Jarhead

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blackbird.
  • 81 comments
  • 3,034 views
So, using your logic Anderton, the movie will not be based on the novel (even though the website says it is) and will have a completely different story from the novel? Geez, then why did they keep the name?

The music in a theatrical trailer should attract the right attention? Well, it sure is working. Attracting people who believe the current war is based on a lie, thinks the US military is bad, and thinks President Bush hates black people.

I knew this movie smelled bad...
 
BlazinXtreme
The movie is still going to suck, just like 90% of war movies. And think about the last Desert Storm movie...Three Kings. That movie was just aweful!
Click to expand...

What?! This movie is widely hailed by many critics as one of the best war movies ever made. It doesn't sugarcoat and the acting and directing are top-notch. Sorry you didn't like it.
 
What are critics on drugs? Did you see Three Kings? It was retarded, best war movie ever made is a toos up between Saving Private Ryan or We Were Soliders...I like We Were Soliders better.
 
Micheal Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 was also hailed by many critics as one of the best documentaries ever made. It doesn't change the fact that the whole documentary was based on lies and incorrect information.

I liked We Were Soldiers, very impressive. If Band of Brothers was a "movie", it would be my pick for best ever.
 
Just a point about war movies, a war movie can be about more than the combat, preperation for example, think of Tigerland or it can be about the phsycology how the soldeirs were affected mentaly ect. There will probably be some combat in the film, there might not be, but that doesn't prevent it from being a war movie. I think it looks ok anyway and I'll probably watch it.
 
Wow this movie is bound to be a bunch of a americans showing that they can kick those iraqis asses!!! YEEHAAA!!! God I wish they would just stop making war movies... it all usually ends up the same. Someone should make a world war one flick...I would watch that. Even if it is just mass slaughter for the most part.
 
Let me get this straight, undertaker. It is bad to make a movie about Americans removing the Iraqi army by force from invading Kuwait for their oil, but it is OK to make a movie about Germany using biological and chemical weapons on French and British soldiers for world domination?

All I can do is shake my head in disbelief.
 
Tehre already are a lot of WWI movies in existence, undertaker. The problem is they're mostly older black & whites which you may not enjoy.
 
Viper Zero
Let me get this straight, undertaker. It is bad to make a movie about Americans removing the Iraqi army by force from invading Kuwait for their oil, but it is OK to make a movie about Germany using biological and chemical weapons on French and British soldiers for world domination?

All I can do is shake my head in disbelief.
Click to expand...

Hmmm....let me see WW1....or the iraq "war"....this is a tough one.....I think I'll take WW1. Granted it is like 90 years ago or something. There has been so many WW2 movies....and I think the genre is full now. The Iraq was has it's little Over There tv series. Who needs a movie about some ****ty political decisions mixed with a lot of weapons.

And ww1 was not about world domance, it was triggered by an assassination and a lot of aliances.

Also I heard from middle eastern news that, the US is gassing Iraqis....
 
There still has not been a film about Operation Iraqi Freedom. There are plenty of Operation Desert Storm movies, as pointed out above. Get your information straight, undertaker.

I also heard that Saddam Hussein was a nice man, but it doesn't make it true. Unless you get your information from reputable sources like the AP or Reuters, then I suggest you not post incorrect information.
 
Viper Zero
There still has not been a film about Operation Iraqi Freedom. There are plenty of Operation Desert Storm movies, as pointed out above. Get your information straight, undertaker.

I also heard that Saddam Hussein was a nice man, but it doesn't make it true. Unless you get your information from reputable sources like the AP or Reuters, then I suggest you not post incorrect information.
Click to expand...

I said tv show, never said there wasn't a movie about it, just said there doesn't need to be a movie about it.

What's reputable to you might not be true. That company is western world based. The info I got is from the middle east, and where's the war happening?
 
the_undrtaker89
Also I heard from middle eastern news that, the US is gassing Iraqis....
Click to expand...

Well, then, it must be true, considering how reliable, honest, and un-biased news services from that part of the world are.

What will you come up with next?

Don't hold your breath waiting for a movie to be made about the Iraq fiasco. Nobody wants to touch it for now. Its way too sensitive.

Years from now, when we and the Brits give up, pull out, and let that pitiful so-called "country" disintegrate into about a dozen medieval fiefdoms, there will be plenty of films made. There'll be so many of them we'll get really sick of them.
 
What hell are you talking about? News from here is bull**** to. I was watching the other day while this reporter was reporting on hurricane rita (i think) she was paddling in a canoe and bull****ing about how deep it was and then right the and there two guys walk by with boots on, and she got busted.


This gassing thing might just be bull, but you can't just say everything Iraqis say about america's army is bull. It's their country, their in their getting their homes blown to rubble and when they protest about how bad a job the AA is doing, you guys are all just like ' it can't be'. For me this war has just shown me how curupt the US government can be sometimes.
 
Jeez, one little topic about a movie and out flow all the political arrogant know-it-all bull****ters... :rolleyes:

Is it not possible to stay quiet and avoid confrontation?!

:rolleyes:
 
the_undrtaker89
What hell are you talking about? News from here is bull**** to. I was watching the other day while this reporter was reporting on hurricane rita (i think) she was paddling in a canoe and bull****ing about how deep it was and then right the and there two guys walk by with boots on, and she got busted.
Click to expand...


That was NBC correspondent Michelle Kosinski reporting for the Today Show. Katie Couric was talking about the supposedly "staged" teleconference (which turned out to be false) with President Bush and American soldiers in Iraq, when Kosinski goes "rowing" by on screen in a small boat in the New Jersey flood waters. As the men walk by the boat, Couric couldn't keep her laughter in. You are correct, Undertaker, this is bull ****ting the news. But, not for the same reason you think it is. This was a clear attempt to undermine the Federal government's "slow" response to the hurricanes that caused this flood.

You can watch the hypocrisy of the mainstream media here: http://thepoliticalteen.net/2005/10/14/todayshow/


This gassing thing might just be bull, but you can't just say everything Iraqis say about america's army is bull. It's their country, their in their getting their homes blown to rubble and when they protest about how bad a job the AA is doing, you guys are all just like ' it can't be'. For me this war has just shown me how curupt the US government can be sometimes.
Click to expand...

It is obvious that you do not have a clear understanding of not only the events in the Middle East, but the whole foreign policy of the United States as well. Would you like to present this evidence of Iraqis protesting "how bad a job the (American Army) is doing"? You could post who the real people are blowing security walls, polling stations, and school teachers in the name of Allah, couldn't you?

Maybe you are just bull ****ting the news?
 
the_undrtaker89
Hmmm....let me see WW1....or the iraq "war"....this is a tough one.....I think I'll take WW1. Granted it is like 90 years ago or something. There has been so many WW2 movies....and I think the genre is full now. The Iraq was has it's little Over There tv series. Who needs a movie about some ****ty political decisions mixed with a lot of weapons.

And ww1 was not about world domance, it was triggered by an assassination and a lot of aliances.

Also I heard from middle eastern news that, the US is gassing Iraqis....
Click to expand...
Theres probably as many WWI films as WWII films out there. I don't see any reason not to make a movie about this way, you sound like you think a war films only good if it shows mass slaughter.

And for the love of god do not turn this thread into some America is evil political debate, I come here to talk about the movies, go the opinions forum if you want to start arguing about that stuff.
 
Taurine
Jeez, one little topic about a movie and out flow all the political arrogant know-it-all bull****ters... :rolleyes:

Is it not possible to stay quiet and avoid confrontation?!

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactley.
 
Viper Zero
The music in a theatrical trailer should attract the right attention? Well, it sure is working. Attracting people who believe the current war is based on a lie, thinks the US military is bad, and thinks President Bush hates black people.

I knew this movie smelled bad...
Click to expand...

So anybody who listens to Kanye West believes that George Bush hates black people? Cool! 💡 👍
 
I don't think Germany was after world domination in WW1. They would have done the same thing to Britain and France as they did to Russia if they had won; Take reparations. The United States didn't do sh-t in WW1 though, Britain, France, Canada and Australia had already sent Germany on the retreat by the time the US joined the front lines.
 
Actually America was the main reason the Allies won WWI. Sure we were neutral for a while, but we soloy stocked the Allies with materials, not to mention the millions of dollars we loaned to the countries at war. Sure we didn't do a ton of fighting, but war is more then killing.
 
Zardoz
American war casualities

Imagine how many we would've lost in WWI if we had actually done ****.
Click to expand...

That just shows that British commanders sent the new American recruits in bayonet charges to their deaths. How many Americans were awarded the Medal of Honor? Meh, I guess it doesn't really matter, because American troops were only in the war for half a year.

Yes, I forgot to mention that America was a valuable supplier. In a war of attrition like WW1 was, resources were very important. I take my comment back.

However, you could say that the Allies won WW1 because of resources. Is that really something to be proud of though? Germany nearly won the war with less resources and money than the Entente to start with, it's incredible that they actually managed to defeat Russia. Sure, Austria was on their side, but they were humililated by Italy and the Balkan nations.

Anywho, I assumed that there are less WW1 movies today because the US were only in the war in the closing phases. Obviously that is not the case. WW1 movies aren't being made because trench warfare is boring in movies.
 
You guys have all ruined this thread.

When you decide to talk about the movie and stop *****ing about who did what in a war none of us were alive in I'll come back.
 
There were many fights that weren't won by trench warfare... Like vimy ridge...you should read about that fight. But I doubt any american companies would make a movie about Canadian solidiers.

^Ok...live4speed.... I'm so excited about this movie, it's going to be a blast.....yay.

Actually if it showed co-operation between brit,us and can solidiers that would be pretty "neat".
 
the_undrtaker89
There were many fights that weren't won by trench warfare... Like vimy ridge...you should read about that fight. But I doubt any american companies would make a movie about Canadian solidiers.

^Ok...live4speed.... I'm so excited about this movie, it's going to be a blast.....yay.

Actually if it showed co-operation between brit,us and can solidiers that would be pretty "neat".
Click to expand...

Yes, I've read about that battle. It was arguably the first form of Blitz, using a "rolling barrage". Four Victoria Crosses were awarded.

Anyways, I don't think this movie will be that great. It has to have exciting tension, and exciting, well, fighting. The Persian Gulf War was influenced by technology moreso than the soldier. How could the story of one soldier who couldn't make a difference be exciting?
 
Zardoz
American war casualities

Imagine how many we would've lost in WWI if we had actually done ****.
Click to expand...

You've got to put the numbers of soldiers killed from other countries, like Britain, France, Germany, and Canada, beside those American figures to see exactly how comparatively small a loss the U.S. suffered as a result of WWI. Plus, let's not forget that America got pretty friggin' rich off that war, and began its climb to global superpower at that time as well.
 
Please keep on topic or i'll be forced to close this thread!
 
Viper Zero
...before accusing me of prejudice. I, for one, know what I am talking about.
Click to expand...

viper 0, do you have any record of service in any war?

The movie is based on a first-hand account of a soldier who was disillusioned to join the Marines when he actually did go to war.

I don't understand why you can't have a movie about a war without actual scenes or accounts of combat. This is Swofford's account of his service. Not all soldiers serving in the US army see combat nor would they glorify it even if they did see combat. But based on your affinty for "war movies" I guess you'd know how combat would look like ("let's glorify blood!") better than Swofford would ever know :rolleyes:

You want blood and burning metal, watch CNN, and see what's really going on in Iraq today.
 
It's Hollywood, there has never been a 100% true to life movie that has ever made it into the mainstream movie. Trust me, the movie would be boring as hell if it didn't have some jazz in it.
 
Back