|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Apocalypto is good movie and I'll fight anyone who says otherwise. We Were Soldiers is middling and other Mel Gibson flicks suck, yes, but Apocalypto is good, and it's admirable imo to make a film about indians filmed entirely in the appropriate language. He tried that with The Passion , too. Then promptly hosed it up by having everyone speak Latin instead of koine Greek. With Church pronunciation even!  Least it wasn't Britain's fault in this one I guess.
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 12:50 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:He tried that with The Passion , too. Then promptly hosed it up by having everyone speak Latin instead of koine Greek. With Church pronunciation even! Wouldn't they have been speaking Aramaic? Or at least the common people, the Roman administration would have likely used koine
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
The legitimacy of the Catholic church is based on a Greek dad joke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Wouldn't they have been speaking Aramaic? Or at least the common people, the Roman administration would have likely used koine Yeah by 'everyone' I was thinking of the Romans and those talking to them. They apparently did use grammatical but hideously pronounced Aramaic in the movie too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:If you price the MOAB by taking the development cost plus the cost of the initial order and then divide it among the number that have been used in wartime, well, it's like a $300 million bomb we dropped because it's the first one. The actual ticket price is of course lower because you don't count the program cost like that but it's a solid example of Pentagon wars poo poo where we just heap millions on arms manufacturers for poo poo we never use outside Aberdeen or wherever the appropriate proving ground/testing range is. I know Aberdeen can be a bit rough but I don't think you need to flatten with with fuel air munitions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 22:53
|
|
Groda posted:The legitimacy of the Catholic church is based on a Greek dad joke. And extremely bad Roman lawyering.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
Sorry to bring this up, but discussion of The Patriot sucking got my attention: Are there any blood movies depicting combat/warfare of that era? Furthermore are any on Netflix? v: crap, fixed the typo. e2: ok, third try Grand Prize Winner fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Apr 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 02:20
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:Sorry to bring this up, but discussion of The Patriot sucking got my attention: Are there any food movies depicting combat/warfare of that era? Furthermore are any on Netflix? Babette's Feast? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:Sorry to bring this up, but discussion of The Patriot sucking got my attention: Are there any wood movies depicting combat/warfare of that era? Furthermore are any on Netflix? Might want to try that again champ. edit: Johnny Treemain
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
The scenes in Barry Lyndon are kind of good.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Last of the Mohicans, maybe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:The scenes in Barry Lyndon are kind of good. That and The Duelists for both good movies of that era if you squint.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Waterloo has its moments, at least in terms of actually being the only movie that can give you even a rough idea of scale.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:A real shame. It had a long life ahead of it. To tell you the truth your mom and I wanted to give moaby the happiest life possible so instead of seeing him trapped in the armory all sad and lonely we found a wonderful valley in Afghanistan with lots of caves and mountains to explore
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
i have heard there is a scene of pike combat complete with a rodelero serving as a captain's bodyguard in a movie called The New World but i've never seen it
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
So obviously it's not a movie, but War and Peace has some incredibly vivid and amazing battle scenes. Tolstoy (who was a veteran of Sevastopol himself) uses a lot of what we might nowadays describe as "cinematic" techniques to effect them: he zooms in and out, he pans across the landscape, he cross cuts between characters in different locations, etc. You've got Borodino, Austerlitz, Russian partisan actions, and more. Even if you aren't interested in going through the whole book (although, of course, you should) those passages are well worth checking out. e: as movies go Ran has some great sequences Fuligin fucked around with this message at 06:42 on Apr 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
Groda posted:The legitimacy of the Catholic church is based on a Greek dad joke. lol Also the best Gibson movie is Payback, and the most historically accurate is Mad Max.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:So obviously it's not a movie, but War and Peace has some incredibly vivid and amazing battle scenes. Tolstoy (who was a veteran of Sevastopol himself) uses a lot of what we might nowadays describe as "cinematic" techniques to effect them: he zooms in and out, he pans across the landscape, he cross cuts between characters in different locations, etc. You've got Borodino, Austerlitz, Russian partisan actions, and more. Even if you aren't interested in going through the whole book (although, of course, you should) those passages are well worth checking out. The War and Peace TV series with Paul Dano doesn't have as much of the battle stuff as the books, but has a pretty good scene at Borodino which gets across how confusing and deadly a Napoleonic battle was from the point of view of a random dude on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 09:36
|
|
|
The Duellists is totally awesome and seems fairly accurate to my untrained eye.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 13:47
|
|
|
It's pretty good once you get used to the actors yeah. I quite like most bits of The Charge Of The Light Brigade, except for how weirdly merciless it was on Raglan, lack of the French and for some reason one of the Wars most one of the most notable strong female correspondents and source being turned into some weird camp follower who wanted to jump Cardigans bones. I also found it weird how they used Nolan and made him a composite character for some reason?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Rob Roy is famous for its sword fights. I also saw the 1970s version of The Three Musketeers and it does seem like there's some accuracy in there as far as it went (except for Raquel Welch being married to that gross old dude.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:lol Wot, no love for Attack Force Z?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Zulu (1964) fairly accurate as I recall. The Charge of the Light Brigade and Rob Roy are both excellent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
bewbies posted:The Duellists is totally awesome and seems fairly accurate to my untrained eye.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Combat Car M1 Queue: T18 HMC, M10 Wolverine, Infantry Tank MkI, Hummel, LT vz. 38, Pz38(t), E-50 and E-75, Hellcat trials in the USSR, Allied fictional tanks, crazy Soviet tanks, Light Tank M3A3, Char B1 in German service, Renault NC, Renault D1, Renault R35, Renault D2, Renault R40, 25 mm Hotchkiss gun, LT vz 35, Praga AH-IV, Praga LTL and Pzw 39, T-60 production in difficult years, big guns for the KV-1, A1E1 Independent, PzI Ausf. B, PzI Ausf. C, PzI Ausf. F, Renault FT Available for request:    T-37 with ShKAS Wartime modifications of the T-37 and T-38 SG-122 76 mm gun mod of the Matilda Tank destroyers on the T-30 and T-40 chassis 45 mm M-42 gun SU-76 prototype SU-26/T-26-6 T-60 tanks produced at Stalingrad NEW  L-10 and L-30 Strv m/40 Strv m/42 Landsverk prototypes 1943-1951 Strv m/21 Strv 81 and Strv 101  Trials of the TKS and C2P in the USSR 37 mm anti-tank gun   PzII Ausf. a though b PzII Ausf. c through C PzII Ausf. D through E PzII Ausf. F PzII trials in the USSR Pak 97/38 7.5 cm Pak 41 s.FH. 18 Maus in the USSR NEW 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Rob Roy is famous for its sword fights. Rob Roy is famous for its swordfights because they go on forever, which people mistake for goodness. A historically accurate swordfight is basically impossible to find in a movie because it is not dramatic. Arn the Knight Templar has a duel that strikes a good balance between realism and accuracy imo. This is much closer to realism (though obviously not analogous since these guys arent fighting for their lives) https://youtu.be/lZPOQDkcu4c Fights are fast and movements are compact and efficient, which means the audience can't see what's going on until the blood starts spurting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:This is much closer to realism (though obviously not analogous since these guys arent fighting for their lives) https://youtu.be/lZPOQDkcu4c Interesting! God these guys are scoring like basketball players
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Rob Roy is famous for its swordfights because they go on forever, which people mistake for goodness. A historically accurate swordfight is basically impossible to find in a movie because it is not dramatic. Arn the Knight Templar has a duel that strikes a good balance between realism and accuracy imo. The movie duel I thought was most similar to those descriptions in that funny webpage with the description of old dueling injuries was actually in The Revenant, with the final fight between Tom Hardy and DeCaprio reminding me a lot of those absurd cases. Of course those probably weren't typical duels, but it was still a nice change of pace from guys falling dead instantly. fake edit: Oh I found the webpage, I think it was originally shared in the medieval LARP thread? "The Dubious Quick Kill posted:Two duelists, identified only as "His Grace, the Duke of B " and "Lord B ", after an exchange of exceptionally cordial letters of challenge met in the early morning to conduct their affair with pistols and swords. The combat began with a pistol ball inflicting a slight wound to the Duke's thumb. A second firing was exchanged in which Lord B was then wounded slightly. Each then immediately drew his sword and rushed upon the other with reckless ferocity. After an exchange of only one or two thrusts, the two became locked corps a corps. Struggling to free themselves by "repeated wrenches," they finally separated enough to allow the Duke to deliver a thrust which entered the inside of Lord B 's sword arm and exited the outside of the arm at the elbow. Incredible as it may seem, his Lordship was still able to manage his sword and eventually drove home a thrust just above Duke B 's right nipple. Transfixed on his Lordship's blade, the Duke nevertheless continued, attempting repeatedly to direct a thrust at his Lordship's throat. With his weapon fixed in His Grace's chest, Lord B now had no means of defense other than his free arm and hand. Attempting to grasp the hostile blade, he lost two fingers and mutilated the remainder. Finally, the mortally wounded Duke penetrated the bloody parries of Lord B's hand with a thrust just below Lord B 's heart.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 06:40
|
|
|
I was wincing the whole time I read that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 10:03
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Rob Roy is famous for its swordfights because they go on forever, which people mistake for goodness. A historically accurate swordfight is basically impossible to find in a movie because it is not dramatic. Arn the Knight Templar has a duel that strikes a good balance between realism and accuracy imo. Asking as a complete amateur, what would this fight have looked like were the two in full armor and meaning to kill one another? Slow, samurai-movie duel circling, followed by fast thrusts to try to get around the armor? Wrassling until one was down and the other could finish him off? Bonking each other on the armor until one fell and then a coup de gras? Or, if on a battlefield, two guys briefly overpowering the single other so they could dispatch him fast?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 10:49
|
|
|
Probably very silly if they were using fencing sabers. If they were using long swords or similar, try and wrestle the other guy down, smack him with your sword hilt, then grab the pointy end of your own sword with your offhand and try to position it at the arm or neck joint and then jam it in there as hard as you can. Armoured knights would generally not fight each other with swords so much, rather they'd use hammers or picks to punch through the armour, or in the hopes of just braining each other hard enough to do some damage, or they'd use something like a rondel dagger, which is basically a metal stake that you smack the pommel of to jam it through armour. You can fight a guy in armour with a sword but you would probably have to halfsword it and use it like a short spear, or grab it by the blade and try to beat them over the head with the hilt. Sword strokes just aren't very effective against plate armour. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vi757-7XD94 (not strictly correct, you can grab a sharp blade if you do it right, doesn't have to be blunt) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwuQPfvSSlo Comedy option: Unscrew your pommel and throw it at him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jETLCm7k3sU OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 14:01 on Apr 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 13:48
|
|
Tree Bucket posted:I was wincing the whole time I read that. Some of the montage duels in The Duelists get very close to this but they get so tired they drop their swords and grapple bloodily or just get pulled apart by the watching seconds. Nobody loses a thumb, or eye or the use of a limb though.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 15:06
|
|
|
On a more modern note, how effective has modern body armour been on reducing casualties? When looking at the very low mortality rates from Iraq/Afghanistan, I've always heard that body armour and quick medivac are the main two reasons why: does anyone have any links to further reading on the subject? Wasn't sure whether this should go here or the Cold War thread in TFR.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:On a more modern note, how effective has modern body armour been on reducing casualties? When looking at the very low mortality rates from Iraq/Afghanistan, I've always heard that body armour and quick medivac are the main two reasons why: does anyone have any links to further reading on the subject? Wasn't sure whether this should go here or the Cold War thread in TFR. No links, but the US Army studied the living poo poo out of this (I want to say in the 80s, could be earlier) looking at casualties from WW1, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam. The tl;dr for anything vietnam and earlier is that it's all about getting quality medical care asap. People in vietnam start surviving truly horrific injuries because someone's able to get to them right after they're hit and they get on a helicopter to a full hospital really fast. Anecdotally I've heard lots about body armor just flat out reducing injuries, period. A guy in a class I"m teaching is ex-USMC and he's got some pretty  stories about catching a round to the chest in Afghanistan and trucking along with a bruise and a fractured plate in his carrier. A TFR regular who's not around any more was in the canadian military and had a story that basically went "An Afghan shot me in the chest, and then I shot him back. The difference was he didn't have a vest on."
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
The ineffectiveness of movie armor is one of the things that really irritates me. Like I'm pretty sure all of these dudes in armor aren't wearing it just because it makes them look sweet, but Hollywood apparently operates on that assumption.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 16:41
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:The ineffectiveness of movie armor is one of the things that really irritates me. Like I'm pretty sure all of these dudes in armor aren't wearing it just because it makes them look sweet, but Hollywood apparently operates on that assumption. I'm sort of wondering if it's possible to present these things in a fashion that's recognisable to the general audience and be somewhat authentic. We have a century of cinematography telling people that they basically can hide behind car doors when somebody shoots at them, or people drop dead when you shoot or stab them, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
There are a lot more amputations now that soldiers are wearing body armour (without the armour they'd have been fatalities instead). I believe this is in much the same way as helmets caused an "increase" in head injuries in WWI, from shrapnel and other falling debris. Anyway the takeaway from all this is that kevlar marks your limbs fall off. GotLag fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Apr 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
GotLag posted:There are a lot more amputations now that soldiers are wearing body armour (without the armour they'd have been fatalities instead). That's sort of like the dude who realized that you need to armour the pieces of the plane that were shot off, not the ones that are left. Seems obvious in hindsight, but he came up with it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
As I recall it was armour the bits that weren't shot off because obviously the bits that were shot off weren't very important if you got the plane back without them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 12:50 |
|
|
Yeah, if the plane comes back without some bits, they weren't important anyway. The planes that lost the important bits didn't come back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 17:56
|
|