Go Back   SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network > General Topics > The Lounge > Movies and TV

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 8 August 2012, 10:36
eoddude eoddude is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 268
Zero Dark Thirty

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/untitl...n-details.html

Based on the true story.

I fucking hate those words.

I would feel better if only the "Hurt Locker" hadn't been:

A) Depressing
B) Lame
C) Gay
D) ALL OF THE ABOVE!

Good luck at the Awards.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 8 August 2012, 10:39
sinjefe sinjefe is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: South Central TX
Posts: 327
After "The Hurt Locker", I'll never watch another Kathryn Bigelow film again
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 8 August 2012, 10:54
Matchanu's Avatar
Matchanu Matchanu is offline
Creepy ass cracka
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Isle of misfit toys
Posts: 11,311
This is the movie that the POTUS allowed the film makers access to the meeting he had with the dudes who did the deed.

Not happy about this at all.
__________________
"Better to live alone in the desert than with a nagging wife" - Proverbs 21:19
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 8 August 2012, 11:06
Kip Kip is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,096
Oh brother. Could they have picked a lesser known cast?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 8 August 2012, 11:11
smp52 smp52 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 1,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matchanu View Post
This is the movie that the POTUS allowed the film makers access to the meeting he had with the dudes who did the deed.

Not happy about this at all.
There were non-government personnel, filmakers of all, as observers in a meeting between the President and SOF? Wow...never knew of this.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 8 August 2012, 11:28
Soot's Avatar
Soot Soot is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kip View Post
Oh brother. Could they have picked a lesser known cast?
Or a less American cast?

By my count there were 4 Brits, an Australian, a dude from Wales (maybe he's a Brit too?), and a Venezuelan.

Oh, and two Americans.
__________________
“If you guys fucking fall for this shit again, I swear to God the ridicule that I unleash will reverberate in the signature lines of half the membership here for an eternity.”

― MakoZeroSix
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 8 August 2012, 11:35
stanpunjabTrini stanpunjabTrini is offline
On the Extract Bird
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: IL
Posts: 548
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soot View Post
Or a less American cast?

By my count there were 4 Brits, an Australian, a dude from Wales (maybe he's a Brit too?), and a Venezuelan.

Oh, and two Americans.
Seems like a global economy! 'Better actors for less' (relative view) and let the story do the talking. Outsourcing is good for America but it depends on who says it and actually does it!
I will support the film because it was conceived by an American and that is good enough for me.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 8 August 2012, 13:20
Maverick's Avatar
Maverick Maverick is offline
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 714
After the unfortunate instance when I actually watched The Hurtlocker...I do not expect this movie to be all that impressive in the least. As far as I'm concerned this film will be another poor attempt at doing any sort of military portrayal any type of justice.
__________________
"Improving team morale, one compliment at a time."

Maverick: "Shit I'd fuck anything with four legs right now."
Godfather: "What like a pigeon?"
Maverick: "A pigeon???"
Godfather: "Yeah, pigeons have four legs."
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 8 August 2012, 14:53
SOW_0331's Avatar
SOW_0331 SOW_0331 is offline
Patriot
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Living Free, or Dying Hard...
Posts: 2,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maverick View Post
After the unfortunate instance when I actually watched The Hurtlocker...I do not expect this movie to be all that impressive in the least. As far as I'm concerned this film will be another poor attempt at doing any sort of military portrayal any type of justice.
Did you finish it? If so, I'm putting you in for a NAM/V. That's fuckin hard as woodpecker lips right there.
__________________
"We had a special place for those guys coming to us from FAST Co...The Armory" TP-2013
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 8 August 2012, 18:05
SaloSV SaloSV is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: AR
Posts: 36
Artists steal from everyone they meet, especially in the case of The Hurt Locker (in case anyone listened to the commentary on the DVD). It was still a fictional story though. As a result, they had all the freedom in the world from a DOD cooperation perspective (i.e., there was no cooperation). The result was artistic freedom and consequently, six Oscars.

I've been working on a WWII script for a while that is based off of an actual memoir from a 32nd Infantry Div. grunt who fought in the south Pacific, and I can tell you, it is impossible to tell the exact truth AND compress everything into two hours AND maintain a quick pace that we're accustomed to today AND a few other things that are required that, if missing, send the critics screaming "shitty movie" or "why did this film get made."

The filmmakers have to juggle between respect in the industry in which they are employed and the military community in which they are portraying. Most filmmakers (used broadly here, and could mean actors, writers, directors, etc.) won't come close to military stories because a) it's too much of a niche, and b) the community is so hard to please.

That being said, Bigelow is up there now with the big boys as far as epic military films (from an industry standpoint). But looking back on past war films, the most epic and memorable ones were either a) a film of a book written by a war fighter or b) written by the guy who was there (i.e. Platoon, really the only case I can think of that actually pleased the military community on any scale).

So the question I keep hearing here is, did Hurt Locker actually do an injustice to the soldiers they were portraying? Tough call I would say, but I'm not a BTDT.

There is where Act of Valor comes in as setting the bar for realistic and quality portrayals. Hollywood is going to do what it's going to do, but from a financing standpoint, Act of Valor might be a very discouraging phenomenon. Not only does the final picture have to meet the requirements to satisfy the community, but the community demands transparency in the construction of the product.

All in an effort to tell the truth, and not misrepresent. It's a tough place to be if you as a filmmaker give a shit what those you so admire actually think of your work. Yes, I'm speaking of myself.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 8 August 2012, 19:57
sinjefe sinjefe is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: South Central TX
Posts: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaloSV View Post
Artists steal from everyone they meet, especially in the case of The Hurt Locker (in case anyone listened to the commentary on the DVD). It was still a fictional story though. As a result, they had all the freedom in the world from a DOD cooperation perspective (i.e., there was no cooperation). The result was artistic freedom and consequently, six Oscars.


So the question I keep hearing here is, did Hurt Locker actually do an injustice to the soldiers they were portraying? Tough call I would say, but I'm not a BTDT.

All in an effort to tell the truth, and not misrepresent. It's a tough place to be if you as a filmmaker give a shit what those you so admire actually think of your work. Yes, I'm speaking of myself.
Did you actually see Hurt Locker? It wasn't just an "injustice". It was complete and utter bullshit and I mean that in every sense of the word. There wasn't one sound military tactic, technique or procedure in the entire film.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 8 August 2012, 21:23
nofear's Avatar
nofear nofear is offline
Proud wearer of a Beard.
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia-based
Posts: 2,559
"The Hurt Locker" was entertainment for the masses, and that's what the makers intended it to be.

I was entertained for a couple of hours, even while gritting my teeth at some of the obvious rubbish.

Yes, I finished it.

Unfortunately it will be very difficult for a movie marketed at the masses to entertain or impress those "in the know".

I have very simple expectations when it comes to movies - Take my mind off real life for the length of the movie, and don't be a chick-flick.
__________________
"Amateurs train until they get it right. Professionals train until they can't get it wrong." - Unknown
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 8 August 2012, 21:54
SaloSV SaloSV is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: AR
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinjefe View Post
Did you actually see Hurt Locker? It wasn't just an "injustice". It was complete and utter bullshit and I mean that in every sense of the word. There wasn't one sound military tactic, technique or procedure in the entire film.
I hear you, but my point still stands. Do we see sound tactics/procedures in the military themed films we respect?

Thin Red Line = no
Ryan = maybe
Full Metal Jacket = biased exception given
Platoon = they fuck up, but they pay for their mistakes

Different wars and as such different circumstances, and the characters make decisions based on those circumstances, but all of these films are really designed to represent something bigger. An internal struggle, and in some of them, a collective one.


HL didn't focus on tactics or techniques at all to me. Those high scenes were designed to be exciting and present a great risk to the team, which they do quite well in various ways. The film opens with the pretense that "war is a drug" and in fact they put those very words on the screen, making this a film about addiction and consequently, weakness, in the first 5 seconds.

I can promise you the film industry will always put more emphasis on the deeper struggles of a charachter than they will accuracy in any other element. Accuracy will be reserved for documentaries and tv shows (translated: reality tv shows nowadays, and even those are loosely scripted most of the time).
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 8 August 2012, 22:13
eoddude eoddude is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 268
Grumble (mutters)

Sigh...

OK, let me try and respond in a understandable and not visceral fashion.

Hurt Locker sucked.

But it's hard to say why in a way that makes sense.

These guys enter the Big Machine (what service I don't care) and chose to go EOD. Cool.
They spend 6 to 12 months going through NAVSCHOLEOD.
Plus, more months doing pre-deployment training.
All that just to go downrange and declare "I can't do this."
NO FUCKING WAY.
If you are doing the EOD thing it's because you want to do it.
I just can't imagine otherwise.
(rant mode off)
Have a good one.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 9 August 2012, 08:22
sinjefe sinjefe is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: South Central TX
Posts: 327
[QUOTE=SaloSV;1058176394]I hear you, but my point still stands. Do we see sound tactics/procedures in the military themed films we respect?
QUOTE]

Maybe. But, Bigelow marketed it as realistic and that would be a lie. The real reason I won't watch her films is..... they suck.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 9 August 2012, 10:52
SaloSV SaloSV is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: AR
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinjefe View Post
Maybe. But, Bigelow marketed it as realistic and that would be a lie. The real reason I won't watch her films is..... they suck.
Ok. Compared to what? Six Academy Awards don't lie.

Ryan was marketed and is regarded as the most "realistic" war film in the history of film, but clearly is was a fictional story. Yet it won the respect of almost every living WWII veteran out there. Why? Because they made it feel real.

That's the magic of it. It's not about telling a good lie, it's about telling the truth under imaginary circumstances. The difference may mean splitting hairs to you, but to me it is a completely different concept.

Would you boycott another of Spielberg's war films because they aren't realistic? What about War Horse? Schindler's List (not really a war film and was based on an actual historical figure, but was fictionalized a great deal)?

The problem I see is that the media professionals today are making movies out of recent events too quickly. As a surviving generation, we can look back on events like WWII or Vietnam and when coupled with our (relatively) academic education of those events, understand these "works of art" to represent the overall struggle as whole. Because they are so heavily marketed and replayed, they eventually rest in the forefront of our perception of the entire time period.

THAT I have a problem with because it just leads to miseducation. I had an actress friend (good person) who once thought when I mentioned Battle of the Bulge to her that I was talking about a weight loss show!

What does this have to do with Zero Dark Thirty? There are bound to be some changes in the real events and the people involved, and it is bound to "majesticize" the POTUS (huh, fancy that, a strategic election year release. actually, nevermind, release is scheduled post election).

Act of Valor comes to mind again as an example. Very jingoistic. We won, they lost, and our lead characters didn't really have any flaws. In the war film genre, Act really was a backtrack from a "story style" perspective. Whether we see flawed good guys in ZDT is yet to be seen, although I'm sure we'll see any "accidents" that occurred get exaggerated, but those are technicalities.

Gotta get back to work now. Interesting discussion though.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 9 August 2012, 11:10
SOW_0331's Avatar
SOW_0331 SOW_0331 is offline
Patriot
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Living Free, or Dying Hard...
Posts: 2,220
Saving Private Ryan was so well received because it was so brutal. Yes, the plot was a fictional story. But the depiction of WWII soldiers in combat in that theater was so incredibly accurate it brought the survivors to tears. The talk, the gear, the technology, all of it was researched over and over again for authenticity. THAT is why it was such a testament to how a war movie can be made.

Hurt Locker was none of those things. Not only was the plot fictional, it was so stupid unrealistic that it hurt to see. Beyond that, it was flat out disrespectful. It took a CURRENT setting where our troops are/were still getting killed and made an entertainment piece out of it for fucking profit. You mean to tell me after X amount of years at war, they couldn't find a single vet of theater (war theater, not acting class) to say "hey uh, this shit is gay, we don't get drunk and sneak out into town in civvies, we don't stay in nice hotel rooms in country and play x box and such. EOD doesn't go running through Baghdad chasing baddies in buddy pairs without comms or anything". NO efforts were made to ensure that the movie did anything realistic.

The fact that it we so many awards shows how out of touch America is with the conflicts they send their own sons to. It makes me sick to think that someday, someone will watch Hurt Locker and think thats what our generations wars were like.

And they'll do the same gay politico-agenda-pushing shit with a movie about a raid that killed the most wanted man in the world. Awesome.
__________________
"We had a special place for those guys coming to us from FAST Co...The Armory" TP-2013
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 9 August 2012, 11:25
sinjefe sinjefe is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: South Central TX
Posts: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaloSV View Post
Ok. Compared to what? Six Academy Awards don't lie.

.
Oh yeah, the academy awards is what I base my taste in movies on. You didn't read my last sentence. I'll say it again.... just for you:

Ultimately, I think Bigelow's movies suck. Thus the reason I won't be watching them. Why I believe they suck, I've already stated. Saving Private Ryan was more realistic. Bigelow's was so out their flapping, it might as well have been science fiction. But they marketed it as realistic. Thay fact that it won six academy awards, to me, just reinforces my opinion of it sucking.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 9 August 2012, 12:09
SaloSV SaloSV is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: AR
Posts: 36
You're specific! I like that.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 9 August 2012, 12:25
Walken1's Avatar
Walken1 Walken1 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio Texas
Posts: 1,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaloSV View Post
Ok. Compared to what? Six Academy Awards don't lie.

Ryan was marketed and is regarded as the most "realistic" war film in the history of film, but clearly is was a fictional story. Yet it won the respect of almost every living WWII veteran out there. Why? Because they made it feel real.

.
^^^It's ironic that these sentences come back-to-back....
Saving Private Ryan was beat for Best Picture by "Shakespeare In Love" that year.

Oscar statues lie all the time.
__________________
"You see, violence merely creates more violence. It's a cycle that never ends... You insult me, I shoot you, you drop dead, someone else insults me... And it just keeps repeating over and over again. And for what?"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Our new posting rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:01.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved
SOCNET