EPTIf you want all of these put together, then I don't really know... but you'll understand that it's pretty rare to have a "realistic" movie, not only because you can't have a superstar die on screen like some kind of nobody 10 minutes into the story, but also because the definition of what "realistic" varies greatly between different people.
Realistic military tactics in movies? - Page 2
| Blogs > Bahku |
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
If you want all of these put together, then I don't really know... but you'll understand that it's pretty rare to have a "realistic" movie, not only because you can't have a superstar die on screen like some kind of nobody 10 minutes into the story, but also because the definition of what "realistic" varies greatly between different people. | ||
|
Dunmer
United Kingdom568 Posts
| ||
|
EpiK
Korea (South)5757 Posts
| ||
Heyoka
Katowice25012 Posts
| ||
|
Bahku
United States182 Posts
On January 10 2013 09:37 Kukaracha wrote: What do you call realistic ? Application of textbook tactics in a real world setting or the chaos and oddity of war ? And what of the historical accuracy ? If you want all of these put together, then I don't really know... but you'll understand that it's pretty rare to have a "realistic" movie, not only because you can't have a superstar die on screen like some kind of nobody 10 minutes into the story, but also because the definition of what "realistic" varies greatly between different people. Just some sort of basic realism, I don't care. Basically, I like it when movies set up a suspenseful, tense conflict, military or otherwise. The odds continue to stack against the hero, how will he prevail? Surely my mind will be blown when I see the conclusion! What kind of creativity will be used to ensure our hero's victory? Oh, no, it's just protagonist reinforcements showing up/giant eagles/a bright light in the sky/blind luck and the bad guys all fall down. What have I done with the past two hours of my life? It's hard for me to even feel suspense any more in films, because it always feels like it's going to be resolved at any moment. I don't want our fiction to mirror human religions where the good guys win before the battle begins; I want fiction to mirror harsh, cold reality where the only survivors are the clever, the bright, and the talented, and I want to see how they do it. | ||
|
tokinho
United States792 Posts
They are somewhat similar to what is done in the military somewhat different. (for obvious reasons, The word retreat is not in their vocabulary, usually the field is "balanced", there are not shrapnel or non-specific weapons, supply happens when you are not being shot at, shooting someone in the foot, hand, or gun rarely kills them.) I would suggest learning this. Laning for example is that you don't actually shoot at the person, but rather shoot from a position where you cannot get hit, where you don't want them to move through. Bait is where you move someone to a position to get fire then push a different angle the moment that they shift fire. Suppressive fire is common, especially back in the 10 man days. you would not stop shooting at the front row if you were a back player. I suggest documentaries more than movies. 1 for 1's is a very common tactic where you create a whole then have the person trade usually to push a side. Double or triple moves are common. so for example everyone on the right side would move about the same time one bunker up if the other time is snap shooting. Paintball is not like war. Especially, War is a lot of artillery and attacking supply lines. Tom clancy has some bad action scenes but the plot overall is very interesting. Can you say wikileaks? Probably the best resource for information about tactics even if a third of the documents are situation updates. Company of heroes is a game which kind of emphasizes tactics over apm. (even if its one of the RTS that no one has really pushed yet, like DOW.) | ||
|
Bahku
United States182 Posts
On January 10 2013 09:47 tokinho wrote: Thanks for taking the time to make this post. I am interested in movies, not the tactics, but I can't stand watching 100 movies that all have the same tactic: "be a protagonist."If you are actually interested in war tactics, and not actually in the movies themselves. (Most people who do movies are definitely not interested in tactics) I highly recommend paintball instructional videos. There are several main concepts. Laning, bait, suppressive fire, 1 for 1's, double or triple moves, bunkering, crossing up. They are somewhat similar to what is done in the military somewhat different. (for obvious reasons, The word retreat is not in their vocabulary, usually the field is "balanced", there are not shrapnel or non-specific weapons, supply happens when you are not being shot at, shooting someone in the foot, hand, or gun rarely kills them.) I would suggest learning this. Laning for example is that you don't actually shoot at the person, but rather shoot from a position where you cannot get hit, where you don't want them to move through. Bait is where you move someone to a position to get fire then push a different angle the moment that they shift fire. Suppressive fire is common, especially back in the 10 man days. you would not stop shooting at the front row if you were a back player. I suggest documentaries more than movies. 1 for 1's is a very common tactic where you create a whole then have the person trade usually to push a side. Double or triple moves are common. so for example everyone on the right side would move about the same time one bunker up if the other time is snap shooting. Paintball is not like war. Especially, War is a lot of artillery and attacking supply lines. Tom clancy has some bad action scenes but the plot overall is very interesting. Can you say wikileaks? Probably the best resource for information about tactics even if a third of the documents are situation updates. Company of heroes is a game which kind of emphasizes tactics over apm. (even if its one of the RTS that no one has really pushed yet, like DOW.) However, I'll certainly check out some documentaries, as I have excessive free time for a while. I would very much appreciate it if you could link me one. Also, how on Earth is this not a general thread lol? Sometimes the mods on TL make me angry with how strictly they enforce such microscopic regulations. | ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
On January 10 2013 09:21 Ramiel wrote: Act of Valor Some semi realistic stuff in there i should guess... I saw that. Heard it was supposed to be based off of true accounts. Still fiction, but based (mostly?) in reality. | ||
|
tokinho
United States792 Posts
On January 10 2013 09:55 Bahku wrote: Thanks for taking the time to make this post. I am interested in movies, not the tactics, but I can't stand watching 100 movies that all have the same tactic: "be a protagonist." However, I'll certainly check out some documentaries, as I have excessive free time for a while. I would very much appreciate it if you could link me one. Also, how on Earth is this not a general thread lol? Sometimes the mods on TL make me angry with how strictly they enforce such microscopic regulations. yeah no problem. Recently I really like restrepo. A really good documentary about afganistan. Steve coll wrote a really good book about the subject. (Iran/russia provided us with information about triaining camps in afganistan/pakistan) Camp victory is another good one about the other central base there. I really liked Gettysberg for strategy. ( old school stuff) The war game, talked about how the third world war would have gone down. it was make in like the 70's. Lessons of darkness talking about the iraq invasion. The war tapes is another one about iraq from first person perspective that was interesting. Occupation:dreamland about falluja is facinating too. The battle of midway is a classic. Especially relevant in the korean war i would recommend chosin. Really well done about the battle there. The entire wwII in hd is great historical stuff. A classic movie, not a "documentary" is the memphis bell, about the bombing campaign in europe. If you haven't seen it, Its one of my favorite movies. Just a few to get you started. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
On January 10 2013 09:47 Bahku wrote: Just some sort of basic realism, I don't care. Basically, I like it when movies set up a suspenseful, tense conflict, military or otherwise. The odds continue to stack against the hero, how will he prevail? Surely my mind will be blown when I see the conclusion! What kind of creativity will be used to ensure our hero's victory? Oh, no, it's just protagonist reinforcements showing up/giant eagles/a bright light in the sky/blind luck and the bad guys all fall down. What have I done with the past two hours of my life? It's hard for me to even feel suspense any more in films, because it always feels like it's going to be resolved at any moment. I don't want our fiction to mirror human religions where the good guys win before the battle begins; I want fiction to mirror harsh, cold reality where the only survivors are the clever, the bright, and the talented, and I want to see how they do it. You have an extremely rose tinted view of war. "suspenseful tense conflict" doesn't happen. "odds continue to stack" doesn't happen. It depends on what kind of war you want, maybe colonial, World War, or modern. Band of Brothers showcases what actually happens in the World Wars pretty well. Some action, lots of doing nothing. They have some real tactics, but nothing really amazing. War is exactly like that. Creativity kills. You run up a hill and hope you don't get mowed down. Not because you zigzagged, but because he was shooting your friend instead. You live because you're lucky, not because you're special. Blind luck is real. Act of Valor supposedly does current tactical operations correctly, in the way they engage targets and clear rooms kind of stuff. The plot makes no sense (drive a pickup truck inside the enemy base?). I don't really watch much about the wars before the World Wars. The Pacific is also pretty good representation, without character development like Band of Brothers (some would say without good character development too). Also, why are half your examples in this post criticisms of the Lord of the Rings? It's not a general thread because you're not discussing realistic military tactics, but asking for recommendations. There's no real discussion involved here. | ||
|
Bahku
United States182 Posts
On January 10 2013 11:29 Blisse wrote: You have an extremely rose tinted view of war. "suspenseful tense conflict" doesn't happen. "odds continue to stack" doesn't happen. It depends on what kind of war you want, maybe colonial, World War, or modern. Band of Brothers showcases what actually happens in the World Wars pretty well. Some action, lots of doing nothing. They have some real tactics, but nothing really amazing. War is exactly like that. Creativity kills. You run up a hill and hope you don't get mowed down. Not because you zigzagged, but because he was shooting your friend instead. You live because you're lucky, not because you're special. Blind luck is real. Act of Valor supposedly does current tactical operations correctly, in the way they engage targets and clear rooms kind of stuff. The plot makes no sense (drive a pickup truck inside the enemy base?). I don't really watch much about the wars before the World Wars. The Pacific is also pretty good representation, without character development like Band of Brothers (some would say without good character development too). Also, why are half your examples in this post criticisms of the Lord of the Rings? It's not a general thread because you're not discussing realistic military tactics, but asking for recommendations. There's no real discussion involved here. You make a post of multiple paragraphs discussing movie realism, then state that there's no discussion involved here. I find that pretty funny. I know I'm not bring data spreadsheets and I didn't write a novel as the OP, but I can't imagine this not passing for a general thread on any other forum. No big deal, back on topic. When I talk about suspenseful conflict and odds stacking unfavorably, I'm talking about the movie's plot, not necessarily the specific military conflict. And I know blind luck is real, but so is skill and decision making. Don't even pretend to suggest that team A can't beat team B from a disadvantage by playing their cards better. I don't want A to beat B because B misses every shot and A never misses, that completely destroys the film for me and makes every scene leading up to it feel meaningless. The examples were criticisms of LotR because 1) "giant eagles" is an iconic stereotype of a cop-out in an epic series and 2) I just watched "The Hobbit" last night so it might have been a little on my mind. LotR isn't annoyingly unrealistic, and I still love the series. I might check out "The Pacific" because I've heard a bit about it. Thanks for suggesting. Also thanks for the suggestions Tokinho, I'll watch at least one. | ||
|
Disregard
China10252 Posts
| ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
- Apocalypse Now, bost one hands down (why ? It's not strictly realistic, but it does depict the insanity that rises from the battlefield better than any other story) - Full Metal Jacket (a softer and more realistic version of Apocalypse Now) - Platoon (life as a grunt) | ||
|
Nitrogen
United States5345 Posts
On January 10 2013 10:04 cLAN.Anax wrote: I saw that. Heard it was supposed to be based off of true accounts. Still fiction, but based (mostly?) in reality. some of the combat in act of valor is kinda retarded, but it's better than most movies. the most realistic movie i've seen that has good modern combat, for the most part, is blackhawk down. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
On January 10 2013 12:06 Bahku wrote: You make a post of multiple paragraphs discussing movie realism, then state that there's no discussion involved here. I find that pretty funny. I know I'm not bring data spreadsheets and I didn't write a novel as the OP, but I can't imagine this not passing for a general thread on any other forum. No big deal, back on topic. When I talk about suspenseful conflict and odds stacking unfavorably, I'm talking about the movie's plot, not necessarily the specific military conflict. And I know blind luck is real, but so is skill and decision making. Don't even pretend to suggest that team A can't beat team B from a disadvantage by playing their cards better. I don't want A to beat B because B misses every shot and A never misses, that completely destroys the film for me and makes every scene leading up to it feel meaningless. The examples were criticisms of LotR because 1) "giant eagles" is an iconic stereotype of a cop-out in an epic series and 2) I just watched "The Hobbit" last night so it might have been a little on my mind. LotR isn't annoyingly unrealistic, and I still love the series. I might check out "The Pacific" because I've heard a bit about it. Thanks for suggesting. Also thanks for the suggestions Tokinho, I'll watch at least one. Your original post asks for recommendations about military tactics. My reply was based on your other reply where you wanted suspenseful action, and questions how you can actually think the military behaves in any way like movies, where there are protagonists and heroes. Teamliquid is not like other sites, and I don't know how you can reply (off-topic) to something, then end off with, "back on topic" like we're to just completely disregard what you just wrote. Why write it then? Anyways, at least in World War, skill and decision making had essentially nothing to do with what 99.99% of infantry dealt with. If you want the glorified 0.01%, then that's what you keep finding it unbelievable, where A beats B precisely because every shot of B missed, while most of A's shots hit their mark. . The wars were random pinpricks of incredulity alongside tens of thousands of deaths. For some reason you don't seem to understand this. The Allies didn't win because they employed better military tactics. It's not like Starcraft where you can go, "oh, if he sets up his defense this way, I'll just go behind this area and flank them." Instead, you have that idea to flank them, and instead of flanking, you just find more troops, and now you're fighting in a different area. Not to mention you're fighting in territory you don't know how to traverse, and if you're Allied then you're going to be running headlong into heavily entrenched positions while being shot at from all angles because that's exactly how the war was fought. But most of the time, your intel was not accurate, and it definitely not up-to-date. Superior numbers, and a bit of luck to break defender's advantage. You want military tactics, and you think they have "cards" to play or something. No, they do not. The historic military tactic for the infantry in the war was charge in, keep moving and try not to die, and in no way suspenseful like you want a realistic movie of it to be. I'm not trying to insult you, but you kind of want war movies that are actually not real. You'll need fiction if you want that kind of thing. I'm not sure where you'll find movies that are truly realistic. I'd be interested in that too, but the truth is way too much for television audiences, so most of the stuff that's out there is highly idealized. The best suggestion if you want just pure strategy like that is probably like the one that suggested paintball at this point. In an isolated environment, sure skill and strategy have a leg up, but in reality, it's rarely ever that simple. If you want to read about how ridiculous some of the things Medal of Honor recipients did, here's a link I found. link As his platoon advanced upon the enemy positions; the leading scout was fired upon and 2d Lt. Gregg (then a Tech. Sgt.) immediately put his machineguns into action to cover the advance of the riflemen. The Germans, who were at close range, threw hand grenades at the riflemen, killing some and wounding 7. Each time a medical aid man attempted to reach the wounded, the Germans fired at him. Realizing the seriousness of the situation, 2d Lt. Gregg took 1 of the light .30-caliber machineguns, and firing from the hip, started boldly up the hill with the medical aid man following him. Although the enemy was throwing hand grenades at him, 2d Lt. Gregg remained and fired into the enemy positions while the medical aid man removed the 7 wounded men to safety. When 2d Lt. Gregg had expended all his ammunition, he was covered by 4 Germans who ordered him to surrender. Since the attention of most of the Germans had been diverted by watching this action, friendly riflemen were able to maneuver into firing positions. One, seeing 2d Lt. Gregg's situation, opened fire on his captors. The 4 Germans hit the ground and thereupon 2d Lt. Gregg recovered a machine pistol from one of the Germans and managed to escape to his other machinegun positions. He manned a gun, firing at his captors, killed 1 of them and wounded the other. Doesn't that sound the least bit like Rambo? Yeah. | ||
|
GaNgStaRR.ElV
Canada535 Posts
On January 10 2013 09:47 tokinho wrote: If you are actually interested in war tactics, and not actually in the movies themselves. (Most people who do movies are definitely not interested in tactics) I highly recommend paintball instructional videos. There are several main concepts. Laning, bait, suppressive fire, 1 for 1's, double or triple moves, bunkering, crossing up. They are somewhat similar to what is done in the military somewhat different. (for obvious reasons, The word retreat is not in their vocabulary, usually the field is "balanced", there are not shrapnel or non-specific weapons, supply happens when you are not being shot at, shooting someone in the foot, hand, or gun rarely kills them.) I would suggest learning this. Laning for example is that you don't actually shoot at the person, but rather shoot from a position where you cannot get hit, where you don't want them to move through. Bait is where you move someone to a position to get fire then push a different angle the moment that they shift fire. Suppressive fire is common, especially back in the 10 man days. you would not stop shooting at the front row if you were a back player. I suggest documentaries more than movies. 1 for 1's is a very common tactic where you create a whole then have the person trade usually to push a side. Double or triple moves are common. so for example everyone on the right side would move about the same time one bunker up if the other time is snap shooting. Paintball is not like war. Especially, War is a lot of artillery and attacking supply lines. Tom clancy has some bad action scenes but the plot overall is very interesting. Can you say wikileaks? Probably the best resource for information about tactics even if a third of the documents are situation updates. Company of heroes is a game which kind of emphasizes tactics over apm. (even if its one of the RTS that no one has really pushed yet, like DOW.) Dunno how long ago you were active seeing how you talk about things in really outdated vocabulary bro. Paintball tactics are nothing like military tactics and watching a instructional paintball video is like watching paint dry(no pun intended). If anything the OP would want to watch some real VODs but even then the "tactics" are not really the same. Biggest skills in paintball right now are mechanical not strategical, all the teams do pretty much the same thing every point. | ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
On January 10 2013 09:23 Eben wrote: Band of Brothers! This. The Pacific and Generation kill would be good as well. | ||
|
endy
Switzerland8970 Posts
| ||
|
calgar
United States1277 Posts
| ||
|
sorrowptoss
Canada1431 Posts
Letters from Iwo Jima (extremely recommended!) Flags of our Fathers The Hurt Locker | ||
| ||
