War movies

[SpencerH]

IIRC, a number of the scenes in Apocalyse now come from a book/biography called 'Dispatches'.

A bridge too far may seem to have had too much 'cliche-drama' but a lot of those incidents that seem cliche were true.

The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) with Errol Flynn has some good clips of the tactical use of 'Tarzan-ropes' in forested areas. Aside from that, I cant see using movies as combat training aids.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by SpencerH
The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) with Errol Flynn ...

BTW: The first choice for the lead in that movie was James Cagney. He wasn't available and Flynn was just coming off of "Captain Blood" so he was given the role.

[Lonestar]

Forrest Gump

And that is all I have to say about that.

[Thrawn05]

My big three war movies have always been Patton, Tora Tora Tora and the Longest Day.

Black Hawk Down was also good. As was Saving Private Ryan.

I know it's not a movie, but Band of Brothers is da bomb.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Japher
yeah, that's it...sure

You're right. I just checked with Amazon.com. The real title of the book is:

We were Soldiers Once...And Young: Ia Drang--The Battle That Changed The War In Vietnam

by Harold G. Moore, Joseph L. Galloway

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by Pekka
But as far as tactics goes, you won't see more than 'cover me' or 'call the airstrike' or some lame ambushes that goes 'we hide and then shoot them' type of things. And hang signals. And radio usage. But that's not tactics. But like I said, there is some in Band of Brothers so it's nice in that way too.

Actually, I wouldn't know the proper term for those "methods", but I'm still curious how correct it is in so far it's shown. Dito with the conditions they're showing. But I guess it's hard to tell since none of us had actually been in a war.

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by SpencerH
A bridge too far may seem to have had too much 'cliche-drama' but a lot of those incidents that seem cliche were true.

Yeah, I watched a documentary linked to the movie yesterday, and I was surprised a lot of a scenes did actually happen. In some cases reality would even have been less believable.
But I was talking about the acting actually, which seems a bit thick sometimes. Recent war movies are far more grittier.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Colon


Yeah, I watched a documentary linked to the movie yesterday, and I was surprised a lot of a scenes did actually happen. In some cases reality would even have been less believable.
But I was talking about the acting actually, which seems a bit thick sometimes. Recent war movies are far more grittier.

A Bridge Too Far was based on the book about the campaign (by Cornelius Ryan). It was part of that trend in the 1960s & 70s to produce "big picture" war movies, where a large campaign would be told through a series of historical incidents featuring a large cast of usually famous actors. The first of this type afaik was The Longest Day, which was followed by The Battle of the Bulge, Patton, Tora Tora Tora and finally A Bridge Too Far. I usually enjoyed these films, as they had good budgets and actors and followed campaigns I was already familiar with.

Grittier, more personal, smaller scale films were more common in the 1950s and early 1960s, and are generally more common because they can be made for a lot less money. Saints and Soldiers is a recent example of this type of film. Some films of course mix the gritty smaller scale viewpoint with a reasonably large budget, and they are often good. Two great examples being Saving Private Ryan and Cross of Iron.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Colon


Actually, I wouldn't know the proper term for those "methods", but I'm still curious how correct it is in so far it's shown. Dito with the conditions they're showing. But I guess it's hard to tell since none of us had actually been in a war.

Oerdin?

[Pekka]

Colon, ok.. well.. I guess that BoB still stands... as for others.. I don't know. It depends.. do individuals follow the doctrine of that situation or do they improvise, do they use their experience and do it the other way which is perhaps better.. I don't know, when talking about these movies. I guess people are more brave in movies in general. In that sense Das Boot is great. There's long shots or horror and fear and nothing else. Anticipation and anxiety.

I guess everything can be realistic, since so many individuals have fought and done everything in the field. What is usually done, that's different I guess. In that sense, We Were Soldiers is great because it's an open field basically, and you can see Gibson calling the shots clearly, and then unit movement. So, in a way, that's good. I mean it's clear what is happening in a sense that you can see different people going to different places and communicating with each other and trying to do things without much experience (thus through training).

I guess there are two types of training. One is the theoretical side you learn in the army, the other one is the one you learn in war (or die if you don't), from experience, from others. The first part is evident in Full Metal Jacket while the latter part kind of lags in it. But it's a great movie anyway.

If you want to see them, join the army and then go to full on war .

[VetLegion]

Am I the only one who absolutely hates the modern war movies like saving private Ryan and Band of Brothers?

They're an insult to the senses. The camera is so hectic you don't really see any action, just fragments of action, and small ones at that. It's like watching a MTV music video of a battle. I crap at that.

New movies that try to make you have an epileptic attack

Old movies where the camera sits and pople and bullets move

[Japher]

yeah, VetLegion, you are the only one...

I like the camera work on the new ones, makes you feel like you are part of the action.

[VetLegion]

No, it makes you feel like the director can't direct, so he hides it by kicking camera around with his foot while it shoots. Then americans think it makes them feel like they are part of the action.

[Japher]

Tell that to Speilberg

[Pekka]

He doesn't appreciate anti-semites such as VetLegion. So I guess he's not getting through!

But sure, war-like Americans want to 'be part of the action' where as Euros want to see more boobs in war movies. There's bound to be bunch of boobs in wars. That's just a fact right there, so why are we not seeing it? We are lovers, not fighters... (but not surrenders, except for the frogs).