Anyone else think Black Hawk Down is one of the Worst war movies of all time?

Agree.

The nail in the coffin for me was the Spitfire with the empty tank defying physics..

 

Funny how the enemy plane just happens to fly in front of his sights so it can be shot down with its eight machine guns without throwing an unpowered Spitfire out if control. Amazing...cough cough.

 

as far as a hollywood produced piece of work, it was realistic with some sentimentalism thrown in. probably to pull in and invest less-informed audience members

spoiler alert: if british forces failed their evacuation, there would have been a seriously diminished capacity to retake france, and from there... the rest of europe

it just says: "here's a representation of what it's like to be stuck between the fucking ocean on one side and an army that has the ability to fuck up your entire national defense, at wholesale prices. by the way, your uber driver is lost"

i thought it was a brilliant depiction of the humanity of being subject to the poor decisions and coordination of those you would call leaders, while still trying to do the right thing as a person.

you're trying to commit to what you know to be right and moral and good, but once you've sworn your fealty to that cause... you're still just a tool to be used at the whim of someone who's typically not clawing at the dirt right there with you

it's a story as old as war itself. i think it was as objective and honest as any film depicting a real event could be

 

the problem that a director and/or writer has in a movie: including stories that are compelling without losing their import or impact on the audience

often they are forced to make an amalgamation of characters into a single character, and will often include elements of each characters' story into a single story

this is very true of war films that depict real events. sometimes it's because of confusion over who did what (record-keeping), and sometimes it's due to actual misdirection. more often than not it's not malicious, so i don't take issue with it

director Christopher Nolan actually voiced this several times "by using fiction, I was able to explain various aspects of what happened in Dunkirk more efficiently and with more emotional clarity than by just following strict facts."

and let's face it, from an individual standpoint and an international strategic standpoint, it was horrifying.

but to put on film exactly what happened... would be boring, because sometimes (often) war is boring.

tom hardy's character portrayed actual events from a few different characters. one shot down a german bomber while dry on gas (over the channel) before ditching (and dying).

another pilot he portrayed (with the same character) shot down six german planes and landed dry on a beach (in Belgium) before re-joining allied troops leaving france, only to return to the air fight six days later.
that pilot later flew in the battle of britain and ended the war with 22 enemy planes under his belt, led his part of Sir Winston Chruchill's funeral procession, and had his ashes scattered from the cockpit of a spitfire when he died in 1995

so how do you bring to life the events of an entire population of good people doing difficult and dangerous things, and the attention span of the audience and your producers allowing only so much time spent on the film?

 

I appreciate your perspective.

Maybe I’ll try it again if I’m laid up for a significant length of time and have exhausted all other options.

 

Black Hawk Down was an illustration of actual events, it doesn't share the same horizon with the other movies you mentioned. haha

i appreciated restrepo as a documentary, because it was. haha

Generataion Kill is typically hailed as a very good representation of what it was like to be a marine during the invasion of iraq. this is usually supported by dudes that were or are marines. guess why. haha

take a wild guess why some material resonates better with some and not others. haha

at the time of it's creation, the film crew for Black Hawk Down took extraordinary measures to ensure technical and factual accuracy. they had several members of the actual elements on the ground on-hand (during filming) and in the actors preparation phase before filming. haha

jarhead and hurt locker were ridiculous because they were ridiculous.

they're outlandish tales twisted into reality for some, and comedy fodder for others. haha

 

BHD wasn't supposed to be good, it was supposed to be propaganda that the viewing public could take as literal to romanticized a failed operation, shift blame, alienate "them" "over there", and recruit more little boys to want to play hero soldier. In that regard it was a complete success.

/Like how everyone was suddenly an ancient warrior tactician after 300 came out.

 

romanticized? it showed dudes getting shot in the head, and their blood being washed out of trucks

these aren't elements of good recruiting propaganda.

the only reason why it was made into a movie: the book sold. the reason the book sold: it was timely and there were compelling stories included

it was done with production when the September 11th terrorist attacks occurred, filming started March that year
so unless Jerry Bruckheimer and Ridley Scott had prior knowledge of the the largest terrorist attack on U.S. soil... that dog doesn't hunt

here's a reason why the film was so popular: there was a national feeling of helplessness after the world trade centers collapsed and the pentagon burned. people wanted a place to put that, dudes especially.

i don't think there was a huge uptick in recruiting because of Black Hawk Down... there were plenty of other [much stronger and more immediate] reasons

 

You and your god damn logic all the time...

 

Not a movie per se but a mini-series -- I remember really enjoying "Band of Brothers"

 

To the military guys.... what's your take on Act of Valor? During its movie release, I recall that it was promoted as a movie developed by SEALs to be used as a recruitment tool, had SEALs with bits parts in the movie, etc

Lone Survivor...the book was a great read, but the movie IMO was meh. I did learn that 1 of the brave heros in Operations Redwing was my age and grew up one town over from me. His memorial at my neighborhood park took on a whole different meaning after reading the book and other side stories. Those guys were some brave and selfless MFers.

Matthew Axelson and James Suh Memorial

 

And yet, with little deviation from the exact happenings there are many films that worked well......it’s obvious, it was suppose to be a real happening. Fantasy scenes detract from the realism. At the very least
let the fake scene be that of shooting down another plane before the pilot runs out of gas...... make scene believable.

 

i did my EIB with 1/506th in Korea, it turns out their B Co. is still called Baker Company.
Ambrose's Band of Brothers was required reading for NCOs there

 

You clearly suffer from army hate syndrome, I bet if those were jarheads you'd think it was OUTSTANDING RAH! I'm just messin with you, but still to call it worst military movie? show us on the doll where the army ranger touched you.

I thought it was frickin' badass, yeah it's packing in a lot of one liners, but you got to realize they are trying to convey a lot in just a couple hours. Shit, I've heard even cornier crap from actual grunts and tankers. Then there are the effects, equipment, tactics and while I've never been part of rangers or SF, all of that looked pretty on point to me.

I also think they did a fair job at portraying the shit show that occurs during a fire fight, horrified looks, soldiers freezing up, lot of loud ass gun fire and yelling. Now I've only been in two fire fights, one of them where we actually took a fair amount of fire, but yeah, I'd say they did a pretty decent job of relaying what that "feels" like given it's a movie.

To call it a fobbit lover flick, dems fight words brother! I ain't no fobbit and I'll fight for this movies honor, but no gut punches, I'm old and can't take body shots like I used too.

PS HOOOOAHHH!!!!