imfdb.org

imfdb.org (http://forum.imfdb.org/index.php)
-   Guns & Movies (http://forum.imfdb.org/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Handguns Grips & Trigger Discipline In Hollywood (http://forum.imfdb.org/showthread.php?t=1341)

MT2008 11-05-2010 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sillybunz13 (Post 21718)
First, Green Zone executed almost perfectly because his whole team in the movie were actual Afganistan/Iraq war veterans. Perfect trigger discipline, perfect tactics, and perfect weapons handling. I know he goes rogue by himself like half of the movie and shoots a green beret, but Matt Damon played a soldier damn near perfect.

And somehow, that makes up for the other problems? Like...

(1.) The "Green Zone" suggests that the U.S. military is in Iraq for oil (did you forget the very last scene?)

(2.) Almost every soldier in the movie who isn't in Matt Damon's platoon fits in the "bad guy" category (the SF unit led by Jason Issacs' character, the soldiers who abuse prisoners in the internment camp, etc.) Actually, pretty much every American in the movie besides Matt Damon and his men are portrayed as bad guys.

(3.) The other soldiers in the movie are portrayed as far more incompetent than those in "The Hurt Locker" (Iraqi insurgents taking out a platoon of Delta Force operators? Yeah right).

(4.) Matt Damon is a leftist loudmouth fucktard with a superiority complex on anything political. If he had his way, America would probably be some European welfare state where guns were illegal and serving in the military is frowned upon.

(5.) Almost everyone I know who likes "Green Zone" leans to the left. Whereas most people I know who are conservative and pro-military regard the movie as an insult to the troops. I have read plenty of reviews and blog posts of "The Hurt Locker" by Army veterans who have called it unrealistic, but few of them seem to think it's "disgraceful".

So when all is said and done, I consider movies like "Green Zone" - on the basis of their politics - to be far more "disgraceful" to the U.S. military than a movie like "The Hurt Locker" (a movie which does not have some bullshit left-wing message). I'm not sure how you managed to watch the "Green Zone" without feeling at least as much outrage as you did watching "The Hurt Locker".

Spades of Columbia 11-05-2010 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MT2008 (Post 21743)
And somehow, that makes up for the other problems? Like...

(1.) The "Green Zone" suggests that the U.S. military is in Iraq for oil (did you forget the very last scene?)

(2.) Almost every soldier in the movie who isn't in Matt Damon's platoon fits in the "bad guy" category (the SF unit led by Jason Issacs' character, the soldiers who abuse prisoners in the internment camp, etc.) Actually, pretty much every American in the movie besides Matt Damon and his men are portrayed as bad guys.

(3.) The other soldiers in the movie are portrayed as far more incompetent than those in "The Hurt Locker" (Iraqi insurgents taking out a platoon of Delta Force operators? Yeah right).

(4.) Matt Damon is a leftist loudmouth fucktard with a superiority complex on anything political. If he had his way, America would probably be some European welfare state where guns were illegal and serving in the military is frowned upon.

(5.) Almost everyone I know who likes "Green Zone" leans to the left. Whereas most people I know who are conservative and pro-military regard the movie as an insult to the troops. I have read plenty of reviews and blog posts of "The Hurt Locker" by Army veterans who have called it unrealistic, but few of them seem to think it's "disgraceful".

So when all is said and done, I consider movies like "Green Zone" - on the basis of their politics - to be far more "disgraceful" to the U.S. military than a movie like "The Hurt Locker" (a movie which does not have some bullshit left-wing message). I'm not sure how you managed to watch the "Green Zone" without feeling at least as much outrage as you did watching "The Hurt Locker".

And We're not over there because of oil?...you should watch the begining of "The Kingdom" again. What I liked about the green zone is it focuses on a soldier willing to ask questions instead of mindlessly following orders.

MT2008 11-05-2010 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spades of Columbia (Post 21749)
And We're not over there because of oil?...you should watch the begining of "The Kingdom" again. What I liked about the green zone is it focuses on a soldier willing to ask questions instead of mindlessly following orders.

First of all, let me say up front that I regard the Iraq War as a mistake and wish we had not gone in retrospect. The fact that I wish we had not gone to Iraq, however, does not mean that I don't find "Green Zone" repugnant.

That being said, no, we are not in Iraq for oil. Also, instead of watching a movie made by Hollywood, I'd recommend this:

http://www.amazon.com/Plan-Attack-De...9001561&sr=8-5

Anyway, let's not focus too much on the politics. I'm just curious to understand how "The Hurt Locker" is really a worse film than "Green Zone".

k9870 11-05-2010 10:58 PM

1/5 of u.s. oil comes from the middle east. Thts it. If we wanted war for oil we could invade venezuela and say its due to them supporting FARC.

And fact stands sarin, mustard gas, illegal missiles, etc., were found in iraq. Before the war saddam wouldnt let inspectors into sites, trying to hide what he had. Hundreds of cargo trucks fled to syria before we rolled in. Munitions were probably buried too, the country is a bigass desert/

As to hurt locker, it was unrealistic but showed american soldiers as brave and heroic, ready to risk their lives to save others. There are too many left wing movies out there where soldiers go crazy and commit murder, are rapeists, and other discraceful acts.

Spades of Columbia 11-05-2010 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MT2008 (Post 21752)
First of all, let me say up front that I regard the Iraq War as a mistake and wish we had not gone in retrospect. The fact that I wish we had not gone to Iraq, however, does not mean that I don't find "Green Zone" repugnant.

That being said, no, we are not in Iraq for oil. Also, instead of watching a movie made by Hollywood, I'd recommend this:

http://www.amazon.com/Plan-Attack-De...9001561&sr=8-5

Anyway, let's not focus too much on the politics. I'm just curious to understand how "The Hurt Locker" is really a worse film than "Green Zone".

What?!...how would you get any "truth" from this type of book when your counterbalanced comes from Colin Powell. I always liked Bush but i wouldn't trust his administration as far as i could throw them...and im not that strong.

MT2008 11-05-2010 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k9870 (Post 21753)
As to hurt locker, it was unrealistic but showed american soldiers as brave and heroic, ready to risk their lives to save others. There are too many left wing movies out there where soldiers go crazy and commit murder, are rapeists, and other discraceful acts.

Exactly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spades of Columbia (Post 21754)
What?!...how would you get any "truth" from this type of book when your counterbalanced comes from Colin Powell. I always liked Bush but i wouldn't trust his administration as far as i could throw them...and im not that strong.

I mostly just suggested this book as an alternative to a movie. Plus, it's Bob Woodward. It's a little more credible, no?

Oh, yeah, and I haven't seen all of "The Kingdom", but you know it takes place in Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, right?

Yournamehere 11-06-2010 12:00 AM

Eh, how does this thread jump from pointing out faulty grip techniques to why Green Zone is a worse movie than Hurt Locker because of intense underlying leftism it conveys? I'm sure you're right in some way about Green Zone, Matt, but the newbie was just trying to point out that technically, the movie had better coordinated actors when it came to firearms handling, not necessarily that the movie was better as a whole (or maybe he was, in which case I'd disagree, but I don't think he was consciously going about doing that if doing it at all). The thread isn't even about arguing about the movies as a whole or their messages or their thematic aspects, it's about one single technical aspect, so you kinda jumped your gun pointing out everything you did. Whether it's correct or appropriate analysis of the films or not, I have no idea, but it wasn't exactly necessary here.

sillybunz13 11-06-2010 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MT2008 (Post 21752)
First of all, let me say up front that I regard the Iraq War as a mistake and wish we had not gone in retrospect. The fact that I wish we had not gone to Iraq, however, does not mean that I don't find "Green Zone" repugnant.

That being said, no, we are not in Iraq for oil. Also, instead of watching a movie made by Hollywood, I'd recommend this:

http://www.amazon.com/Plan-Attack-De...9001561&sr=8-5

Anyway, let's not focus too much on the politics. I'm just curious to understand how "The Hurt Locker" is really a worse film than "Green Zone".

The Hurt Locker makes the EOD team seem like they're completely retard.

For example:

The beginning of the movie, they have a robot which helps them dismantle IEDs. The wheel comes apart and they're like "Damn, I'm not going to fix and be safe from the bomb, I'm just going to mess with the damn thing." And what happens, he gets blown the hell up. This is one of the reasons.

They failed to detect an IED take killed a LT. COLONEL, abandoned their mission, went everywhere with no escort vehicles, went on a sniper's duel for no apparent reason, and shot his own teammate who was following his illegal orders. He was just plain fucking retard this guy. If there was a sergeant like that in the U.S. Army, they would rip apart his career.

Unlike Green Zone, Matt Damon's character was in a WMB unit who wanted answers becuase they were never finding anything during their searches. All he wanted to do is find out the truth so maybe he'll find something out that would keep soldiers from dying in a war that should have never happened in the first place. That seems intelligent to me unlike Sergeant Douchebag in Hurt Locker, everyone was incompetent in doing their job even though they thought they were doing the right thing to, but in a more retarded imbecile like way.

So in Green Zone, you understand why Matt Damon's character was doing all this shit. In Hurt Locker, I was confused on why they did have the things in the movie like: a sniper duel, a blown up O-5, shooting his own teammate, the list just goes on with lots of stupidity.

Zulu Two Six 11-06-2010 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sillybunz13 (Post 21777)
The Hurt Locker makes the EOD team seem like they're completely retard.

For example:

The beginning of the movie, they have a robot which helps them dismantle IEDs. The wheel comes apart and they're like "Damn, I'm not going to fix and be safe from the bomb, I'm just going to mess with the damn thing." And what happens, he gets blown the hell up. This is one of the reasons.

They failed to detect an IED take killed a LT. COLONEL, abandoned their mission, went everywhere with no escort vehicles, went on a sniper's duel for no apparent reason, and shot his own teammate who was following his illegal orders. He was just plain fucking retard this guy. If there was a sergeant like that in the U.S. Army, they would rip apart his career.

Unlike Green Zone, Matt Damon's character was in a WMB unit who wanted answers becuase they were never finding anything during their searches. All he wanted to do is find out the truth so maybe he'll find something out that would keep soldiers from dying in a war that should have never happened in the first place. That seems intelligent to me unlike Sergeant Douchebag in Hurt Locker, everyone was incompetent in doing their job even though they thought they were doing the right thing to, but in a more retarded imbecile like way.

So in Green Zone, you understand why Matt Damon's character was doing all this shit. In Hurt Locker, I was confused on why they did have the things in the movie like: a sniper duel, a blown up O-5, shooting his own teammate, the list just goes on with lots of stupidity.

AMEN.
the first time i saw this i thought, hmm nice movie. but it was all wrong, then i realised what a load of bullshit it was. now every time i watch it i laugh at it!

Excalibur 11-06-2010 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yournamehere (Post 21759)
Eh, how does this thread jump from pointing out faulty grip techniques to why Green Zone is a worse movie than Hurt Locker because of intense underlying leftism it conveys? I'm sure you're right in some way about Green Zone, Matt, but the newbie was just trying to point out that technically, the movie had better coordinated actors when it came to firearms handling, not necessarily that the movie was better as a whole (or maybe he was, in which case I'd disagree, but I don't think he was consciously going about doing that if doing it at all). The thread isn't even about arguing about the movies as a whole or their messages or their thematic aspects, it's about one single technical aspect, so you kinda jumped your gun pointing out everything you did. Whether it's correct or appropriate analysis of the films or not, I have no idea, but it wasn't exactly necessary here.

Seriously, this thread started out as what seems to be a bad grip and trigger discipline thing and then it's all about how The Hurt Locker is bad and why the Green Zone is better?

The Green Zone to me is too much like the Bourne Identity with Matt Damen again


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.