Everyones Top 5 War Movies (1 Viewer)

[lancer]

anyone ever see "A Midnight Clear"? thought that was pretty good even if a bit unusual. had a great cast. --lancer

 

[Lewey Gun Vick]

I forgot to add 300 to my list!

HERE WE STAND! AND HERE WE SHALL STAY!

Vick

 

[Spitfrnd]

I forgot to add 300 to my list!

HERE WE STAND! AND HERE WE SHALL STAY!

Vick

I like and own the 300 but I could have done without the wierd and excessive beast and human deformities and the immortals with samurai swords. I know it follows Miller but frankly that makes it a bit too cartoonish for my tastes. I really did like Butler though.

 

[eborris]

Yeah that movie was just a little over the top, a wee bit.

 

[Lewey Gun Vick]

I agree I like the 300 Spartans there are just not enough dead persians I watched it Wensday, I like 300 yeah the Cyclops man is kind of wierd! Or Ephilates or as I call him gimp gimp

Is it just me or does anyone miss summer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Vick

 

[tuco99]

#1 Das Boot
#2 Twelve O'clock High
#3 Platoon
#4 Sea of Sand
#5 Stalingrad

 

[OzDigger]

I think it would be interesting and informative to see a POLL done of everyones Top 5 War movies (only five choices allowed).

Could someone please start a separate new Poll Thread for this, or would the numbers be a problem.

 

[Uthred]

I like and own the 300 but I could have done without the wierd and excessive beast and human deformities and the immortals with samurai swords. I know it follows Miller but frankly that makes it a bit too cartoonish for my tastes. I really did like Butler though.

I agree with you, Bill. It's not a bad film, in spite of several problems. And I know it follows the comic book very closely, however, those immortals were ludicrous! I was in shock when I saw them...


And what about that Persian excutioner with his hands replaced by long blades? Not quite accurate to say the least...


Cheers...

Uthred

 

[Spitfrnd]

I agree with you, Bill. It's not a bad film, in spite of several problems. And I know it follows the comic book very closely, however, those immortals were ludicrous! I was in shock when I saw them...


And what about that Persian executioner with his hands replaced by long blades? Not quite accurate to say the least...


Cheers...

Uthred

Yes mate, I would put the Immortals at the top of the ludicrous list, along with the executioner. Some movies seem to loose their focus and this one seemed in that category to me. So we were left with many good parts and many silly ones.

 

[lancer]

It seems to me that "300" was produced as a film about the legend of Thermopylae and beyond a few basic facts (which is all that is actually known) the film should in no way be taken a serious history. It is a cartoonish rendition and needs to be viewed as fun with a nod towards the underlying fact of the actual occurrence. Almost nothing in the film is supported by the few known facts except that there was a battle between Persians and Greeks at the location of Thermopylae. It is a visual treat, with plenty of fantasy thrown in based on mostly legend. Still, I enjoyed the show for what it was, entertainment on a large screen. -- lancer

 

[Spitfrnd]

It seems to me that "300" was produced as a film about the legend of Thermopylae and beyond a few basic facts (which is all that is actually known) the film should in no way be taken a serious history. It is a cartoonish rendition and needs to be viewed as fun with a nod towards the underlying fact of the actual occurrence. Almost nothing in the film is supported by the few known facts except that there was a battle between Persians and Greeks at the location of Thermopylae. It is a visual treat, with plenty of fantasy thrown in based on mostly legend. Still, I enjoyed the show for what it was, entertainment on a large screen. -- lancer

Well I think that is mostly true but I think the known facts support a bit more than just the fact of the battle. To cite just a few examples, the phalanx style of fighting, the Spartan regimes, the 300 elite chosen from families that had another son, the Spartan spears and shields, the "fight in the shade" remark, secret passage around the pass revealed by a traitor, the companion Greek troops, all of whom were released by Leonidas for the final stand (although some few stayed to die with the Spartans, the agreement between Sparta and Athens, the amazing success of the Spartans against the Persians, the frustration of Xerxes that lead to committing the Immortals, the failure of the Immortals, the slaughter of the last Greek survivors by Persian archers, the bravery of the Spartans, the toughness of the Spartan women and the impact of the battle on rallying the remainder of Greece. Yes many of the film details were just for fun and it was more allegory than reality but I think there was more than a casual nod at history by Miller and the film.

 

[lancer]

Well I think that is mostly true but I think the known facts support a bit more than just the fact of the battle. To cite just a few examples, the phalanx style of fighting, the Spartan regimes, the 300 elite chosen from families that had another son, the Spartan spears and shields, the "fight in the shade" remark, secret passage around the pass revealed by a traitor, the companion Greek troops, all of whom were released by Leonidas for the final stand (although some few stayed to die with the Spartans, the agreement between Sparta and Athens, the amazing success of the Spartans against the Persians, the frustration of Xerxes that lead to committing the Immortals, the failure of the Immortals, the slaughter of the last Greek survivors by Persian archers, the bravery of the Spartans, the toughness of the Spartan women and the impact of the battle on rallying the remainder of Greece. Yes many of the film details were just for fun and it was more allegory than reality but I think there was more than a casual nod at history by Miller and the film.

Yes, I agree that much more is known about the battle than just it having taken place. My point was that the movie played fast and loose with the facts as known. For instance, 700 Thespians and 400 Thebans stood by the Spartans on the final day. The Spartans were not alone, as depicted. The depiction of the Spartan Llamda on the shield is most likely incorrect for the time period. If the emblem was used (and there is no real proof it was) it came later in their history. Spartans were mainly ID'ed on the battlefield by reputation, long hair, and their use of red clothing. The fact that Sparta had a 2 king system was overlooked and the depiction of the ephors was comic book to the extreme. The ephors were a revered ruling system in an extremely conservative, closed society. The fight in the shade remark has come down through history but is generally seen by serious historians as an example of Spartan bravery and not a actual recorded statement. How could it be? Yes, there are many known facts to the battle but there are also many legends and suppositions that the film makes use of. -- lancer

 

[Warrior]

If memory serves, there was going to be a much more historically accurate movie about the battle starring George Clooney, but I guess that project died on the vines.

In it's place, we got this cartoonish, over the top movie instead; I thought it was idiotic for the most part and was glad I didn't waste my time seeing it on the big screen.

One mans treasure is anothers trash as they say.................

 

[Ragnar]

Five for me.
1 Gettysburg.
2 Waterloo.
3 Kingdom of Heaven.
4 Glory.
5 Alamo (1960)

 

[Spitfrnd]

Yes, I agree that much more is known about the battle than just it having taken place. My point was that the movie played fast and loose with the facts as known. For instance, 700 Thespians and 400 Thebans stood by the Spartans on the final day. The Spartans were not alone, as depicted. The depiction of the Spartan Llamda on the shield is most likely incorrect for the time period. If the emblem was used (and there is no real proof it was) it came later in their history. Spartans were mainly ID'ed on the battlefield by reputation, long hair, and their use of red clothing. The fact that Sparta had a 2 king system was overlooked and the depiction of the ephors was comic book to the extreme. The ephors were a revered ruling system in an extremely conservative, closed society. The fight in the shade remark has come down through history but is generally seen by serious historians as an example of Spartan bravery and not a actual recorded statement. How could it be? Yes, there are many known facts to the battle but there are also many legends and suppositions that the film makes use of. -- lancer

Indeed, as was Miller's intent. Yes the depiction of the Ephors in the movie is a caricature at best but they are also attributed with the prophecy, repeated in the film, that either Lacedaemonia would fall or morn a kind descendent from Hercules, as was the legion associated with the line of Leonidas. The use of the Llamda by Sparta is pretty well supported in what I have read but the exact date of its introduction is less well know. It is known that it was used first by the Lacadamians fighting with the Spartans and that use is generally projected to have occurred before the great battle. The fight in the shade remark is another one of those debated points over the centuries, accepted by some and supposedly reported by the surviving Spartans. Of course the movie does incorrectly give the impression that only the Spartans fought to the end and ignores the Helots completely. The Thespian sacrifice was most interesting since it represented their entire hoplite force at the time. It seems the Thespians did that on at least two other occassions so the Spartans were not alone in their valor at the time. The remaining Thebans however ultimately surrendered before the final slaughter. BTW, another film element supported by history is the Spartan throwing of the Persian emissaries into a well.

 

[lancer]

Indeed, as was Miller's intent. Yes the depiction of the Ephors in the movie is a caricature at best but they are also attributed with the prophecy, repeated in the film, that either Lacedaemonia would fall or morn a kind descendent from Hercules, as was the legion associated with the line of Leonidas. The use of the Llamda by Sparta is pretty well supported in what I have read but the exact date of its introduction is less well know. It is known that it was used first by the Lacadamians fighting with the Spartans and that use is generally projected to have occurred before the great battle. The fight in the shade remark is another one of those debated points over the centuries, accepted by some and supposedly reported by the surviving Spartans. Of course the movie does incorrectly give the impression that only the Spartans fought to the end and ignores the Helots completely. The Thespian sacrifice was most interesting since it represented their entire hoplite force at the time. It seems the Thespians did that on at least two other occassions so the Spartans were not alone in their valor at the time. The remaining Thebans however ultimately surrendered before the final slaughter. BTW, another film element supported by history is the Spartan throwing of the Persian emissaries into a well.

When one gets down to it, what is known for sure about Sparta is rather sparse compared to, say, the Athenians. The Spartan Army especially is the subject of much speculation. Organization, actual numbers, are all open to question. Perhaps the greatest expert on the Spartan Army, J.F. Lazenby, cannot even say for sure about things such as uniforms, shield emblems, organization, or numbers. From what I have read, the use of the Llamda was post-Thermopylae and perhaps as late as the great Sparta-Athenian conflict. Scholars such as Lazenby, Sekunda, Pritchett, Cartledge, and a whole host of others all have differing opinions on every aspect of Spartan life. It is something of a quagmire. -- lancer

 

[Spitfrnd]

When one gets down to it, what is known for sure about Sparta is rather sparse compared to, say, the Athenians. The Spartan Army especially is the subject of much speculation. Organization, actual numbers, are all open to question. Perhaps the greatest expert on the Spartan Army, J.F. Lazenby, cannot even say for sure about things such as uniforms, shield emblems, organization, or numbers. From what I have read, the use of the Llamda was post-Thermopylae and perhaps as late as the great Sparta-Athenian conflict. Scholars such as Lazenby, Sekunda, Pritchett, Cartledge, and a whole host of others all have differing opinions on every aspect of Spartan life. It is something of a quagmire. -- lancer

That is true. We know they had toy soldiers though.

 

[lancer]

That is true. We know they had toy soldiers though.

I would expect nothing less from the West's first great civilization.

 

[Currahee Chris]

Can't recall if I ever posted on this one or not. Either way, the usual suspects for me:

1.) SPR
2.) Braveheart
3.) We were soldiers once
4.) Blackhawk down
5.) Gladiator

Anyone a fan of Enemy at the Gates- I thought that was pretty cool. While at the Gettysburg Show I saw some of the Canadian film Passchendale- it was INCREDIBLE!! Couldn't stay too terribly long as I had the kids and it was bloody but it was unreal.

Cheers
CC

 

[Go for Broke]

1. Spr
2. Longest Day
3. Bridge too far
4. Black hawk down
5. None but the brave