Greyhound Staring Tom Hanks, now streaming.

a reply to: alldaylong

They do.. those movies are called documentaries.

Couldn't pay me to watch anything this satanic pedophile makes....dudes a very, very sick man.

im watching it now so far not to bad but im only 14 minutes in . im really liking the old timey film effects they seem to be using and as a naval buff i think ill like it

a reply to: alldaylong

You frequently come across as a very insecure Englishman who needs to toss out insults at the United States to make himself feel better. This is one of those times.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


When is asking a question tossing an insult ?

a reply to: Macenroe82

just got it on my android box today... can't wait to watch it tonight

en.m.wikipedia.org...(DD-215)#Final_battle_with_U-405 i was a bit confused as to some of the sub tactics in the movie but then found this which is probably one of if not the most ridiculous naval engagements of the war
as you will see below in the snippet

he sub's machine guns scored hits in the forward engine room and several scattered and harmless hits near the bridge, and her deck gun crew traversed their 88 mm (3.5 in) gun and took aim for their first shot at Borie's waterline; but Borie's 20 mm gunfire killed every exposed member of the sub's crew topside, and a salvo of three 4-inch shells then blew off the sub's deck gun before it fired a round.[5] Borie then closed in and rammed U-405, but at the last moment, the submarine turned hard to port and a huge wave lifted the Borie's bow onto the foredeck of the U-boat.[4] After the ramming, Borie was high-centered on top of U-405, and until they separated, exchanges of small arms fire took place. This was a unique battle: unlike most other modern naval battles, it was decided by ramming and small arms fire at extremely close range. Borie's 24-inch spotlight kept the submarine illuminated throughout the following battle, except for brief periods when it was turned off for tactical reasons.

it only gets more weird with one naval crewman getting a kill with a flare gun of all things , a knife and an empty 4inch shell were also used to basically repel boarders.

so seeing this reality was much weirder then what was seen in the fiction of the movie so to speak but i enjoyed it and while it was not what i expected it was still a pretty good movie

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

They are great films 👍

a reply to: SPNoble

I'm curious. You're the second member in this thread to state something like this. Perhaps back it up with some facts, rather than just pseudo BS?

a reply to: SPNoble

What did he do?
I've never heard of Tom Hank's doing something unsavoury to the tune of pedo-ing.

He's not a member of the union is he?
As in registered offender.

irst I will give the devil their due with tom hanks

forrest gump was an entertaining story with enough real world information to give it some meat and the technical adding in of events was quite novel.

saving private ryan had enough factual DETAILS (equipment, WWII battle tactics, ect) to keep a military buff (like me) quite happy.. the D day landings were the most accurate (had guys on the landing boats throwing up , who else added that little realistic detail) IMO ever portrayed.

the fictional story had enough period accurate details that suspending disbelief that it was all made up was easy and quite enjoyable.

I have not seen greyhound so cant comment on it

but if I may take this to a broader issue

I HATE the "based on a true store/events/ect" that hollywood has done (with some exceptions see above) with this over last 20 or years has been AWFUL to CRAPFESTS .
to the point "based on " is at best a JOKE, at worst defame the event/people.

what frosts me (as a military history buff) is there are so many events, people ,ect that THE REAL THING just told as is with ACCURATE setting, props, ect would be as epic if not more that a "saving private ryan"
They would be more entertaining and jaw dropping than anything ever made up even.

hell there are events coming to light (like commando raids and code breaking) that were NEVER KNOW or top secret until a few years ago..

why given hollywood being LAZY in coming up with new/unique material (as expressed by their remakes, reboots and "based on true XX" ) they would not latch on and produce events that write themselves?

scrounger

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: alldaylong

You frequently come across as a very insecure Englishman who needs to toss out insults at the United States to make himself feel better. This is one of those times.

As accurate as your chosen war films are (and you seem to forget Midway recently, that was nigh on perfect in my opinion)
You also see how accurate the comments of our English friends are. Of the oh so many war films the US have made, most, just shy of all are pretty fantastical, overdressed and pure hyperbole.
Having said that, Kelly’s Heroes, Black Hawk Down, Platoon, Apocalypse and Stalingrad (US?) and The aforementioned Midway are without comment.
But the US didn’t capture the Enigma, win the war on their own, (well maybe against the Japanese 🇺🇸🎉) or some of the other things they like to take credit for.

Think our English cousins are a little saddened that the US think they won single handedly.
I mean the US gave away secret British information to the Germans in Africa, we don’t hear about that do we?

originally posted by: Raggedyman
As accurate as your chosen war films are (and you seem to forget Midway recently, that was nigh on perfect in my opinion)

I thought Midway was very inaccurate, particularly the final dive bomb run.

You also see how accurate the comments of our English friends are. Of the oh so many war films the US have made, most, just shy of all are pretty fantastical, overdressed and pure hyperbole.

He asked for one film, I gave him three which he had to find minor issues with that actually didn't have to do with the filmmaking process in one case.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yeah, I guess that final dive bomb run was a pretty seriously inaccurate! Nothing minor about that.

Minor issues indeed

Wrong payloads on some wings of dive bomber, typical yanks lying in war movies as usual, generate a bit of self pride in a country flailing like a hungry child
🦄🌈💃. You have no idea do you AM

You just justified the other argument and made your own redundant, pretty dumb thing to do if you apply a bit of though, well done

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Yeah, I guess that final dive bomb run was a pretty seriously inaccurate! Nothing minor about that.

Bombs sliding on the deck? Wings clipping water? It was over the top.

You just justified the other argument and made your own redundant, pretty dumb thing to do if you apply a bit of though, well done

How? The other three weren't going for embellished battle sequences, it was more about the people which is always the better approach.

This is why Band of Brothers worked. There were war sequences but it was always the personal stories.

a reply to: Macenroe82
Thanks for the info.
I will check it out.

Tho I bet its no notting hill, or billy elliot....