Yes,i ve seen Saving Private Ryan about 25 times without exagerrattin as it used to be my fav film but in facts u realize it s not so real.Band of brothers is a bit better defo
-
-
Well, I like the movie, it is entertaining. I do have a few comments for the readers.
1) Bullets do travel in water. A 9mm shot into a 5 gallon bucket, from above, will expand, if a hollow point, and not damage the bottom of the bucket. This depends on the bullet and powder (i.e. +P+). Rifle rounds, and this case being an 8mm, will travel approximately 2-3 feet in water and still be capable of inflicting severe wound ballistic damage. But this has to be done close to or at a 90 degree angle. Firing into water at an angle is like shooting at concrete, will ricochet very easily.
2.) The sniper: The American sniper (Jackson) changes his scope from a standard Weaver used on a 1903a4 rifle, and he changes it to a USMC Unertl scope. A sniper does not, would not, and did not do this, despite the branches of service.
Someone also indicated that a sniper would move his position after the first shot. I would say no. Movement could reveal the sniper's position. He would have simply stayed in place and not fired another shot unless necessary.
To the guy that said, “Any sniper would rather die to a bullet to the head, than be caught”, sorry brother, not the case.
The guy that said Jackson was left handed and to reach over the scope, not a problem unless using the sling. Which he was doing, you are correct. A left handed sniper will probably forfeit the sling in that case. If he did not, not a big problem.
3) Attacking the pill box. A very stupid tactical decision. Why not utilize the sniper if the attack was necessary?
Further, where is the 360 degree security when providing medical care for the medic? In other words, why are they not on the look-out for more Germans.? Reason, Hollywood.
4) The hatch on the tank IS very heavy, and it should have a securing latch.
5) Why is the name Ryan stenciled on his pack? Not done at that time.
All in all, it is a movie and it did raise the bar for movie makers.
Thanks for reading my thoughts on the matter, FrankLast edited by Raven26; 03-07-2007, 12:17 PM.Comment
-
I agree with your points Frank, except for bullets traveling through water. If you watch the Mythbusters show, you'll see that they fired high-velocity rifle rounds (up to 50 cal.) into water at a bit of an angle and all fragmented into pieces almost upon impact. My point is, the way this was depicted in Saving Private Ryan was pure Hollywood fantasy in the 1st degree. Again, I'm talking about high-velocity rifle or machine gun rounds.Comment
-
Dan, thank for your input, an your thoughts are duly noted. I did indicate the bullet will travel in meters after impact with water, I meant feet. I did edit that to feet. My error, thanks.
My information is based on conducting tests of bullet ballistics to water and different materials (including high caliber rifle rounds). There are many variables to determine what a bullet will do. In my opinion there are educated guesses as to what a particular bullet will do, how it will respond to external and internal ballistics, but it is still a roll of the dice in many instances. Water is a difficult material to shoot though, no argument there. Fragmentation of bullets and secondary projectiles of surrounding materials have a life of their own and can be deadly.
In terms of the movie, I will say very very unlikely, about as likely as many of you giving me your collections. Thank you again for reading, FrankLast edited by Raven26; 03-07-2007, 12:13 PM.Comment
-
Hey Frank, I hope I didn't come across as a know-it-all regarding the dynamic of bullets traveling through water, I'm certainly not. I just watched the Mythbusters show and it seemed to make sense to me. But like you say, there are many variables and many different tests that could be done. They probaby just covered the basics in the show with standard ammo in different calibers and so on.Last edited by Dan P; 03-07-2007, 10:03 AM.Comment
-
Hi guys!
Nobody mentioned the biggest mistake in SPR movie: there were no SS around at that time so soon after the D-Day landing. The Waffen-SS "Das Reich" division, which fought against American troops, arrived in Normandy late June 1944 (see link: http://www.dasreich.ca/normandy.html ):
When the Allies landed in Normandy, Das Reich's Pz.Rgt. was commanded by Ostubaf. Tychsen, its 1st Abt. c/0 Stubaf. Rudolf Enseling, its 2nd Abt. c/o Stubaf. Kesten. It travelled from Toulouse area in SW France, arriving SW of Caen in late June. Taken from reserve during the first week in July, its strength was 26 Panthers in the 1st Abt. and 50 Pz.IV's in the 2nd Abt. The 5th and 7th Pz. Companies were attached to the 17th SS Pz-Grn.Div. along the Periers to Carentan road, the 6th Pz. company attached to I "Deutschland", the rest of the Pz.Rgt. positioned south of Sainteny.
The Waffen-SS Division "Hitlerjugend" fought around Caen against only Canadian and British troops.
Of course it's cooler to show the nasty SS fighting against the brave American troops. At that time the Americans fought predominantly against Fallschirmj******228;ger and Heer troops.
About German tactics: I don't think that well experienced Waffen-SS and veteran of the Eastern front would risk to send in a town tanks for close combat. I rather think that they would have used them as supporting role, flanking the town from both sides and shell the American positions, destroying first the high position like the church bell tower to blind them. Just a thought...
Many other little mistakes, but overall an impressive movie, especially the first scene of the landing... I was shocked by the exceptionnally brutal representation of what such a landing could have been in reality.
Ciao,
ClaudioLast edited by Klaus O.; 03-07-2007, 07:58 AM.Comment
-
When did the first Tigers appear in Normandy - not with DR.
At the cliff tops - do you think the rar door of bunker would be so easily taken left open and undefended ?
The last scene in the town - the tanks never used their fire power even MGs - can't see them being so easily over come but in the end it is only a movie.Comment
-
Yeah, the garbage-can lid hatches on the tanks and the fact that there is no armored glass in the view ports on the T-34 "Franken-tiger" are laughable.
BTW, in the final scene in the town, the Tiger does use it's main gun and fires it's MG only once when it fires at Upham who is running past.Comment
-
At the end of the day, 'Saving Private Ryan' was a very good war film. It was not a documentary and much like 'Downfall' has fallen prey to some extremely tight scrutiny in the realism stakes.
I do not think there has been a war film yet made that does not stand to some critism or innacuracies? 'Saving Private Ryan' in my opinion set a benchmark standard for war film production. Sure, it is not perfect but when you put it alongside limp history rewritings such as "U-571" it is an epic!
Finally, bullets are not rendered useless/harmless on contact with water!
Regards Richard.Always looking for Luftwaffe Kampfflieger related document groups. In particular anything to Kampfgeschwader 2.Comment
-
Uphem
Uphem ( Splet wron ?) - when he confronted the nabd off SS men and shot "Steamboat Willy" - upham was looked away from the guy on the extreme left who had his gun trained on Uphem - highly unlikely that he would not have shot him.
A movie after all and as frank says its Hollywood , not history - certainly a cut above many movies.Comment
-
The German would have shot Uppum? I wish he would have! Hated that guy. After he shoots steamboat willie...the filmakers thought it cool to put some dreamy filter around him...why? Very ambiguous...but in the end the guy was just a big pussy anyway.Comment
-
S.p.r.
Briefly:
S.P.R.
Realism of wounds & casualties =
Story line & plot =
German stereotyping =
Tactical movement of Panzers in town =
A new high of "trying to get it right"=
Comment
-
Pretty funny- I agree!Originally posted by J.von Canon View PostBriefly:
S.P.R.
Realism of wounds & casualties =
Story line & plot =
German stereotyping =
Tactical movement of Panzers in town =
A new high of "trying to get it right"=
Yeah behblc, I noticed that also that the one German could have easily shot Upham. He was a turd anyway. Rieben with his bad-ass B.A.R. was cool!!Last edited by Dan P; 03-13-2007, 09:55 AM.Comment
-
It's not a documentary!
I thought it was a great and entertaining movie for "the masses." The spirit of the movie, and the timing of the release during the D Day anniversary did much to make people appreciate the sacrifices made by this generation of citizen warriors.
Capt. Miller, Ranger at war, teacher at peace was a characture to show that most of the soldiers were not professionals in the career sense, but draftees and volunteers.
Spielberg seems to have an obsession with the SS. We see them quite a bit in BOB, too. Seeing the 2nd SS in Normandy, when actually they were still busy making a point about snipers at Orador sur Glade is rather silly. The FJ put up a hell of a fight, along with the regular German troops.
If you can get by the tactical and strategic inaccurancies and enjoy the movie for what it was intended, as a Tribute, it is quite enjoyable still."Activity! Activity! Speed! I greet you."
-Napoleon to Massena, advancing on Landshut, April 18, 1809
Comment
-
Wish it had been FJ
I wish the movie had shown some fallschirmjäger too it in,maybe one of the battles in it realy,not just waffen ss and regular army troops.Comment
Comment