View Full Version : What Was The Last Military Movie That Was Actually Really Good...?
When I think of great films, I go back to Tora, Tora, Tora (1970), A Bridge Too Far (1977) and the like.
When I think of modern war films I immediately think of absolute crap like Windtalker, Thin Red Line and Pearl Harbor. I think of failed attempts like Dunkirk, Midway and every other film with CGI as a major character.
But I happen to catch Flags of out Fathers (2006) the other night and it's an excellent film. And it reminded me that Saving Private Ryan (1998 and a great film even with major historical inaccuracies), Black Hawk Down (2001), We Were Soldiers (2002), The Patriot (2000), The Pianist (2002), Zero Dark Thirty (2012), Act of Valor (2012) and a lot of other really excellent films have been made recently and it is possible.
1917 (2019) is a great example. I expected NOTHING from this film and was pleasantly surprised by a good (not spectacular, but good) solid film. A lot of attention was paid to details and accuracy of gear, environments and the challenges faced by soldiers in the First World War. It's not a cliched predictable film but doesn't go to extremes to play "gotcha" and try and catch you off guard. It feels like you are watching a story where real life "unexpected things" actually happen.
It's not an action shoot em up and Michael Bay wouldn't have gone anywhere near this film. As a result I think most here would enjoy it.
So what are the other "really good" films that have come out in the last 20 years that didn't get huge, big budget releases? The ones we should have watched instead of Dunkirk or Midway?
I liked The Outpost.
Modern war films worth their salt have started to add in things like tracers, and the sound of rounds zipping past. Bonus points for the ones that show a round zipping past before you hear the sound of the weapon firing.
I really enjoyed 13 Hours, Fury, Hacksaw Ridge, and The Great Raid.
BoringGuy45
07-30-20, 06:24
I really enjoyed 13 Hours, Fury, Hacksaw Ridge, and The Great Raid.
The Great Raid was underrated. Admittedly, it was pretty slow overall, but the final raid made it worth it.
Though it was based on a fictional war, Tears of the Sun was pretty good (Bruce Willis' backwards mounted Aimpoint not withstanding).
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-30-20, 06:48
I thought that Hyena Road was based on a true story, kind of like how I thought Hustle and Flow was too. Neither was,
Good? Realistic? Entertaining? Respectful? Insightful?
What is recent? Blackhawk Down?
StovePipe_Jammer
07-30-20, 06:50
I have to second 1917. The way it was shot in one continuous sequence gives it a feel like your along on the mission with them.
Fury and 13 hours were pretty decent. Act of Valor and Lone Survivor are good watches as well.
BoringGuy45
07-30-20, 07:09
I thought that Hyena Road was based on a true story, kind of like how I thought Hustle and Flow was too. Neither was,
Good? Realistic? Entertaining? Respectful? Insightful?
What is recent? Blackhawk Down?
I think we're defining recent as "past 25 years". Up until Saving Private Ryan, there was a real lull in war movies in the 90s. Ever since the Iraq War, with a few exceptions, all the movies have been "support the troops but not the war" type films, and have been 10% about the war and 90% about the soldiers dealing with PTSD and disillusionment when they get home.
I agree with most and although not "great" by any stretch I enjoyed Danger Close recently but kept waiting on the star, recently from The Vikings, to draw a battle axe. Outpost was very good as well.
Dunkirk was utterly horrible. I enjoyed Midway, but understand why it isn't very popular.
Hacksaw Ridge and Unbroken were really good. I don't see unbroken mentioned much.
So, what's a "good" war flick? Historical veracity? The action? The acting chops? It's so hard to find a balance: a good story; if is true, the historical accuracy; good acting/drama; good 'action' with accurate tactics.
BoringGuy45
07-30-20, 07:46
Dunkirk was utterly horrible. I enjoyed Midway, but understand why it isn't very popular.
Hacksaw Ridge and Unbroken were really good. I don't see unbroken mentioned much.
You liked Unbroken? The book was so damn good and so thorough, I don't think the movie didn't do it justice. It really needed to be an HBO miniseries to really cover all of Zamperini's life and experiences.
The Siege of Jaddotville is good. Early 60's Africa political climate and the UN's uselessness.
BoringGuy45
07-30-20, 08:12
So, what's a "good" war flick? Historical veracity? The action? The acting chops? It's so hard to find a balance: a good story; if is true, the historical accuracy; good acting/drama; good 'action' with accurate tactics.
I'd say all of the above if possible. Obviously in terms of accuracy, nothing is going to be a take-for-take recreation of the actual event. Also, in terms of accurate tactics, I'm fine if it "looks real": Aiming down the sights, firing single shots unless using suppressing fire, using cover, fire and maneuver, etc. If Larry Vickers reviews it and his assessment of a scene is that there are some subtle tactical errors that only professionals would notice, then it's good. It's only when you get into firing rifles on full auto from the hip with 30 round mags that magically hold about 2000 rounds that you lose me.
Also, a war movie should honor its heroes. I do like when it shows the protagonists as flawed, but I don't like war movies that are actually anti-war movies that either villainize or victimize the protagonists (unless, of course, the movie is actually about a brutal, evil figure).
You liked Unbroken? The book was so damn good and so thorough, I don't think the movie didn't do it justice. It really needed to be an HBO miniseries to really cover all of Zamperini's life and experiences.
I read the book first and was glad it was made into a movie. Agree it didn't do the book justice, but thought it was better than a lot of the crap that gets made into movies. I do agree that a mini-series would have been the better approach. Regardless, I enjoyed the movie and could fill in the missing parts since I had already read the book.
BoringGuy45
07-30-20, 08:40
I read the book first and was glad it was made into a movie. Agree it didn't do the book justice, but thought it was better than a lot of the crap that gets made into movies. I do agree that a mini-series would have been the better approach. Regardless, I enjoyed the movie and could fill in the missing parts since I had already read the book.
True. And at least they didn't change Zamperini.
PracticalRifleman
07-30-20, 09:00
Surprised at the love for “Hacksaw Ridge”. I thought it was one of the worst movies I’d seen in the last 25 years. If my wife hadn’t bought it as a gift, I wouldn’t have sat through it with her. Terrible acting, terrible action sequences that were wholly unrealistic as were the “tactics”....nothing was remotely right. I hope that it was a historically inaccurate portrayal. If it wasn’t, it’s embarrassing.
“1917” was a solid movie. As was “Siege of Jadotville” of the more recent films.
“Gods and Generals”, while I cannot account for the accuracy, was a solid movie.
Not a film, but a mini-series, I enjoyed “Band of Brothers”.
“The Outpost” is on my list to watch next.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Act of Valor; although not based on true events
Behind Enemy Lines; based on true events
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-30-20, 09:45
Act of Valor; although not based on true events
Real SEALs and a fake story ;)
The SEAL staring into the camera at the end like the Jesuit staring at the camera at the end of "The Mission".
Surprised at the love for “Hacksaw Ridge”....... “1917” was a solid movie. As was “Siege of Jadotville” of the more recent films.
I liked Hacksaw Ridge, didn't love it. That's about par for me and war/military movies; I like them OK enough, but few I really love. I really liked "Siege of Jadotville." I thought it was well-made.
I liked "Act of Valor"; you don't ask real SEALs to act, but there was authenticity to their TTP (and I love, LOVE, SBT-22 and the river scene....).
"Behind Enemy Lines" was entertaining, but that last scene, the rescue, was awful.
Of course, "Band of Brothers" probably changed the standard.
The Great Raid was underrated. Admittedly, it was pretty slow overall, but the final raid made it worth it.
Though it was based on a fictional war, Tears of the Sun was pretty good (Bruce Willis' backwards mounted Aimpoint not withstanding).
Yes, I liked Tears of the Sun. Watched it twice.
It's only when you get into firing rifles on full auto from the hip with 30 round mags that magically hold about 2000 rounds that you lose me.
I'm with you on this one. I couldn't stand the gunfight scenes in '12 Strong' when they would shoot hundreds of rounds without a single reload, and then make 100 yard head shots from the hip while at full gallop on a horse...
I enjoyed Blackhawk Down alot, as well as Act of Valor, We Were Soldiers, SPR, Platoon, and of course the series like Band of Brothers, Generation Kill, etc.
Movies I enjoyed were Black hawk down, Lone Survivor, Act of Valor, 12 strong, Tears of the sun, 1917, 13 hours, we were soldiers, The Patriot, The Outpost, Hunter Killer, Green Zone, Enemy at the gate, 7 days in Entebbe , 6 days, Band of brothers, the pacific, generation Kill.
A Bridge To Far is especially moving in this family due to my in-laws being young children when US Paras jumped into their village in Nederland to liberate them. The people of Nederland still remember their liberation and are grateful for it. My wife grew up 1500 meters from Germany.
I thought Dunkirk was great, but I’m a huge Christopher Nolan fan.
TENET was supposed to come out the day before my birthday, was massively excited for that. F#ckin Covid.
Adrenaline_6
07-30-20, 12:21
I thought Dunkirk was great, but I’m a huge Christopher Nolan fan.
TENET was supposed to come out the day before my birthday, was massively excited for that. F#ckin Covid.
I was looking forward to TENET too.
Others mentioned these from the past 2 two years:
Six Days
Siege at Jadotville
Danger Close
When I think of great films, I go back to Tora, Tora, Tora (1970), A Bridge Too Far (1977) and the like.
When I think of modern war films I immediately think of absolute crap like Windtalker, Thin Red Line and Pearl Harbor. I think of failed attempts like Dunkirk, Midway and every other film with CGI as a major character.
But I happen to catch Flags of out Fathers (2006) the other night and it's an excellent film. And it reminded me that Saving Private Ryan (1998 and a great film even with major historical inaccuracies), Black Hawk Down (2001), We Were Soldiers (2002), The Patriot (2000), The Pianist (2002), Zero Dark Thirty (2012), Act of Valor (2012) and a lot of other really excellent films have been made recently and it is possible.
1917 (2019) is a great example. I expected NOTHING from this film and was pleasantly surprised by a good (not spectacular, but good) solid film. A lot of attention was paid to details and accuracy of gear, environments and the challenges faced by soldiers in the First World War. It's not a cliched predictable film but doesn't go to extremes to play "gotcha" and try and catch you off guard. It feels like you are watching a story where real life "unexpected things" actually happen.
It's not an action shoot em up and Michael Bay wouldn't have gone anywhere near this film. As a result I think most here would enjoy it.
So what are the other "really good" films that have come out in the last 20 years that didn't get huge, big budget releases? The ones we should have watched instead of Dunkirk or Midway?
I have not seen it, but even the trailer suggests the new Hanks movie Greyhound probably falls in that category. Trailer looked like an over processed CGI mess to me. While not a war movie, it is a movie about the war and I rated it excellent: Darkest Hour.
BoringGuy45
07-30-20, 14:15
I have not seen it, but even the trailer suggests the new Hanks movie Greyhound probably falls in that category. Trailer looked like an over processed CGI mess to me. While not a war movie, it is a movie about the war and I rated it excellent: Darkest Hour.
I just saw Grayhound and it was actually really good. It’s not really a CGI-laden type of movie; I would say actually more substance over style. It’s really short; only about an hour and a half, but it moves at a good pace.
I just saw Grayhound and it was actually really good. It’s not really a CGI-laden type of movie; I would say actually more substance over style. It’s really short; only about an hour and a half, but it moves at a good pace.
Good to know, thanx.
MountainRaven
07-30-20, 16:47
Surprised nobody’s mentioned Fury.
I thought Dunkirk was great, but I’m a huge Christopher Nolan fan.
I seem to remember LAV posting on his Facebook page that he thought Dunkirk was one of the best war movies ever made. Or maybe that it was the most realistic. I forget.
Anyway, I don’t remember there being much CGI in Dunkirk. And I believe the scenes shot with the Spitfires and Bf-109s were filmed with actual, flying Bf-109s and the scenes of Tom Hardy (and the other British pilot who wasn’t Michael Caine’s voice in The Battle of Britain) in the Spitfire cockpit were filmed in a flying, two-seat Spitfire.
Surprised nobody’s mentioned Fury.
I seem to remember LAV posting on his Facebook page that he thought Dunkirk was one of the best war movies ever made. Or maybe that it was the most realistic. I forget.
Anyway, I don’t remember there being much CGI in Dunkirk. And I believe the scenes shot with the Spitfires and Bf-109s were filmed with actual, flying Bf-109s and the scenes of Tom Hardy (and the other British pilot who wasn’t Michael Caine’s voice in The Battle of Britain) in the Spitfire cockpit were filmed in a flying, two-seat Spitfire.
Fury was mentioned on pg 1, good movie I thought. Wasn't that type M4 called the Firefly or something? 1917 was the last one I saw. Thought it was good...interesting landscapes they put together.
Averageman
07-30-20, 18:05
Fury was mentioned on pg 1, good movie I thought. Wasn't that type M4 called the Firefly or something? 1917 was the last one I saw. Thought it was good...interesting landscapes they put together.
Fury was realistic enough for me to enjoy, with the understanding that it was a fantasy.
The SS had one mission and one Tank would not have stopped or delayed that mission long, the reality is they very well would have moved on and left that Tank to hit the MSR and rear echelon folks they were sent to destroy.
They did have a nifty mix of Sherman's though, which was real and accurate. You simply fight with what you have available and the mix was what was available at the time.
The battle with the Tiger was nearly the exact scenario's described to me by some of the guys who were there.
So, what's a "good" war flick? Historical veracity? The action? The acting chops? It's so hard to find a balance: a good story; if is true, the historical accuracy; good acting/drama; good 'action' with accurate tactics.
Combinations of all of the above.
Also if anyone hasn't seen Memorial Day (2012), it is an excellent film that I think most here could appreciate.
Generation Kill
Not a movie, but another excellent HBO series. I think I'd rank it between Band of Brothers and The Pacific.
Jar Head was good too. Interesting at least.
Not a movie, but another excellent HBO series. I think I'd rank it between Band of Brothers and The Pacific.
And also memoirs of a real event. It was excellent and an old friend, who was a Recon Marine in the actual platoon, was an extra in the show.
To find something that it is historically accurate, tactically accurate, with good action and good acting, that's a real unicorn. A couple of my favorite movies from the '80s were Commando and Invasion USA. Horrible movies, but I love them. Also, that Steven seagal movie where he was the Navy SEAL-cum-cook on the USS Missouri.
The Siege of Jaddotville is good. Early 60's Africa political climate and the UN's uselessness.
I liked this one as well.
Also, the British movie 'The Trench' is pretty good, set a few days leading up to the battle of the Somme.
Johnny Rico
07-30-20, 19:19
Tae Guk Gi is a pretty good flick. It’s in Korean though, so be ready for subtitles.
Combinations of all of the above.
Also if anyone hasn't seen Memorial Day (2012), it is an excellent film that I think most here could appreciate.
Absolutely! My FIL is a WWII infantry vet from the final months of the war in Europe. When I saw Memorial Day a couple months ago I called him and told him he needed to see it. Not sure if he has yet or not.
Some of my favorites:
Hacksaw ridge
Fury
Enemy at the gates
Letters from Iwo Jima
Apocalypse now
The Patriot
Saving private Ryan
Schindler’s list
Escape from Sobibor
Kelly’s hero’s
My all time favorites are series, Band of Brothers and the Pacific
All
I`m going to throw Dawn Patrol into the mix . Filmed not too long after the end of WW1 in B&W with original planes etc . Some of the aerial combat scenes are fantastic .
MountainRaven
07-30-20, 22:03
Fury was mentioned on pg 1, good movie I thought. Wasn't that type M4 called the Firefly or something? 1917 was the last one I saw. Thought it was good...interesting landscapes they put together.
Must have missed it.
I had a big long thing typed up comparing the M4A3(76)W HVSS or M4A3E8 (aka "Easy Eight") with the Firefly. Short version: Fury's an Easy Eight, which was pretty much the Sherman tank perfected. Firefly was a British effort to get a tank into France that could fight toe-to-toe with Panthers and Tigers from the moment British armor landed in Normandy - by basically strapping their proven 17-pdr (3" or 76.2mm) anti-tank gun to a tank and to hell with all the problems that it would cause (like it's poor HE and slow rate of fire). While Firefly tanks were in combat on 6 June 1944, Easy Eights didn't even go into production until January 1945. And American Shermans fitted with the same 76mm gun as the Easy Eight weren't in Europe until July 1944 - and Patton refused to take any until September 1944.
Similar ideas, but different takes, as far as the gun's concerned. I don't know if the British received any Shermans with the HVSS suspension or if any were converted into Fireflies. But that would be a significant difference between the Easy Eight and Firefly.
Jar Head was good too. Interesting at least.
Almost great, but the book was mostly a Marine whining about the Marines (never a good thing) and the film was even worse, add in Jake Gyllenhaal and it's bound to be a disaster. They tried to save it with some elements of realism ("Gas, Gas, Gas") but fell well short IMO.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-31-20, 08:30
BAT21
Watched the Outpost last night. It was decent, not great but good. Warning to this crowd, lots of 16" lightweight profile barrels.
BAT21
That was a good movie, the book Saving Bravo: The Greatest Rescue Mission in Navy SEAL History is an excellent book covering that entire event.
5 pages and no one listed Platoon? I didn't see it if so. Top 3 of all time easily. For me:
Platoon
SPR
Apocalypse Now
Last war movie i saw i thought was truly great was SPR, but I have also sworn off most war movies ever since so can't comment on many that came after that one.
Most underrated war time movie is Empire Of The Sun, which is an earlier Spielberg movie and one of his best I thought. That was during when Hollywood was still snubbing him and ignoring the great movies he was putting out because he had the audacity to also make fun silly not art movies like The Goonies and such.
If anyone has not seen that movie, see it. It's not a war movie but it is a war time movie.
The question was the last, which unless you just crawled out from under a rock, doesn't include any of the three you listed.
Grand58742
07-31-20, 11:48
When I think of great films, I go back to Tora, Tora, Tora (1970), A Bridge Too Far (1977) and the like.
When I think of modern war films I immediately think of absolute crap like Windtalker, Thin Red Line and Pearl Harbor. I think of failed attempts like Dunkirk, Midway and every other film with CGI as a major character.
But I happen to catch Flags of out Fathers (2006) the other night and it's an excellent film. And it reminded me that Saving Private Ryan (1998 and a great film even with major historical inaccuracies), Black Hawk Down (2001), We Were Soldiers (2002), The Patriot (2000), The Pianist (2002), Zero Dark Thirty (2012), Act of Valor (2012) and a lot of other really excellent films have been made recently and it is possible.
1917 (2019) is a great example. I expected NOTHING from this film and was pleasantly surprised by a good (not spectacular, but good) solid film. A lot of attention was paid to details and accuracy of gear, environments and the challenges faced by soldiers in the First World War. It's not a cliched predictable film but doesn't go to extremes to play "gotcha" and try and catch you off guard. It feels like you are watching a story where real life "unexpected things" actually happen.
It's not an action shoot em up and Michael Bay wouldn't have gone anywhere near this film. As a result I think most here would enjoy it.
So what are the other "really good" films that have come out in the last 20 years that didn't get huge, big budget releases? The ones we should have watched instead of Dunkirk or Midway?
If you watched Flags of our Fathers, the other half, Letters from Iwo Jima, needs to be watched as well.
Must have missed it.
I had a big long thing typed up comparing the M4A3(76)W HVSS or M4A3E8 (aka "Easy Eight") with the Firefly. Short version: Fury's an Easy Eight, which was pretty much the Sherman tank perfected. Firefly was a British effort to get a tank into France that could fight toe-to-toe with Panthers and Tigers from the moment British armor landed in Normandy - by basically strapping their proven 17-pdr (3" or 76.2mm) anti-tank gun to a tank and to hell with all the problems that it would cause (like it's poor HE and slow rate of fire). While Firefly tanks were in combat on 6 June 1944, Easy Eights didn't even go into production until January 1945. And American Shermans fitted with the same 76mm gun as the Easy Eight weren't in Europe until July 1944 - and Patton refused to take any until September 1944.
Similar ideas, but different takes, as far as the gun's concerned. I don't know if the British received any Shermans with the HVSS suspension or if any were converted into Fireflies. But that would be a significant difference between the Easy Eight and Firefly.
Thx, yeah the Easy Eight was the one I was thinking of.
The question was the last, which unless you just crawled out from under a rock, doesn't include any of the three you listed.
Some how I don't think BAT21 was the last war movie FromMyColdDeadHand saw... See also MAUSER202 long list of favorites and so forth.
I noted people started just throwing and discussing favorites, some quite old, pre dating Platoon, so decided if that was the case, I'd add my 2 cents on that topic too.
We had a thread drift. I happens here. I didn't start it.
5 pages and no one listed Platoon? I didn't see it if so. Top 3 of all time easily. For me:
Platoon
SPR
Apocalypse Now
Last war movie i saw i thought was truly great was SPR, but I have also sworn off most war movies ever since so can't comment on many that came after that one.
Most underrated war time movie is Empire Of The Sun, which is an earlier Spielberg movie and one of his best I thought. That was during when Hollywood was still snubbing him and ignoring the great movies he was putting out because he had the audacity to also make fun silly not art movies like The Goonies and such.
If anyone has not seen that movie, see it. It's not a war movie but it is a war time movie.
Platoon sure did have an agenda, and we saw how off the rail Stone was with this subsequent movies.
But yeah, it was the first legit Vietnam war movie since Apocalypse Now, I really enjoyed it even if you had to watch some of it in context.
For a recent film, 13 Hours had its moments.
I noted earlier in this thread Blackhawk Down was discussed. The movie didn't end right for me. When the film ended, we were still in operations over Mogadishu that nobody ever recalls or mentions. Fellow pilot Mike Durant was held captive for the next 11 days, and every day we flew at all hours using our psyops broadcast speakers blasting a recorded message over that shitty city that we will not leave with you. We didn't.
MountainRaven
07-31-20, 15:52
I thought Platoon was OK. Apocalypse Now was a decent movie, but it really had nothing to do with the war it was using as a setting (which is understandable, since it’s an adaptation of a book set in the Congo in the 19th Century).
Platoon sure did have an agenda, and we saw how off the rail Stone was with this subsequent movies.
But yeah, it was the first legit Vietnam war movie since Apocalypse Now, I really enjoyed it even if you had to watch some of it in context.
I didn't get an agenda per se, but I did get his intent to relay how awful it was, that people are capable of awful chit under the right circumstances, that good guys exist even under such horrible circumstances too, the general sense many had no real sense of what they were doing or trying to accomplish and were just counting the days their time was up, and so forth.
I always assumed a microcosm of how he felt in that war.
His other movies were meh.
Grand58742
07-31-20, 16:30
I didn't get an agenda per se, but I did get his intent to relay how awful it was, that people are capable of awful chit under the right circumstances, that good guys exist even under such horrible circumstances too, the general sense many had no real sense of what they were doing or trying to accomplish and were just counting the days their time was up, and so forth.
I always assumed a microcosm of how he felt in that war.
His other movies were meh.
Not all of them. Wall Street was pretty good. World Trade Center was good and certainly a path away from Stone's normal work. And remember, he wrote Scarface.
I didn't get an agenda per se, but I did get his intent to relay how awful it was, that people are capable of awful chit under the right circumstances, that good guys exist even under such horrible circumstances too, the general sense many had no real sense of what they were doing or trying to accomplish and were just counting the days their time was up, and so forth.
I always assumed a microcosm of how he felt in that war.
His other movies were meh.
Whether his intent was to portray the characters as caricatures, or semi autobiographical, I think he tried to make it so that people would think that it was normal for units to be filled with people who killed civilians, got stoned, leadership fought, etc. All of that aside, I did enjoy it.
Whether his intent was to portray the characters as caricatures, or semi autobiographical, I think he tried to make it so that people would think that it was normal for units to be filled with people who killed civilians, got stoned, leadership fought, etc. All of that aside, I did enjoy it.
Ah got it. I can see that, but I didn't quite come away with the same impression on that score. But you bring up an interesting point, it does seem like many (most?), Nam movies, unlike any other war, portrays that "it was normal for units to be filled with people who killed civilians, got stoned, leadership fought, etc."
Not all of them. Wall Street was pretty good. World Trade Center was good and certainly a path away from Stone's normal work. And remember, he wrote Scarface.
I didn't see Wall Street but heard it was good and didn't know that about ScarFace. I retract my "meh" comment!
If you watched Flags of our Fathers, the other half, Letters from Iwo Jima, needs to be watched as well.
I have both on DVD. I thought it was good but not great.
For a recent film, 13 Hours had its moments.
I noted earlier in this thread Blackhawk Down was discussed. The movie didn't end right for me. When the film ended, we were still in operations over Mogadishu that nobody ever recalls or mentions. Fellow pilot Mike Durant was held captive for the next 11 days, and every day we flew at all hours using our psyops broadcast speakers blasting a recorded message over that shitty city that we will not leave with you. We didn't.
They alluded to it, but I agree it left the story unfinished. They could have also included a lot of back story. Honestly I'd love to see it redone as a mini series.
Grand58742
07-31-20, 19:41
I have both on DVD. I thought it was good but not great.
To me, getting the "other half" of the story was what made it really good. Not often do both sides of the battle get told.
I didn't get an agenda per se, but I did get his intent to relay how awful it was, that people are capable of awful chit under the right circumstances, that good guys exist even under such horrible circumstances too, the general sense many had no real sense of what they were doing or trying to accomplish and were just counting the days their time was up, and so forth.
I always assumed a microcosm of how he felt in that war.
His other movies were meh.
The problem with Platoon is portrayed the average Vietnam veteran as either a raging psychopath or a dope smoking flunkie that got scammed into service. The officers were unqualified morons with no regard for those serving under them and were often portrayed as worse than the enemy.
Problem is Stone believed his experience was the common experience and he didn't seem to grasp that he was dropped in a loser crew for a reason. Contrast his portrayal with that of We Were Soldiers and you can see how the film is insulting.
Sure some of that stuff happened, but that is because you had F ups like Stone over there. There was also the "hippies controlling the narrative" popular view of Vietnam so everyone was either a child raping savage or at a minimum a victim of the war.
MountainRaven
07-31-20, 21:33
Problem is Stone believed his experience was the common experience and he didn't seem to grasp that he was dropped in a loser crew for a reason. Contrast his portrayal with that of We Were Soldiers and you can see how the film is insulting.
To be fair to Stone, the war in 1965 was totally different than in 1967.
In '65, US military units arriving in Vietnam had trained together stateside extensively.
In '67, the same units were still there, but most of the guys who'd been there in '65 were gone - and so were most of the guys who'd been there in '66. And none of them after the first guys got to train together before being thrown into combat.
The problem with Platoon is portrayed the average Vietnam veteran as either a raging psychopath or a dope smoking flunkie that got scammed into service. The officers were unqualified morons with no regard for those serving under them and were often portrayed as worse than the enemy.
Problem is Stone believed his experience was the common experience and he didn't seem to grasp that he was dropped in a loser crew for a reason. Contrast his portrayal with that of We Were Soldiers and you can see how the film is insulting.
Sure some of that stuff happened, but that is because you had F ups like Stone over there. There was also the "hippies controlling the narrative" popular view of Vietnam so everyone was either a child raping savage or at a minimum a victim of the war.
I was not there, but I know/knew many that were and that experience or similar was a common theme. How common I have no idea. But yes, that and many other Nam era war movies left one with the impression things were not too great.
To me, getting the "other half" of the story was what made it really good. Not often do both sides of the battle get told.
I was able to appreciate it, but I'd rather have a single film with both perspective like "Tora, Tora, Tora."
I was not there, but I know/knew many that were and that experience or similar was a common theme. How common I have no idea. But yes, that and many other Nam era war movies left one with the impression things were not too great.
I think because I grew up with a lot of people that were there, and listened to them bitch about how they were portrayed as baby killers, dope addicts or dumbshits that bumbled their way through the jungle I'm probably biased. We didn't treat our WWII vets that way.
If there is a common experience among Nam vets, it's probably that everyone wants to treat them like some kind of cripple. They have a choice of being victim or villain when they feel like they are neither of these things.
Now given the fact that you had draftees that really, really didn't want to be there, there is some truth to that narrative. And those people sometimes went nuts, turned into drug addicts or became class A F ups. Many of those people really shouldn't have been there and that is why the draft was wrong, not everyone will make a suitable soldier no matter how hard you hammer a square peg into a round hole.
But lots of people also did their duty to the best of their ability and served with honor. And films like Platoon are an insult to them. I remember a family friend and the first time I ever saw him cry was when he watched "We were soldiers..." and I thought it was because it brought back hard memories but the reality was it was the first movie about that war that didn't portray them all as somehow "broken" men.
Vietnam vets for the last three decades or so have made pilgrimages to the wall to honor their buddies that were lost. But if you knew them back in 81 / 82, more than a few of them were absolutely pissed off because their "memorial" was nothing more than a giant tombstone. They didn't feel "honored" by that, they felt they had been victimized again by an uncaring population that at best is embarrassed or ashamed of them. It really did take awhile for many of them to accept it even if they all didn't completely warm up to it.
Even worse, some vets who did nothing wrong, accepted a state of victimhood as if service in Vietnam was automatically traumatizing to the extent you were treated like some kind of alcoholic who had to be pitied, rescued or shunned. Many vets experienced all three.
When I was younger, I began collecting all things military (especially uniforms, decorations and such) and had quite a collection of WWII vintage items since many of my grandparents friends saw me as the best caretaker for those items if they didn't have any children or relatives that appreciated them. When I'd find out somebody had been in Vietnam I was always caught off guard by the fact that they didn't keep their uniforms and in some cases not even their awards and decorations. I could never figure out why somebody would do that, but eventually I found out for myself.
I'm glad they are finally getting some of the respect that has been long overdue, many didn't live long enough to hear "thank you for your service." But films like Platoon, Casualties of War, Born on the Fourth of July and too many others sometimes did more harm to veterans of that war than the war itself. If people tell you that you were wrong enough times, sometimes you come to accept it.
PracticalRifleman
08-01-20, 05:32
I think because I grew up with a lot of people that were there, and listened to them bitch about how they were portrayed as baby killers, dope addicts or dumbshits that bumbled their way through the jungle I'm probably biased. We didn't treat our WWII vets that way.
If there is a common experience among Nam vets, it's probably that everyone wants to treat them like some kind of cripple. They have a choice of being victim or villain when they feel like they are neither of these things.
Now given the fact that you had draftees that really, really didn't want to be there, there is some truth to that narrative. And those people sometimes went nuts, turned into drug addicts or became class A F ups. Many of those people really shouldn't have been there and that is why the draft was wrong, not everyone will make a suitable soldier no matter how hard you hammer a square peg into a round hole.
But lots of people also did their duty to the best of their ability and served with honor. And films like Platoon are an insult to them. I remember a family friend and the first time I ever saw him cry was when he watched "We were soldiers..." and I thought it was because it brought back hard memories but the reality was it was the first movie about that war that didn't portray them all as somehow "broken" men.
Vietnam vets for the last three decades or so have made pilgrimages to the wall to honor their buddies that were lost. But if you knew them back in 81 / 82, more than a few of them were absolutely pissed off because their "memorial" was nothing more than a giant tombstone. They didn't feel "honored" by that, they felt they had been victimized again by an uncaring population that at best is embarrassed or ashamed of them. It really did take awhile for many of them to accept it even if they all didn't completely warm up to it.
Even worse, some vets who did nothing wrong, accepted a state of victimhood as if service in Vietnam was automatically traumatizing to the extent you were treated like some kind of alcoholic who had to be pitied, rescued or shunned. Many vets experienced all three.
When I was younger, I began collecting all things military (especially uniforms, decorations and such) and had quite a collection of WWII vintage items since many of my grandparents friends saw me as the best caretaker for those items if they didn't have any children or relatives that appreciated them. When I'd find out somebody had been in Vietnam I was always caught off guard by the fact that they didn't keep their uniforms and in some cases not even their awards and decorations. I could never figure out why somebody would do that, but eventually I found out for myself.
I'm glad they are finally getting some of the respect that has been long overdue, many didn't live long enough to hear "thank you for your service." But films like Platoon, Casualties of War, Born on the Fourth of July and too many others sometimes did more harm to veterans of that war than the war itself. If people tell you that you were wrong enough times, sometimes you come to accept it.
You said it all, man. I’ve several family members and family friends that served there. All we’re volunteers. Not a one has saved anything from their experience. Not a one has talked about it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think because I grew up with a lot of people that were there, and listened to them bitch about how they were portrayed as baby killers, dope addicts or dumbshits that bumbled their way through the jungle I'm probably biased. We didn't treat our WWII vets that way.
If there is a common experience among Nam vets, it's probably that everyone wants to treat them like some kind of cripple. They have a choice of being victim or villain when they feel like they are neither of these things.
Now given the fact that you had draftees that really, really didn't want to be there, there is some truth to that narrative. And those people sometimes went nuts, turned into drug addicts or became class A F ups. Many of those people really shouldn't have been there and that is why the draft was wrong, not everyone will make a suitable soldier no matter how hard you hammer a square peg into a round hole.
But lots of people also did their duty to the best of their ability and served with honor. And films like Platoon are an insult to them. I remember a family friend and the first time I ever saw him cry was when he watched "We were soldiers..." and I thought it was because it brought back hard memories but the reality was it was the first movie about that war that didn't portray them all as somehow "broken" men.
Vietnam vets for the last three decades or so have made pilgrimages to the wall to honor their buddies that were lost. But if you knew them back in 81 / 82, more than a few of them were absolutely pissed off because their "memorial" was nothing more than a giant tombstone. They didn't feel "honored" by that, they felt they had been victimized again by an uncaring population that at best is embarrassed or ashamed of them. It really did take awhile for many of them to accept it even if they all didn't completely warm up to it.
Even worse, some vets who did nothing wrong, accepted a state of victimhood as if service in Vietnam was automatically traumatizing to the extent you were treated like some kind of alcoholic who had to be pitied, rescued or shunned. Many vets experienced all three.
When I was younger, I began collecting all things military (especially uniforms, decorations and such) and had quite a collection of WWII vintage items since many of my grandparents friends saw me as the best caretaker for those items if they didn't have any children or relatives that appreciated them. When I'd find out somebody had been in Vietnam I was always caught off guard by the fact that they didn't keep their uniforms and in some cases not even their awards and decorations. I could never figure out why somebody would do that, but eventually I found out for myself.
I'm glad they are finally getting some of the respect that has been long overdue, many didn't live long enough to hear "thank you for your service." But films like Platoon, Casualties of War, Born on the Fourth of July and too many others sometimes did more harm to veterans of that war than the war itself. If people tell you that you were wrong enough times, sometimes you come to accept it.
Well said man. I hadn't heard any feedback on their impressions on the various Nam era movies but that all makes sense to me.
Ah got it. I can see that, but I didn't quite come away with the same impression on that score. But you bring up an interesting point, it does seem like many (most?), Nam movies, unlike any other war, portrays that "it was normal for units to be filled with people who killed civilians, got stoned, leadership fought, etc."
Based on the experiences of my family members, I think the reality based on war movies would be more along the lines of We Were Soldiers, The Green Berets, etc... competent and able if not professional. I think like World war II and Korea, most people who are drafted, their goal was to go in do their job and get out of life.
Speaking of movies and wars, I would love to see a movie or a mini-series dedicated to SOG, or the boat units and navy special warfare down in Rung Sat. That movie has a ton of background that could be made into great movies or series.
Based on the experiences of my family members, I think the reality based on war movies would be more along the lines of We Were Soldiers, The Green Berets, etc... competent and able if not professional. I think like World war II and Korea, most people who are drafted, their goal was to go in do their job and get out of life.
Speaking of movies and wars, I would love to see a movie or a mini-series dedicated to SOG, or the boat units and navy special warfare down in Rung Sat. That movie has a ton of background that could be made into great movies or series.
A movie that really needs to be redone is Bat 21. The movie told the story from the pilots POV and it's by far the least interesting aspect. The lone SEAL and his Vietnamese partner who went up the river to rescue that pilot is one of the most amazing stories if the entire war, and if not true, people would call BS if it was a fictional movie. The SEAL - Thomas R. Norris - won the MOH for it and his partner - VNN Petty Officer Nguyen Van Kiet - was awarded the Navy Cross, the only South Vietnamese sailor given that award during the war.
Done right, that movie would set the standard for the example of what our people were willing to do to save fellow soldiers.
Now, that may not even be the best story of the war!
Will,
Is there a non-fiction book dedicated to this story you recommend? Thx.
ETA: chuckman referenced the following above:
Saving Bravo: The Greatest Rescue Mission in Navy SEAL History
Anything else?
A movie that really needs to be redone is Bat 21. The movie told the story from the pilots POV and it's by far the least interesting aspect. The lone SEAL and his Vietnamese partner who went up the river to rescue that pilot is one of the most amazing stories if the entire war, and if not true, people would call BS if it was a fictional movie. The SEAL - Thomas R. Norris - won the MOH for it and his partner - VNN Petty Officer Nguyen Van Kiet - was awarded the Navy Cross, the only South Vietnamese sailor given that award during the war.
Done right, that movie would set the standard for the example of what our people were willing to do to save fellow soldiers.
Now, that may not even be the best story of the war!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Will,
Is there a non-fiction book dedicated to this story you recommend? Thx.
ETA: chuckman referenced the following above:
Saving Bravo: The Greatest Rescue Mission in Navy SEAL History
Anything else?
The story of how one SEAL who had been awarded the MOH (Norris) who was saved by his buddy (Petty Officer Mike Thornton), who was awarded the MOH for it, making it the only time in history and MOH winner was rescued by someone awarded the MOH for it, is perhaps and even better story. Both of those gents are still with us and meeting them a real pleasure. See:
By Honor Bound: Two Navy SEALs, the Medal of Honor, and a Story of Extraordinary Courage (https://www.amazon.com/Honor-Bound-SEALs-Extraordinary-Courage/dp/1250130212/)
The story of how one SEAL who had been awarded the MOH (Norris) who was saved by his buddy (Petty Officer Mike Thornton), who was awarded the MOH for it, making it the only time in history and MOH winner was rescued by someone awarded the MOH for it, is perhaps and even better story. Both of those gents are still with us and meeting them a real pleasure. See:
By Honor Bound: Two Navy SEALs, the Medal of Honor, and a Story of Extraordinary Courage (https://www.amazon.com/Honor-Bound-SEALs-Extraordinary-Courage/dp/1250130212/)
I heard him speak once, Norris, he said that he was attending an event in which all the living Medal of Honor recipients were attending. He was late showing up because he couldn't find it, it was in a box in his attic and it took him a while to find it. I have certainly never met him, I know a Vietnam era SEAL who knew him, said he was very unassuming and one of the most laid-back guys you would ever meet.
I think a movie from his perspective and the on the ground rescue operations would be very cool.
I think Apocalypse Now is probably my favorite military movie, possibly because, as mentioned above, it’s not really about the war and instead just uses it as a backdrop for the actual story.
Most of the war movies I like all tend to be older ones, The Great Escape, Das Boot, Full Metal etc..
Black Hawk Down is probably the most recent war movie that I actually thought was quite good.
Lone Survivor was alright, 13 Hours wasn’t bad....from what I actually remember of it. 1917 was decent I guess.
I saw American Sniper in the theater and remember thinking that it wasn’t very good.
Whiskey_Bravo
08-04-20, 16:17
JoJo Rabbit was good.
Sounded really dumb but then I watched it. Highly recommend.
1917 sucked, long and slow. Ensing was anticlimactic.
Sounded really dumb but then I watched it. Highly recommend.
So just finished it. A bit bleak at times, reminded me a little of "Look Who's Back" (2015). But I think I'll stick with Europa, Europa (1990).
That said, the opening credits for JoJo with the Beatles "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" in German might be the most brilliant satire I've seen in my life. Unfortunately I think it set the bar too high and the rest of the film failed to measure up to expectations. Lots of "moments" though.
Grand58742
08-05-20, 06:45
The Last Full Measure caught my eye a while back and I planned on renting it on Prime.
Anyone seen it? Worth it?
The Last Full Measure caught my eye a while back and I planned on renting it on Prime.
Anyone seen it? Worth it?
I thought it was pretty good. The battle sequences you see in the previews is pretty much what you get for the entire movie. It's more of a political battle throughout the movie. Probably worth watching once though.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.