|
Sounds pretty ridiculous and all but on the other hand maybe you've heard of this guy who basically did that for real.
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:03 |
|
|
Comstar posted:It sounds like someone made the movie of the Let's Play - Combat Mission : Red Thunder thread. Totally accurate! The one where I mutinied or the one where I called in a danger close fire mission?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
So, you think maybe you might want to spoiler tag your blow by blow summary of a movie still in theaters, or at least give a loving spoiler warning before starting in on it? Also holy poo poo you must be miserable to go to movies with. Hint: if you're a giant mil hist sperglord don't go see any military movie, ever. None of them. Period. Even the absolute best and relatively accurate have huge glaring technical and historical problems. The Longest Day is an absolutely great movie made when Hollywood was firing on all cylinders in the best possible way and even THAT - made in direct conjunction with men who had actually been there and drawing freely from the mountains of military surplus that were still for the taking at that time has issues. Me? I like stupid military themed action movies. I like to down a few beers, watch the pretty flashing lights and colors on the big screen for a couple hours, and just kinda soak in the ambiance of violence going on against a backdrop that I'm interested in. The 60s might have just been the absolute golden age for this. Kelley's Heroes and Where Eagles Dare might just be two of the best things to ever happen to celluloid. If you want (an honest attempt at) realism go to a reenactment, if you want ~~cinema~~ go to Cannes. if you walked into a Brad Pit vehicle about dudes in a tank expecting either you're naive at best. A realistic movie about tank combat would be loving awful for the 99.9% of the population who aren't hard core armor geeks. Cyrano4747 fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Oct 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:If you want (an honest attempt at) realism go to a reenactment, if you want ~~cinema~~ go to Cannes. if you walked into a Brad Pit vehicle about dudes in a tank expecting either you're naive at best. A realistic movie about tank combat would be loving awful for the 99.9% of the population who aren't hard core armor geeks. I would watch the gently caress out of a film of any of those memoirs of Russian T34 veterans. The problem is that they picked an era of the war (April 1945!) that is fundamentally not that interesting, and then decided to spice it up with Hollywood stupidity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:If you want (an honest attempt at) realism go to a reenactment... Hell, I'd settle for a film that gets pike combat correct at all. Although, I have met two different people on two different occasions who, after names were out of the way, asked me "Did you see that scene at the end of Alatriste?" by way of introduction. That may just be the circles I run in though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
How is that Alatriste scene by the way?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:15
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
HEY GAL posted:lol, if you feel like it man Meh, I was tempering myself on the reenacting thing mostly out of consideration for you honestly. I think it's an interesting attempt to get hands on and figure out how people did certain things and I think it's great from a public history angle at trying to engage the general public, but I have met way, WAY more reenactors who have this over-romanticized notion that they're "living history" or some BS like that. I'll flat out guarantee this is due to my exposure to some of the more insufferable elements in WW2 and ACW reenacting, especially the people who try to lift both Nazi Germany and the Confederacy completely out of their historical contexts. Is there a 30YW equivilant to that guy who just insists on the "Clean Wehrmacht" or states rights/"Lost Cause" stupidity?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:How is that Alatriste scene by the way?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Meh, I was tempering myself on the reenacting thing mostly out of consideration for you honestly. I think it's an interesting attempt to get hands on and figure out how people did certain things and I think it's great from a public history angle at trying to engage the general public, but I have met way, WAY more reenactors who have this over-romanticized notion that they're "living history" or some BS like that. I'll flat out guarantee this is due to my exposure to some of the more insufferable elements in WW2 and ACW reenacting, especially the people who try to lift both Nazi Germany and the Confederacy completely out of their historical contexts. Pappenheim did nothing wrong!
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Is there a 30YW equivilant to that guy who just insists on the "Clean Wehrmacht" or states rights/"Lost Cause" stupidity? It might be different if I knew any actual Swedes, I met a Swedish dude in a hostel who got super romantic over ~Gustavus Adolphus riding to his death in the mists~ when we started discussing my hobby (I will show people the photos at the slightest provocation). Crywank me a river, you carping child. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Oct 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:The closest you get to that is the people in shiny outfits who don't fight and are basically just in it to participate in a festival dedicated to their city. But even they, when prompted, will go "Nope, everyone at that time was a douche." Hell, I've read books published in the 2000s that still call this "the Great War." Hahaha, more like fat nearsighted goon wobbling in the wrong direction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
There's a really self-important Dutch group out there that may be more accurate than most of these people (I used to be an ACW reenactor and I was so bummed out when I saw the sorts of things that are customary for 30YW reenactors), but they're also douches and they don't accept women either. But they don't fight, so they can eat it. (I'm not sure if it's a coincidence or not that the two ethnic groups with the most dangerous styles of fighting, the English--English push might be inauthentic but it's difficult and dangerous--and the Czechs--who will aim at you for reals--also have the most women fighters. It's cool though.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Pappenheim did nothing wrong! I have to wonder if any WW2 reenactors use ROMMEL WAS A WAR CRIMINAL as a battlecry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:I have to wonder if any WW2 reenactors use ROMMEL WAS A WAR CRIMINAL as a battlecry. Does world of tanks count? Because goons have been doing that ingame for years now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
there's been exactly one realistic war movie ever made and it was jar head and everyone hated it because it was kind of boring.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
bewbies posted:there's been exactly one realistic war movie ever made and it was jar head and everyone hated it because it was kind of boring. what about the one where a bunch of soldiers wander away from the ECW and eat shrooms
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:So, you think maybe you might want to spoiler tag your blow by blow summary of a movie still in theaters, or at least give a loving spoiler warning before starting in on it? It sounds like a dumb movie, and you sound like you don't respect your own entertainment? Here's the problem with Fury, it's a Vietnam movie set in WWII. It's got "grit", which is mostly about making your protagonists amoral but quirky so you don't feel bad for them. The reality of war is the tired trope that prisoners get executed and civilians get killed. Why do you think a realistic movie about tank combat is going to be bad? Filmmakers turn lots of boring ideas into amazing movies. Boiling a movie into short phrase will always make it seem stupid, but the only thing that make movies stupid is if their derivative and bland. Aside from the plot, Kelley's Heroes depicts the war fairly realistically, and nothing is really lost. Fury is like five bad WWII movies, 3 overblown 'Nam movies, and a History Channel documentary attached to nice tank battle scenes. Everything has been done before, the virgin new guy, the heartless prisoner execution, nasty SS, invulnerable Tigers, heroic sacrifice at the end. It might as well be a video game. An aside question, do your mercenaries get ordered to do stupid things by commanders who just want to get out of paying them?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:An aside question, do your mercenaries get ordered to do stupid things by commanders who just want to get out of paying them?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:Fury is like five bad WWII movies, 3 overblown 'Nam movies, and a History Channel documentary attached to nice tank battle scenes. Everything has been done before, the virgin new guy, the heartless prisoner execution, nasty SS, invulnerable Tigers, heroic sacrifice at the end. It might as well be a video game. It's also by the guy who wrote U571, who promised not to gently caress with history again: quote:Ayer wrote the submarine thriller U-571, a fictional account of the United States capturing the Enigma code rather than Great Britain. The furor that surrounded the film's release led British Prime Minister Tony Blair to claim that it was an "affront to the memories" of those involved and U.S. President Bill Clinton to write a letter emphasizing the film's fictional nature. Ayer has said that U-571 distorted history by this assertion and that he would not do it again. "It was a distortion", he said, "a mercenary decision to create this parallel history in order to drive the movie for an American audience. Both my grandparents were officers in World War II, and I would be personally offended if somebody distorted their achievements." But nope.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:It sounds like a dumb movie, and you sound like you don't respect your own entertainment? Oh, I respect the hell out of my own entertainment, both in the sense that I can appreciate films that are trying to do something interesting and in the sense that I try not to consume crap that's going to annoy me. I also love stupid action movies. Hint: not all entertainment has to be "high entertainment" however you want to define that. I watch the original Red Dawn and Ghostbusters at least twice a year each, but that doesn't keep me from liking a good documentary as well. Believe it or not it's possible to see the value in both Commando and Glory Either way, someone who just comes in and wall-of-texts the plot to a movie that's in theaters without spoiler tags is an rear end in a top hat, full stop. quote:
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Cyrano4747 fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Oct 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
I think the more important question that you have to answers is how you manage to drink a few beers and then sit in the cinema without pissing yourself. Do you have an emergency bag with you?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Oh, I respect the hell out of my own entertainment, both in the sense that I can appreciate films that are trying to do something interesting and in the sense that I try not to consume crap that's going to annoy me. I also love stupid action movies. Hint: not all entertainment has to be "high entertainment" however you want to define that. I watch the original Red Dawn and Ghostbusters at least twice a year each, but that doesn't keep me from liking a good documentary as well. Good films don't just "do something interesting", and good films don't need to be high entertainment. Fury is not a good film because you can skip about an hour and a half of the movie without losing the train. Tanks fight other tanks and look cool.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:I think the more important question that you have to answers is how you manage to drink a few beers and then sit in the cinema without pissing yourself. Do you have an emergency bag with you? The trick is to piss on someone else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:There's easier ways to not pay them (step one: don't pay them) but I have heard of heads of state/generals promising to pay people after a coming battle. Would guys generally demand that they be paid up before going into a serious engagement?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:It might be different if I knew any actual Swedes, I met a Swedish dude in a hostel who got super romantic over ~Gustavus Adolphus riding to his death in the mists~ when we started discussing my hobby (I will show people the photos at the slightest provocation). Crywank me a river, you carping child. The Swedish Great Power period isn't much appreciated in Swedish society, as far as I can tell. The Finns probably make more noise about it because Hackapells uguu~. Even the Swedish nazis are more into loser douchebag Karl XII than Gustavus Adolphus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
Were there actual "sign here" mercenary contracts? (If there were, I'm forced to ask "Why?" and "Who the hell would enforce them?") Were mercenary units incorporated (in a manner of speaking)?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Spacewolf posted:Were there actual "sign here" mercenary contracts? (If there were, I'm forced to ask "Why?" and "Who the hell would enforce them?") Were mercenary units incorporated (in a manner of speaking)? PittTheElder posted:Would guys generally demand that they be paid up before going into a serious engagement?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Ahh. Yeah, whether it was a legal person was what I was asking. Iiiinteresting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Spacewolf posted:Ahh. Yeah, whether it was a legal person was what I was asking. Iiiinteresting. Nobody talks about reacting to or suing or accusing "the regiment," they sue/accuse/react to/request jobs from the individual in question. Not to mention that a bunch of the people hanging around will belong to the personal retinue of the Oberst or the Hauptmann or whatever; they're either his employees or his feudal subjects but they're not "part of the regiment" or "part of the company." (They never appear on rolls either, which is annoying. For instance, I only found a dude called "the Hauptmann's appraiser" mentioned in passing in someone else's story.) HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Oct 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Nah, they think "legal authority" comes from the War Law and, beneath that, an Oberst who has a valid appointment, not "the regiment." Mmmhmm. So did regiments have, uh, non-warfighting people on the rolls? Like, for example, accountants or someone to keep track of the money? Better way of asking that, now that I think about it: How business-like *were* mercenary units? Is it more "random unit that just happens to switch armies" or is it more "really well-armed businessmen, complete with HR and finance people?" I know you've mentioned that the usual employees were terrible at life decisions, but its their employers I'm curious about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Libluini posted:I've heard the movie is at lest more accurate then other, similar war films. Also German tanks sometimes destroyed dozens of Shermans for each one taken out, so it sounds quite remarkable someone finally remembered that in a movie. I've never seen a Western war movie where German armour didn't shred Shermans into pieces while everyone is flipping out about how awesome Tigers are. Also it's annoying that wet ammo rack Sherman turrets are popping like corn in the movie despite the WAR being specifically designed to make that not happen. Edit RE realistic war movies/shows: 4 Tankers and a Dog is pretty good and manages to be realistic (way more time is spent driving then fighting enemy tanks), and yet entertaining. Plus the dog is hella cool. Ensign Expendable fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Oct 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
What do you mean Fury isn't realistic?!? http://worldoftanks.com/en/news/pc-browser/22/fury-event/
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
100 Years Ago The British generals appear to think that the Germans have run out of men and that they're good for a major flanking move that will evict the villainous Hun from France. This is not quite in accord with the actual tactical situation. Speaking of which, the Austro-Hungarians once again fail to do anything useful, and a newsmagazine appears to have a greater grasp of strategy than them. Read all about it! PittTheElder posted:Would guys generally demand that they be paid up before going into a serious engagement? I'd be very interested in the answer to this, because by 1914 in regular armies, a lot of people think that going into battle with money in your pocket is extremely unlucky. (It implies that you're certain you're going to live to spend it, and that's tempting fate to drop a Minnie on your head.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
Spacewolf posted:Mmmhmm. So did regiments have, uh, non-warfighting people on the rolls? Like, for example, accountants or someone to keep track of the money? I haven't seen any accountants on the rolls (that doesn't mean they don't exist, just that they're not on the rolls) but there are people who keep records and conduct administration, monitor poo poo, make sure the names on List A correspond to the names on List B, etc. A lot of those dudes are on the rolls--Musterschreiber, Regimentschreiber, Profoss, Regimentprofoss, translator (for regiments ordered in the Imperial manner, and for Spain) but there's flocks of people around each high officer we may never see. I've read a Hauptmann refer to someone else's company as "his geschäft" (business), but I haven't read anyone who's so gauche to refer to his own company or regiment like that. (Their customary word for themselves, of course, is "the people.") I'd call them about as businesslike as anything else at the time. For your real high powered "really well armed businessmen," who are also kind of sovereign but not a country, you probably want the big Companies, like the Dutch East India Company. Here's a funny anecdote--if you're a talented aspiring Oberst while Wallenstein was at the height of his career, you could buy up to four regiments in his army, cash down. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Oct 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
If a regiment was an investment, what were the returns? I mean, loot from plundering is the obvious one, but what else?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
my dad posted:If a regiment was an investment, what were the returns? I mean, loot from plundering is the obvious one, but what else? And that's just the above board poo poo, not stuff like embezzling, dead pays, or swindling your soldiers. Trin Tragula posted:I'd be very interested in the answer to this, because by 1914 in regular armies, a lot of people think that going into battle with money in your pocket is extremely unlucky. (It implies that you're certain you're going to live to spend it, and that's tempting fate to drop a Minnie on your head.) HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Oct 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Hey Hegel, what're the strangest anecdotes you've come across in your research?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:
Yeah, sorry, that was a mistake. The movie just really creeped me out lifting plot points from Spec Ops: The Line, but then staying a brainless action movie that people found funny. I dragged on too long trying make sense of that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
Hey Gal, how old are the guys you're talking about? Are they 15 year olds straight off the farm, or are they veterans who have been doing this for a while? So a regiment was an explicitly for profit enterprise? Did they at least pretend they cared about fighting for King/religion/whatever?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:03 |
|
|
I've been reading a biography of Stonewall Jackson and this dude must have had aspergers or something, right? Brilliant commander but I'm definitely getting some serious autism vibes from reading about his mannerisms and personality. My favorite is how he was convinced half of his body was larger than the other so he'd walk funny or work out the "weak" side extra in the hope that it would even out. Am I way off base here with the autism stuff?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 04:04
|
|
