is a very underrated submarine flick. Also in the cast: Jeremy Sisto, Thomas Kretschmann, Rene Heger, Connor Donne, Matt Lindquist and Lauren Holly. Writing credits go to John E. Deaver. Director of IN ENEMY HANDS is Tony Giglio.