That site has not convinced me. But the point is the plane in the movie was "Clean" ei. no rockets.LordTD wrote:In fact, there was a tank buster versionPolynikes wrote:Lastly I'm not sure how the last Tiger got stopped...Hanks shoots it with his Colt .45 and there's a P-51 flying overhead BUT - the P-51 isn't a tank-buster...it carried NO rocket racks under its wings (check it out).
How historically accurate was Saving Private Ryan?
Well, I'm sort of a fan of SPR. When I heard Spielberg was doing D-DAY, I was excited. I still admire his Schindler's List. Very graphic, and a telling testament of the Nazi atrocities.
SPR STARTED out great, the landings remind you WAR is HELL! THEN, it suddenly becomes an episode of Combat or something!! The whimsical, almost fantastical turn the movie takes after the landing, actually detracts from the gritty beginning I think.
And, as a Limey, I WAS annoyed at first with it's "America won the war" stance, but as stated earlier in this thread, I soon accepted its about a team of AMERICANS landing on an AMERICAN designated beach.
It's not nearly as offensive or annoying as U-571!
But, for me. The Longest Day is still the yardstick for D Day movies!
SPR STARTED out great, the landings remind you WAR is HELL! THEN, it suddenly becomes an episode of Combat or something!! The whimsical, almost fantastical turn the movie takes after the landing, actually detracts from the gritty beginning I think.
And, as a Limey, I WAS annoyed at first with it's "America won the war" stance, but as stated earlier in this thread, I soon accepted its about a team of AMERICANS landing on an AMERICAN designated beach.
It's not nearly as offensive or annoying as U-571!
But, for me. The Longest Day is still the yardstick for D Day movies!
-
Hans Kloss
- Member
- Posts: 182
- Joined: 30 Jul 2004, 16:11
Here is something on the subject
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=47252
Herr Schmidt that wrote that letter made few good points.
look at the soldier on the left.He is clearly laughing.I guess it was Upham's attempt to speak German that made him laugh
@ Tiger scene
In reality "Tiger" crew would have used tanks MGs to deal with any infantry jumping around vehicle.Instead they are trying to use main gun.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=47252
Herr Schmidt that wrote that letter made few good points.
look at the soldier on the left.He is clearly laughing.I guess it was Upham's attempt to speak German that made him laugh
@ Tiger scene
In reality "Tiger" crew would have used tanks MGs to deal with any infantry jumping around vehicle.Instead they are trying to use main gun.
-
finnjaeger
- Member
- Posts: 347
- Joined: 14 Jan 2003, 17:48
- Location: Finland
polynikes:
In that movie the SS was indeed in haste to take the bridge, but still no sane person would not charge head on to the enemy fire....
[b]You've never heard of the Battle of the Somme then when British soldiers WALKED into enemy fire. [/b]
[b]Or Gallipoli, or Omaha beach..[/b].
...nobody is willing to take that much casualties (well, maybe the russians but thats another issue..). Doing such thing would deffenetly make sure that the bridge would not be taken.
[b]The SS at Arnhem also charged headlong into British paratroopers defensive fire & yes, the SS were prepared to take casualties and if you look at the battle, just how many did they lose to Miller's Rangers and the paratroopers? 30? 40? plus a couple of tanks. Nothing really to 2nd SS Pz Div in order to get a vital bridge. At Arnhem, the British lost 13,000 airborne troops to get a vital bridge - and failed.[/b]
Yes i have heard about them, in my mind Somme and Gallipoli belong to a different time in which old (not very vise) methods were still in use causing unneeded casualties. I´ve also led few charges in the army few times, training of course. But, what was my main point about the charging is that in the SPR the germans charge without any planning, no covering fire, no good direction, no use of terrain. Before the leven from which the real charge will begin some measures of finding cover/returning fire should be taken place.Even when making the last charge against the enemy (not taking any cover because of the closeness) soldiers should fire their weapons to force the enemy to take cover (hopefully my point is clear, not my native language).
In that movie the SS was indeed in haste to take the bridge, but still no sane person would not charge head on to the enemy fire....
[b]You've never heard of the Battle of the Somme then when British soldiers WALKED into enemy fire. [/b]
[b]Or Gallipoli, or Omaha beach..[/b].
...nobody is willing to take that much casualties (well, maybe the russians but thats another issue..). Doing such thing would deffenetly make sure that the bridge would not be taken.
[b]The SS at Arnhem also charged headlong into British paratroopers defensive fire & yes, the SS were prepared to take casualties and if you look at the battle, just how many did they lose to Miller's Rangers and the paratroopers? 30? 40? plus a couple of tanks. Nothing really to 2nd SS Pz Div in order to get a vital bridge. At Arnhem, the British lost 13,000 airborne troops to get a vital bridge - and failed.[/b]
Yes i have heard about them, in my mind Somme and Gallipoli belong to a different time in which old (not very vise) methods were still in use causing unneeded casualties. I´ve also led few charges in the army few times, training of course. But, what was my main point about the charging is that in the SPR the germans charge without any planning, no covering fire, no good direction, no use of terrain. Before the leven from which the real charge will begin some measures of finding cover/returning fire should be taken place.Even when making the last charge against the enemy (not taking any cover because of the closeness) soldiers should fire their weapons to force the enemy to take cover (hopefully my point is clear, not my native language).
finnjaeger
...nobody is willing to take that much casualties (well, maybe the russians but thats another issue..). Doing such thing would deffenetly make sure that the bridge would not be taken.
The SS were willing to take massive casualties - do you know how many 12th SS Pz Div lost in Normady? Or 1st SS Pz Div?
What's certain is that a slow methodical approach would not be in time to take the bridge...either the American paratroopers would blow it up or the American armour would reach it before the SS did.
Yes i have heard about them, in my mind Somme and Gallipoli belong to a different time in which old (not very vise) methods were still in use causing unneeded casualties.
The fact is that young soldiers WILL advance into enemy fire and take casualties - not just in WWI but in Napolean's time and in WWII also - Omaha beach, Dieppe, Kursk. Remember the 2nd SS Pz Div was a collection of pressganged men and young German Hitler Youth.
I´ve also led few charges in the army few times, training of course. But, what was my main point about the charging is that in the SPR the germans charge without any planning, no covering fire, no good direction, no use of terrain. Before the leven from which the real charge will begin some measures of finding cover/returning fire should be taken place.Even when making the last charge against the enemy (not taking any cover because of the closeness) soldiers should fire their weapons to force the enemy to take cover (hopefully my point is clear, not my native language).
Very little of the "battle" is actually shown - you only see American troops shooting advancing Germans but the Germans didn't know how many Americans were in the ruined town...they HAD to advance until they were fired upon.
Then they did take cover and fight it out...Miller was shot by Steamboat Willie who'd taken up a good firing position in a shell hole. Remember Upham was hiding in the very next hole.
...nobody is willing to take that much casualties (well, maybe the russians but thats another issue..). Doing such thing would deffenetly make sure that the bridge would not be taken.
The SS were willing to take massive casualties - do you know how many 12th SS Pz Div lost in Normady? Or 1st SS Pz Div?
What's certain is that a slow methodical approach would not be in time to take the bridge...either the American paratroopers would blow it up or the American armour would reach it before the SS did.
Yes i have heard about them, in my mind Somme and Gallipoli belong to a different time in which old (not very vise) methods were still in use causing unneeded casualties.
The fact is that young soldiers WILL advance into enemy fire and take casualties - not just in WWI but in Napolean's time and in WWII also - Omaha beach, Dieppe, Kursk. Remember the 2nd SS Pz Div was a collection of pressganged men and young German Hitler Youth.
I´ve also led few charges in the army few times, training of course. But, what was my main point about the charging is that in the SPR the germans charge without any planning, no covering fire, no good direction, no use of terrain. Before the leven from which the real charge will begin some measures of finding cover/returning fire should be taken place.Even when making the last charge against the enemy (not taking any cover because of the closeness) soldiers should fire their weapons to force the enemy to take cover (hopefully my point is clear, not my native language).
Very little of the "battle" is actually shown - you only see American troops shooting advancing Germans but the Germans didn't know how many Americans were in the ruined town...they HAD to advance until they were fired upon.
Then they did take cover and fight it out...Miller was shot by Steamboat Willie who'd taken up a good firing position in a shell hole. Remember Upham was hiding in the very next hole.
In reply to the letter to Speilberg, maybe he WAS trying to tie the modern (moronic) Neo-Nazi movement to WWII Germans by having them all have skinheads, but I have photos of at least four Fallschirmjagers, ALL with skinhead cuts!
Same way in the past movies showed every German soldier had a MP40 and jackboots. Now, the tide has turned and it seems that ALL germans were in Camo, and mostly SS!!!
Is it because the camo uniforms LOOK better? Hollywood has a new wardrobe item to decorate sets with!!!!
Same way in the past movies showed every German soldier had a MP40 and jackboots. Now, the tide has turned and it seems that ALL germans were in Camo, and mostly SS!!!
Is it because the camo uniforms LOOK better? Hollywood has a new wardrobe item to decorate sets with!!!!
-
finnjaeger
- Member
- Posts: 347
- Joined: 14 Jan 2003, 17:48
- Location: Finland
-
Doppleganger
- Member
- Posts: 166
- Joined: 11 Jun 2004, 23:46
- Location: UK
The combat performance of German units in Normandy was in many cases poor as by 1944 the quality of manpower replacements received by even 'elite' units was very uneven. It is possible that an SS unit that had just received a particularly poor batch of replacements could have wandered into that village without laying down any supression fire ect ect. However, I still think that troops with even only 2 weeks training (as some German replacements were receiving), unless they were stupid or suicidal, would not have just sauntered into the village like they did in SPR.finnjaeger wrote:I still think that the combat performance of these germans is very poor. From most of the time they pack in herds, stand straight, don´t fire and when they should at the end finally charge to the bridge, then they finally lay down and start shooting (and none goes for the bridge).
best regards, TK
While the innacuries in the movie weren't as bad as something like 'Guns of Navarone', they are worth pointing out. I, myself, don't mind miniscule goofs and tend to focus mainly on the plot and characters, which sadly, were lacking in this movie.
It was almost like a Sergeant Rock comic book come to life. None of the characters had any personality or were fleshed out, and the story was pretty simplistic. To me, SPR was just your basic, ho-hum war movie. It was just alright, not bad, but not really good.
My main problem was the uproar it caused, and how people raved about how 'war is no longer portrayed as glamorous' although it strikes me as having patrotic undertones. It was nothing really special or unique, except for a gory opening which shocked the audience. More powerful and well written plots can be found in movies like, 'All Quiet on the Western Front', 'A Time to Love and a Time to Die', 'Human Condition', 'Paths of Glory', 'Johnny Got His Gun', etc.
It was almost like a Sergeant Rock comic book come to life. None of the characters had any personality or were fleshed out, and the story was pretty simplistic. To me, SPR was just your basic, ho-hum war movie. It was just alright, not bad, but not really good.
My main problem was the uproar it caused, and how people raved about how 'war is no longer portrayed as glamorous' although it strikes me as having patrotic undertones. It was nothing really special or unique, except for a gory opening which shocked the audience. More powerful and well written plots can be found in movies like, 'All Quiet on the Western Front', 'A Time to Love and a Time to Die', 'Human Condition', 'Paths of Glory', 'Johnny Got His Gun', etc.
-
Eden Zhang
- Member
- Posts: 1196
- Joined: 28 Dec 2003, 10:54
- Location: XXX
Not to mention Platoon which was made several years before Saving Private Ryan...My main problem was the uproar it caused, and how people raved about how 'war is no longer portrayed as glamorous' although it strikes me as having patrotic undertones. It was nothing really special or unique, except for a gory opening which shocked the audience. More powerful and well written plots can be found in movies like, 'All Quiet on the Western Front', 'A Time to Love and a Time to Die', 'Human Condition', 'Paths of Glory', 'Johnny Got His Gun', etc.