Movies!!

[Ralf Toth]

We had a topic on this movie, but cleaned it before we went public. Just had the chance to see it. I had little expectations (did not like Sin City very much), but this movie was great! Everything was exaggerated, and this could easily kill the atmosphere, but sometimes the magic just works. This was one of the rare examples where it worked.

Great stuff, if you haven't seen it, I recommend renting the DVD (though I do not know how it looks on the TV, saw it on friend's home cinema).
_________________
Tome of Treasures - #1 resource for collectible role-playing games.

[tntwargo]

My friend, I must respectfully disagree. Did you ever wonder why they did not call the movie The 300 Spartans? Because there already is a movie by that name. I think my dad has my copy, but I'll get it tomorrow and send you the info. IMHO, it's a far better movie because it doesn't rely on tricky special effects. Exaggerations in what are supposed to be an historical movie leave me cold. There were no elephants. Recently, the history channel had an excellent program about Thermopylae.

Maybe I'll start a thread about that piece of tripe, Saving Private Ryan. Great battle scenes and that's it. How they get away with saying it's based on a true story is totally beyond my comprehension. -Tom

[scribe]

Here is the vintage version.... The 300 Spartans Thanks for the tip, Tom. I wanna check it out sometime.



I am the opposite of Ralf. I had high expectations of this movie and was left feeling let down a bit. I thought the special effects were superb and I enjoyed the fantastical elements. I could have stood a bit less of the bravado and testosterone soundbites. I give this movie a B rating.
_________________

[Beyondthebreach]

Man, I must say I'm a little pissed off! I had to go out of town for work the last three days, right? Well, it sucks to be away, but at least I've got the company AmEx card so I can eat well . . . and usually catch up on a movie or two I missed with the hotel pay-per-view.

I was thinking . . . 300 just came out on DVD . . . it will definitely be on PPV. I'll just charge it to the room and I'll finally get to see it . . .

Only . . . they didn't have Pay-Per-View! What freakin' hotel doesn't have that yet!!!! The Houston Airport Hampton Inn can #@@%**&#$ .
_________________
"Ah, Blackadder. Started talking to yourself, I see."

"Yes . . . it's the only way I can be assured of intelligent conversation."

[Ralf Toth]

Tom, you are right, of course. But I think that was intended. The maker of the movie put it in these words: "The truth can kill a good story." I believe he is right.

Did anyone read the novel? I am considering buying it.
_________________
Tome of Treasures - #1 resource for collectible role-playing games.

[tntwargo]

Ralf, my friend, again I have to respectfully disagree. I feel it is the other way around. Major historical inaccuracies in movies ruin them and I don't even believe they are neccessary. And even worse, people will believe that history actually happened that way. I'm not talking about Sherman tanks in place of German tanks. I'm talking about gross misrepresentations. Let's take Saving Private Ryan as an example.

When I first saw SPR something really started to bug me about the movie. I started to think, "Why are they sending a half-squad of rangers traipsing all over the Normandy countryside looking for one guy whom they have no idea is even alive, let alone where he might be?" It didn't seem to make sense to me. The answer came on a local news show on the same night as the movie aired on TV. There was an interview with a relative in western New York state. That there was a private Ryan is as close to the truth as this movie ever got.

Yes, one brother was killed and another taken prisoner(wasn't known at the time if he was alive or dead), so the call went out to find Ryan. Whereupon Ryan walked into the chaplain's office and said, "Here I am." End of story. The rest was made up out of whole cloth. It never happened.

No competant military leader would squander valuable resources on such a mission, and no civilian leader would force them to. If any were still alive I'm sure they would vigorously defend themselves but of course they are convienently dead and can't. Looking at the movie in that light, other things seem out of sorts. Ryan was the real hero in the movie because he refused to abandon the bridge. If Hanks' character had his way they would have left. Some of his men even wanted to forcibly take Ryan. If the Germans took the bridge it might have endangered the entire landing. Does that make any sense?

The movie has great battle scenes, there's no denying that. Beyond that it's a piece of trash. But people believe it's true because they are allowed to say its based on a true story. It gives a very skewed history. Spielberg was fascinated with D-day even as a kid. But there are plenty of true stories that would make good movies.

In the village where I live there was an 82nd Airborne soldier by the name of Marcus Heim who passed away a few years ago. On June 6th, 1944 he was part of a 2-man bazooka team that stopped a German counterattack on the bridge over the Merderet river at La Fiere. They destroyed three French R-35's(not Tigers, of course) and saved the bridge. Not long ago, the French renamed the causeway in his honor. In 2003, Critical Hit remade their Kellam's Bridge module for ASL with a beautiful new map and 12 scenarios and called it Airborne Stand! The Battle for the 'Marcus Heim' Causeway - June 6-9, 1944. I will be glad to put up Marcus' description of the action that it contains if anyone is interested. When I showed the CH module to Marcus' widow she asked me to get her a copy, so of course I gave her mine. It took me a while to replace it and cost me about three times what I paid for the first one, but it was his widow. I sure wasn't going to SELL it to her.

My point is that there are plenty of real stories, it's completely unnecessary to invent ones. Take someone like Chesty Puller, his life would make THREE movies and you wouldn't have to stretch the truth one iota. Does anyone really think Pearl Harbor was a better movie than Tora, Tora, Tora? What about The Longest Day, A Bridge Too Far(only problem with this one was too many big name stars all trying to out do each other), and Patton? They didn't have to sacrifice the truth to make a good movie.

And I did not mean to slight other countries. I know there are great stories to be told in other country's military history. I'm just talking about the ones I know. And I'm not saying you can't spice up a story for a movie, just don't shread history to do it. I'm sure we'll hear more on this thread and I look forward to it. -Tom

[Ralf Toth]

In the case of 300 the movie is based on the comic and stayed very close to the original (except for a few minor side-stories and characters that showed up).

The comic itself is based on what Herodotus has written down. Many things we "know" about those times is derived from two sources: The writings of Herodotus and the stories from the Bible.

Today we know, that a lot of what Herodotus reported is true at the core, but has a lot of errors in the details. So I think the good thing about this movie is, that it made people (at least you and me ) think about what the sources of what we believe to be our history really are and what's true and what not.

In my humle opinion, the main point of the movie is to entertain and not to teach a history lesson. So if the movie sticks 100% to the truth it would probably become very boring and no one would want to see it. The way it is, it made people think and start asking themselves: Was it really the way they depicted it in the movie? Then people start looking things up in the net and in books and that's the great thing the movie has done (at least for me).

I am unable to comment on Private Ryan, I have seen it but I have a general antipathy against exaggarated patriotic movies like Private Ryan. And Spielberg has done only a few good movies, I like the older ones, like The Duel, Jaws, Indiana Jones, and of course his masterpiece Schindler's List (a must see for every German). After this, nothing good came from him anymore.

Like Tarantino. Tarantino only made two good movies, real jewels (Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction). The rest you can forget about. He think he's stayed too long in Amsterdam and lost his sense for making good movies there ....
_________________
Tome of Treasures - #1 resource for collectible role-playing games.

[tntwargo]

Ralf, my friend. I could not agree with you more about Tarantino. Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are the only two movies of his I have on DVD. And I'll even go a step further. Pulp Fiction was the best picture that year, not Forest Gump. Although Hanks was suberb and fully deserving of the Best Actor award.

I'll never agree that history can be sacrificed for the sake of entertainment, because I don't agree that history is boring. It's in the way that you tell it. And to make people think it's true, as in SPR is nothing short of criminal. As I said earlier, minor things that don't distort the overall historical record I don't have a problem with.

Take Enemy at the Gates for example. There was a Vassili Zaitsev and there were female snipers, but I doubt there was a love triangle between them and a political officer. It doesn't hurt the movie's historical rendering and if anyone was bored during that movie, they were probably in a coma.

Or, one of my all time favorites, Cross of Iron. I have no doubt that its not all true, but it doesn't shred history. There were probably countless stories like that. It could have happened. And if anyone was bored with THAT movie, you weren't in a coma, you were six feet under ground. BTW, I think Coburn should have gotten Best Actor for his performance as Steiner. If anyone has not seen this movie, I can't recommend it enough. You will love it.

And if a movie doesn't represent itself as true, then its perfectly acceptable to me. I just don't like when they mislead the masses into believing something that is nothing short of fanciful. A perfect example is Kelly's Heroes. No one believes that really happened and no attempt is made to make people believe it did. But I think it's a good movie and very funny. Or any of the Alistair McClaine(sic) novels that were turned into movies. No claims were made that The Guns of Navarone was based on a true story, although I'm sure some might believe it was real.

My point is that there are great and unboring movies about history and there are great and unboring stories that are not based on historical facts, but to blur the distinction between the two is to deceive people about what really happened and that is just plain wrong.

We have focused on WWII in this thread, but we could easily substitute any era. Perhaps some Vietnam movies next. Siege of Firebase Gloria is one of my favs, as is an Australian offering The Odd, Angry Shot. My best friend, who was in the 173rd in Nam, likes Platoon Leader(not Platoon). -Tom

[Ralf Toth]

[falstaff]

Liked the interpretation of Xerxes. Just like I imagine the avatars of the various gods in D&D.

Regarding Saving Private Ryan.
Never heard that this movie is based on a true stroy.
_________________
*Forgotten Realms update daemon*

A notebook. A pen. A camera. A photographic ear.

[Beyondthebreach]

[OolEurts]

I also really enjoyed both the Kill Bill flicks, and Amsterdam is a great place to spend a lot of time.

I don't think the plot of Saving Private Ryan was presented as a true story, but rather an inspiration of the heroic deeds of the guys who were there. I felt it was alright though the battle scenes were excellent. The story and characters were cliche.

Hollywood will sacrifice historical accuracy for added entertainment value pretty much every time. Braveheart anyone?

[tntwargo]

I believe the claim is made that SPR is based on a true story. But a blanket claim like that can be made even if only a miniscule part of the story is true as in SPR. There was a Ryan, and they wanted him sent home because of what happened to his brothers, but there never were any Rangers(or anyone else) sent out to find him, and that is what the movie is all about.

A SPR fan on another site said, "Yea, but it could have happened. There must have been lots of similar missions." My response was, "Prove it." Those records are all unsealed. I dare anyone to find even one factual account of a like mission. You won't be able to. The reason is NO senior military commander would have authorized such an asinine mission and no civilian leader would have ordered them to. That is why this movie is a gross distortion of history and a dishonor to our exceptional senior leaders at the time, who of course are not around to defend themselves.

It's also a slur against the Rangers and junior grade officers because if Ryan had said, "Let's go", they would have all bugged out and left the bridge to the Germans and Hanks' character could very well have been facing a courts-martial and firing squad instead. That's why Ryan himself was the true hero in the movie.

And please, don't try to pass on the "but we risk the many for the few or one. That's what makes us better than them." That's true with small unit tactics and civilian rescues, with a fair chance of success. But to risk countless lives and possibly the success of an entire operation for one individual is nothing short of purblind idiocy. You wouldn't be in command long with that attitude.

And please, don't get me started on Mel Gibson's movies. He should have stuck with something he knew about, Mad Max. -Tom

[Ralf Toth]

Oooohhh Mad Max.... a true classic.... a long time since I saw that one! Now where did I have the DVD ??? ....
_________________
Tome of Treasures - #1 resource for collectible role-playing games.

[tfm]

The Road Warrior is one of my favorites.
_________________
"This is cool."

[scribe]

I gotta admit. I am looking forward to seeing the next installment of the Indiana Jones series. I am afraid I will probably be disappointed in a way that I was to see Rambo with heavy makeup on.


_________________

[scribe]

We saw this movie this weekend with my daughter. I had heard reviews weren't too good for Indiana. But I thought it was excellent. I could honestly sit through a 12 hour movie of the same. It had all the flavor of the original series without becoming too trite. Sure, this was no Raiders of the Lost Ark, but it sure made for a great evening that left me wanting more.
_________________