PDA

View Full Version : Black Hawk Down


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


erminio
08-27-2002, 02:02 PM
Hi folks, I re-post here a question because I'm really looking for your answers: what did you think about "Black Hawk Down", by Ridley Scott? I found its principles and the way of thinking of these roles very valuable, but my friends all laugh after me :( , saying "here come the cowboys"..

Thanks

Erminio

chadsieger
08-27-2002, 05:42 PM
I thought it looked like a video game with constant fatalities. Also, the ending was fake. Correct?

paw
08-27-2002, 09:38 PM
Chad,

If you read the book, the number of casualties was grossly understated. Although like any adaptation, the movie did omit certain events for brevity's sake, but overall was accurate.

Personally, I enjoyed the movie when I saw it in the theater, but watching it again, I didn't like it as much as I did. IMO, the director over did it by making every scene so manipulatively dramatic with music.

That said, watching the two Delta snipers request to secure the second crash site was much, much harder the second time.

Regards,

Paul

chadsieger
08-28-2002, 09:55 AM
Nice tone....
If you read the book,

All I know is, I saw almost 1,000 Somolians die in almost every way immaginable. Some may consider this pleasurable viewing. I however, do not.

If you were attracted to the "realism," I may remind you that Stone Temple Pilots don't play whenever you look through the sights of a M-16.

Thanks

Chad

paw
08-28-2002, 02:34 PM
Chad,
All I know is, I saw almost 1,000 Somolians die in almost every way immaginable. Some may consider this pleasurable viewing. I however, do not.

I didn't say I considered watching people getting shot was pleasurable. I don't think the D-Day scene in Saving Private Ryan is pleasurable (far from it), but within the context of the movie the scene works very well.

Your video game comment struck me as saying the Somali deaths were either a) gratuitious or b) exagerrated. B is certainly not true, and I didn't consider the film to portray the deaths as gratuitious. This was a war film that was intended to be faithful to the actual events. Did you have different expectations of the film?
If you were attracted to the "realism," I may remind you that Stone Temple Pilots don't play whenever you look through the sights of a M-16.

I didn't say I was attracted to the realism. I thought made it clear that I thought the soundtrack was manipulative and over the top.

Did you read the book? Based on the book's accounts, the Somali casualities were understated as was the involvement of non-combatants in the firefight (the book makes several references to Somali fighters deliberately using women and children as human shields to fight behind, as well as women and children deliberately taking weapons from dead fighters to give to other fighters....in both cases there was a moral dilema for US Soldiers, do you fire or not?).

I compare the movie to the book because the book was the original source. If a film is based on something else (book, comic, television show) I try to see/read the original source. It's just something I do. <shrugs>

I think Black Hawk Down is a good film, but not a great one. The book is a compelling read, and the most accurate account (possibly the only account) of the events that transpired.

Regards,

Paul

Brian H
09-02-2002, 01:22 PM
Somali casualties:

The US "little bird" Helicopters spent most of the night flying bellow roof top level firing mini guns (up to 100 rounds a SECOND) and rockets into the streets around the rangers. The few seconds devoted to this phase of the battle, while gratuitously violent, understate the grinding horror depicted in the book.

The movie is largely devoted to the "action" of the story. The book gets into the back ground of the battle, what lead up to it, and the aftermath. It doesn't editorialize, it lays out the story based on first person accounts. The movie plays around with what real people actually did (Everhart in particular), but the ending is real. Those guys really did get left behind and have to run out.

PS : Only in Hollywood can a company clerk brag that Obi Wan Kanobi played him in the movie.

Genex
09-03-2002, 04:59 AM
I'm seriously attracted to realism in a "war movie" because it protrays what the soldiers had to battle through 'Saving private ryan' was an amazing film and the first ten minutes is enough to put anybody off the army for life, unless your a sadist and enjoy being up to your waste in grenades and intestines, the same can be said for 'Band of brothers' which i found truely moving (having read the book previously) i think it portrayed the story well as did 'Black hawk down' i'm actualy about to order it on DVD i enjoyed it that much along with my other collectons

Das Boot, Full metal jacket, the longest day, tora tora tora, Saving private ryan, band of brothers and countless others which portray accurate (mostly) stories.

has to be said tho if you've seen it 'Saving Ryans Privates' is a hilarious film.
If you were attracted to the "realism," I may remind you that Stone Temple Pilots don't play whenever you look through the sights of a M-16.

This alas is a shame i was looking forward to this, as when you look the the Susat (SP?) of an SA80 you hear "night on a bare mountain" and on a GPMG you get "Iron man" by ozzy ;)

Jim ashby
09-03-2002, 05:04 AM
Looking through the SUSAT on an SA80 you will normally hear these mantra "I hope this pile of sh*t goes bang this time" and "why can't I have an HK".

Have fun.

Genex
09-03-2002, 06:00 AM
Looking through the SUSAT on an SA80 you will normally hear these mantra "I hope this pile of sh*t goes bang this time" and "why can't I have an HK".

LOL have you ever checked who manufacture SA80's? hehehe its hecklor and kock!!!!

seriously it really is!

tell ya what tho the government want to stay with the sa80 and the army want to get the colt range in its a real battle but hilarious!

Bring back the SLR is what i say.

pete

Jim ashby
09-03-2002, 06:57 AM
Hi Pete. Yeah I know that H&K make the SA80, the H&K I was referring to would be the G3. I agree that the SLR was great (unless some sod turned the gas regulator up to 9).

Have fun.

Azrael
09-03-2002, 11:52 AM
MP5.......every time!!:grr:

Jim ashby
09-03-2002, 03:55 PM
MP5 is a good gun but I wouldnt like to try to use it at any decent distance. Also, I found it to be a bit picky about ammo. Anyway, this is way off thread!

Have fun

paw
09-03-2002, 08:23 PM
Genex,

You might want to hold off getting Black Hawk Down on dvd....rumor is a deluxe 2 disc set will be released next year.

Regards,

Paul

Genex
09-04-2002, 05:25 AM
paw, bit late i've already ordered it from australia(duel encoded rgn 2,4) and all delivered for a mere 12english pounds, $35 australian dollers but a nice £12

so i'm happy and as were on the subject of gunz for close quartars and breach work i'd use a p90 or an HK ump45 silenced, for medium to long probebly a colt m4 with a 5X scope, t bar handle metal stock etc.. for long range i'd take an SLR because they are ace.

cant you tell i play counter strike alot? besides i've fired slr's and they rock, one hell of a kick.

yoroshiku, pete

Jim ashby
09-04-2002, 02:01 PM
Never played counter strike. I was a registered firearms dealer for some years though.

Have fun

Genex
09-05-2002, 05:19 AM
I dont suppose your still selling firearms are you? evileyes

There are a few items i would love to get my hands on.

(Que meniacle laughter here)

dont suppose you know where i could get my hands on a nice sphere of weapons grade plutonium would you? golf ball sized would do.

tum-te-tum...

yoroshiku, pete

Jim ashby
09-05-2002, 08:28 AM
No I don't. I gave it up when the cretinously stupid public backed that mad harridan Margaret Thatcher ( may she die in poverty of a lingering disfiguring agonising disease the evil bitch) and Douglas Hurd (the same applies), in banning certain firearms. I gave up my pesonal firearms certificate later when the divine T Blair's government decided to ban most of the rest. Isn't it nice to know that, now firearms are banned, nobody gets shot on our streets.

Have fun

Brian H
09-05-2002, 06:28 PM
Don't hold it in, Jim!

I am gun buff and living in the US get to own a bunch (and carry them concealed in public), but call me weird, but ...

The thing that struck me the most about Black Hawk Down was the scenes in the Hanger. Seeing the Rangers as a bunch of heavily- armed-man-children-with-guns-making-fart- jokes, only made watching their fight for survival that much harder

paw
09-05-2002, 09:41 PM
Brian,
The thing that struck me the most about Black Hawk Down was the scenes in the Hanger. Seeing the Rangers as a bunch of heavily- armed-man-children-with-guns-making-fart- jokes, only made watching their fight for survival that much harder

Could you elaborate on that? What made it harder? Also, did you have different feelings about the Delta Force Operators? (The book went into quite a bit of detail about the difference between Delta and the Rangers)

Regards,

Paul

Jim ashby
09-06-2002, 08:17 AM
Hi Brian. I rant on about Mrs T but for very good reasons. The destruction of industry, the rise of "yuppie culture" (oxymoron?) and escalating a very minor scuffle into a war in which a lot of my friends were killed.As to "black hawk down" it should be looked at as one of the more "warts and all" portrayals of war. There are those who would think it was cool, but then, you can't bruise a pillow.

Have fun.

Genex
09-06-2002, 10:57 AM
You mean the falklands war?

That was a sham and could have been avoided well in advance if it werent for maggie and the ladz... oh and the french deciding to sell argentina those cruise missle's but we wont hold that against them eh? they didnt really sink many ships:grr:

anyhoo about the rangers arent all soldiers just big kids? drinking beer and telling very rude jokes?

i think if they werent they'd prolly go nutz

;)

yoroshiku,

pete

Brian H
09-06-2002, 11:36 AM
Brian,



Could you elaborate on that? What made it harder? Also, did you have different feelings about the Delta Force Operators? (The book went into quite a bit of detail about the difference between Delta and the Rangers)

Regards,

Paul
Paul,

The movie (and the book) did a real good job of showing the humanity of the Rangers. The Delta guys come off as more as ultra squared away action hero types. The difference is likely true in reality.

The Rangers were largely teenagers or not much older. They reflect the immaturity of their age and our times. The fact that I was about the same age at the same time draws me closer to them. Their antics remind me of my peers and the silly things men/boys do to bond. That they instantly could transform into mission oriented soldier and fight for each otherís lives is a testimony to the courage and training.

The Delta guys are all senior NCOs and the product of several progressive, grinding selection and training processes. (Basic/ airborne/ ranger/ special forces /delta) They are some very serious fellows. The training weeds out anyone without incredible drive and endurance.

When we were 13, one of my Boy Scout buddies told me he was going to become a SEAL Officer. I thought he was so full of crap. He was/is a relatively little guy. But he did it and when asked, "How long can you guys hold your breath under water?" He just answered, "As long as we have to."

As a "regular guy" these guys just seem both "less human" and "super human" to me.

paw
09-06-2002, 01:20 PM
Brian,

Thanks for replying.

That's the impression I got from reading Black Hawk Down as well. I also read "Inside Delta Force" by Eric L. Haney to get a better idea of Delta Operators.

One of the things that I don't think the movie stressed was how much the Rangers looked up to the Delta Operators (it seemed to border on hero worship). Although I do think the movie touched on the different command differences between Delta and the Rangers. The Rangers seemed to have a much more structured and formal command, while Delta did not technically answer to the Ranger command (I think this was shown in the movie in the dinner scene where a Delta Operator -- Hoot, in the movie -- was confronted with the Ranger CO about bringing a "hot" weapon into the cafeteria).
The Delta guys are all senior NCOs and the product of several progressive, grinding selection and training processes. (Basic/ airborne/ ranger/ special forces /delta) They are some very serious fellows. The training weeds out anyone without incredible drive and endurance.

Very true. Very dedicated and capable individuals.

Regards,

Paul

Kevin Leavitt
09-06-2002, 07:43 PM
Believe it or not, I have not seen Black Hawk Down or read the book. ( I am watching it this weekend.)

Several of my Ranger Instructors were fresh out of Somalia and had a great deal of advice to us. I took there lessons to heart.

Rangers, Delta, and SF all have different missions.

Rangers are really just infantrymen, albeit very, very special. They specialize in conventional warfare and missions center around airfield seizure, raids, ambushes, and small unit tactics. They are basically "stormtrooper" that go in fast, furious, in well executed and coordinated missions and do it very well. Yes they are very regimented and structured...they have to be since they typically do not fight below the platoon level, and for most part they do battalion level missions (1000 soldiers). The Privates are all about 18-21, the company level officers are anywhere from 21-25 on average.

Having commanded and lead a bunch of "bat boys" in training (18 year old privates...I can tell you that they can be pretty darn normal 18 year olds. It is not until they make sergeant and are in Battalion for a few years that they get experience and maturity. Most of them do their four years and get out...it is a hard life and not for everyone.

Delta, is well..Delta. Brian is correct in his response. They do their own thing as needed.

SF are not really fighters per se. They are into unconventional warfare and basically train indigenous troops and work very differently from Rangers.

All Special Operations FOrces in U.S. have a great deal of respect for one another. and typically share a common brotherhood bond that they have chosen a life that few care to live or have the intestintal fortitude to live.

They are all normal guys and I have had some of the best debates and philosophical conversations with my Ranger Buddy who was a 19 year old private at the time we were in school together.

It changed my life forever I will tell you that!

paw
09-07-2002, 06:00 AM
Kevin,

Please post your thoughts on the movie after you see it. (I hope we haven't given away too many spoilers for you in this thread)

Although the book is a bit "dry" in places (the author rightly assumes that not every reader will know military terms, procedures, etc... and so he explains them as they come up) I think it's worth a trip to the library to pick up.

Regards,

Paul

Kevin Leavitt
09-09-2002, 12:01 PM
Good movie. Technically correct for the most part. Not too much hollywood in it. Liked how they had a hard time hearing each other when rounds are going off.

The tactics they used in the movie were doctrinally correct and accurately reflected. Even the lingo was well done. Probably a few more F thats! in the real battle though.

In the movie they could have used more M203 rounds, but that is a judgement call.

Shows you what happens when you go into battle and violate your basic tenants of combat.

I will say that they really do take "leave no man behind" that serious. In school we would carry logs and people for up to 5 Kilometers just to practice this.

paw
09-09-2002, 02:47 PM
Kevin,

Thanks for the review.

M203....is that a grenade launcher?

Regards,

Paul

Brian H
09-10-2002, 06:05 AM
40mm grenade launcher that mounts under the barrel of the M-16/M-4.

Genex
09-10-2002, 08:16 AM
M4 with underslung m203

hmmmmm music to my ears

dont know why but i prefer the carbine *shrug*

Dont suppose anybody has seen windtalkers recently?

i couldnt stop laughing it really was a john woo film

Picture this nicolaus cage stood there with a tommy gun fires off a volley in one direction and about 12 japanese fall dead, he runs off to another bit and does it again

there was alltogether too much death in the film, hitting someone at close range is really difficult even with an SMG

I once saw a 'spray' chart for an mp5 at ten yards the circle on the figure was about 8-10 inches in diamiter at 50 it was like 30 and at 100 it was near on 3 ft!

so factor in that Your running, theyre running and its a bit of a snap shot thing the chances are damn low to hit one person never mind about 6 in one sweep.

still lots of BFG's and explosions etc...

was alright.

pete

paw
09-10-2002, 09:48 AM
Pete,

So Windtalkers was ok? Darn. I'm a huge fan of John Woo and was hoping for something really special. Then I heard that parts of the movie had to be reshot....then re-edited....then it was postponed....then it was in the local theaters for a week....

<sigh>

Hey, anyone want to compare and contrast Black Hawk Down with We Were Soldiers?

Regards,

Paul

Brian H
09-10-2002, 02:24 PM
Pete,

Hey, anyone want to compare and contrast Black Hawk Down with We Were Soldiers?

Regards,

Paul
Paul,

Are you writing a paper or something;)?

Brian

paw
09-10-2002, 03:05 PM
Nah... But since you asked....

I like movies. There are a number of fine "war films". Currently the one on the top of my list is Saving Private Ryan.

I had high hopes for both Black Hawk Down and We Were Soldiers. Both were based on actual events, and really went out of their way to get things "right". While both are good movies, I don't think either are great movies. I also have the strong feeling that the director/actors/crew/etc... wanted to emphasize the bond between soldiers, but for my money, neither movie did that as well as Saving Private Ryan.

Anyhoo, off the top of my head (and in no particular order after Saving Private Ryan), here's a list of some of my favorite "war films" (some of which, I couldn't possibly see again ... a person's gotta know their limits)

Saving Private Ryan

Zulu (1964)

A Bridge Too Far

Bridge Over the River Kwai

Glory

The Great Escape

Schindler's List

Apocalypse Now

Full Metal Jacket

Tora! Tora! Tora!

Gallipoli

I'm missing a bunch... Ah well....

Regards,

Paul

Kevin Leavitt
09-10-2002, 07:40 PM
Both movies were good in their own respects.

Many of my fellow soldiers preferred "We were soldiers"...mainly because Joe Galloway, Ernie Savage, and Hal Moore have come to many of our classes at Fort Benning to give talks to new LTs.

Both were technically correct and were designed to be very factual. Most American Infantrymen appreciate the fact that they did a great job capturing the realism.

I really detest violence, especially gratitious violence and avoid flims with it. However, Films like Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, and We were soldiers serve a purpose.

They do not glorify war, but at the same time show that soldiers are real people with compassion and feelings. So while not glorifying war....it does not slander and put down the people that fought it.

Maybe if we had more films like these people would not be so apt to want to fight wars.

Genex
09-11-2002, 07:00 AM
Maybe if we had more films like these people would not be so apt to want to fight wars.

I agree totaly with this statement, after watching saving private ryan i definatly didnt want to run off to war or anything, same can be said about Band of brothers also

they did indeed show the bond between men in battle extremly well in both it made you feel rather upset when one of them 'gets it' especialy knowing that it was true...still i'm yet to see a good film about the british involvement in D-Day and africa other then really old ones.

pete