Greyhound (2020)

The review finds Greyhound a compelling, gripping naval thriller, though its climactic stretch can feel visually monotonous. It praises the film’s grounded depiction of naval warfare and the suspense built from its limited point of view.

Rooney finds Greyhound a taut, stirring action thriller that sustains its grip despite a slightly overdone sentimental ending. He particularly praises the immersive, nail-biting combat sequences and the convincing depiction of the perilous convoy crossing.

Ebiri finds Greyhound surprisingly immersive and ultimately memorable despite some minor weaknesses. He especially praises its authentic naval detail and sound design, while noting that the focus on procedure leaves the crew underdeveloped.

Crust finds the film an efficient, satisfying war drama, though its Black sailor subplot feels underdeveloped. He praises the taut direction, atmospheric visuals and understated performances, especially Hanks and Graham.

Bradshaw finds the film effective and watchable, though notably traditionalist and sombre. He praises its tense, claustrophobic naval action and old-school cat-and-mouse strategy.

Gleiberman finds the film a sturdy, tense account of the logistics of naval battle, though its characterizations are thin and the action sometimes sags. He praises Tom Hanks’s finely etched, minimalist performance and the scrupulous military detail.

The review text is unavailable, so its verdict cannot be established. No specific praise or complaint can be verified from the supplied page.

The critic finds that the film’s hymn to the Greatest Generation is overwhelmed by its sound and fury. They single out Tom Hanks’s relatable, quietly self-doubting performance and understated faith as a strength.

Leyland finds Greyhound solid but unexceptional, with its brevity a welcome contrast to more stodgy war films. He praises Hanks’s gravitas and understated humanity, while noting that the film can feel monotonous and lacks a standout set-piece.

The review finds Greyhound serious and well-intentioned, but lacking the characterisation and depth to become memorable. It praises the compelling naval detail and effective action set-pieces.

Ehrlich finds the film monotonous and shallow, unable to make its commander’s inner life meaningful. He praises the tension of the vulnerable convoy under threat, but says the spectacle rarely becomes coherent naval action.

Walsh finds the film effective as a brisk, action-packed tale of courage, but lacking in emotional depth. He praises Hanks’s nuanced performance and the tense, slickly staged sea battles.

White finds the film puzzlingly inert and says it lacks the soul and warmth Tom Hanks usually brings to his roles. He praises the sea action as impressive, but faults the film’s thin characterization and emphasis on naval accuracy over drama.

Bowen finds the film sentimental and dramatically thin, with its action ultimately feeling rootless. He praises a few eerie visual touches but complains that the crew lacks human dimension.

Goldberg finds the film thrilling and captivating despite its thin plot and limited character development. He praises Schneider’s tense, detailed depiction of naval combat and Hanks’s morally weighted performance.

The critic finds Greyhound a brisk, suspenseful, and effective wartime thriller, though its narrow focus leaves little room for character development. They praise the claustrophobic direction and the visceral battle effects, enhanced by Blake Neely’s percussion-led score.

The critic finds Greyhound an enthralling but bare-bones war film, carried by Tom Hanks’s performance. The battles’ taut editing and craft earn praise, while the sparse script leaves supporting actors underused.

The critic finds the film slick, solid, and reassuringly serious, with a righteous finale. They praise Tom Hanks’s steady presence, while noting that the characters are not fully fleshed out.

The review finds Greyhound tense and compelling, though its supporting characters are thin and its spectacle is diminished on streaming. It praises the detailed, repetitive chain of command for making naval warfare feel fresh and exciting.

The critic finds the film tense and efficient, but less gripping than it should be. He praises its straightforward, effective handling of the dangerous crossing, while noting its thin characterization.

The page identifies this as a video review, but the accessible text does not reveal the critics’ verdict. It gives no specific praise or complaint from the review.

Kermode finds the film a serviceable but limited thriller that falls short of its source material’s potential. She praises Tom Hanks’s restrained performance, with Rob Morgan’s warmth also helping the film connect.

The critic finds Greyhound a serviceable but dramatically weak war film that feels more like a cable movie than a theatrical feature. He praises its swift, tight pacing, while faulting its thin characterization and lack of dramatic heft.

The critic finds the naval thriller dull and dramatically underdeveloped. He praises a few tense moments, especially the first U-boat crossing beneath the ship, but faults the flat direction and lack of character depth.

Geisinger finds the film underwhelming and not very moving. She criticizes its thin character development, intrusive religious dialogue, and rushed pacing, while noting Stephen Graham’s magnetic presence.

Lindbergh finds the film a brief, forgettable naval drama that fails to make the most of its story. He praises its tense depiction of open-ocean combat, but says its rapid pace leaves little room for immersion or emotional depth.