Well, we've seen plenty of what we like but how about what we hate?
I nominate The Thin Red Line.
Never before have I seen such overbearing, pretencious drivel. If you like being hit over the head with obvious and tedious moralising and slow motion art house sequences then this is the film for you.
On the other hand, the Japanese machine gun looked authentic.
------------------
Wait for Death. There's a choice?
Recon
Worst war movie you've ever seen
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
-
Recon_slith
- Posts: 111
- Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Adelaide, Australia
Worst war movie you've ever seen
Let me make the superstitions of a nation and I care not who makes its laws or its songs either.
-- Mark Twain
-- Mark Twain
Worst war movie ever? Hmm...let see there are so many to choose from...
I'd say any movie that has one or more of these ingredients.
1) German handgrenades never explodes unless an allied soldier first picks it up and throws it at some german.
2) German sentries smokes all the time (especially at night) they carry their rifle slung over the shoulder, and they will run or walk towards any sound without first calling for reinforcements.
3) Any German force regardless of size will walk into any ambush or trap, no matter how obvious the trap or ambush is. German units on march will move with their tanks first followed by soldiers in trucks. The halftracks comes last together with the recon units.
4) It is against the laws of nature that any German soldier should win in hand to hand combat. This regardless of his or his opponents size.
5) German tactics. When ordered to attack, a German soldier will run as fast as he can towards his objective. If a unit is ordered to attack, the entire unit will run as fast as they can towards their objective, preferably in a straight line.
6) German units never have panzerfausts.
7) German tanks will drive buttoned towards the enemy without infantry support.
Perhaps Sahara is the worst movie ever, I dont know who came up with the original story, but he must have been on drugs or something. 7 Allied soldiers armed with small arms and one tank defends a well in the desert against a German "elite mechanized batallion". Well..lets see...the first attack says it all, the German soldiers standing in one long line and marched fully erect and painfully slow towards the allied machine guns. Yup..thats elite for ya, thats standard German tactics in wwii.
I dont know if its just me, but I have a real problem with warmovies made in 1940-1960 where all German soldiers are depicted as handicapped morons. So, in my opinion the only movie worth watching is SPR, perhaps Cross of iron and Stalingrad too. But the rest of them...
------------------
Panzerjaeger Hortlund
-=Fear is only a state of mind=-
I'd say any movie that has one or more of these ingredients.
1) German handgrenades never explodes unless an allied soldier first picks it up and throws it at some german.
2) German sentries smokes all the time (especially at night) they carry their rifle slung over the shoulder, and they will run or walk towards any sound without first calling for reinforcements.
3) Any German force regardless of size will walk into any ambush or trap, no matter how obvious the trap or ambush is. German units on march will move with their tanks first followed by soldiers in trucks. The halftracks comes last together with the recon units.
4) It is against the laws of nature that any German soldier should win in hand to hand combat. This regardless of his or his opponents size.
5) German tactics. When ordered to attack, a German soldier will run as fast as he can towards his objective. If a unit is ordered to attack, the entire unit will run as fast as they can towards their objective, preferably in a straight line.
6) German units never have panzerfausts.
7) German tanks will drive buttoned towards the enemy without infantry support.
Perhaps Sahara is the worst movie ever, I dont know who came up with the original story, but he must have been on drugs or something. 7 Allied soldiers armed with small arms and one tank defends a well in the desert against a German "elite mechanized batallion". Well..lets see...the first attack says it all, the German soldiers standing in one long line and marched fully erect and painfully slow towards the allied machine guns. Yup..thats elite for ya, thats standard German tactics in wwii.
I dont know if its just me, but I have a real problem with warmovies made in 1940-1960 where all German soldiers are depicted as handicapped morons. So, in my opinion the only movie worth watching is SPR, perhaps Cross of iron and Stalingrad too. But the rest of them...
------------------
Panzerjaeger Hortlund
-=Fear is only a state of mind=-
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
Originally posted by Panzerjaeger Hortlund:
Worst war movie ever? Hmm...let see there are so many to choose from...
I'd say any movie that has one or more of these ingredients.
1) German handgrenades never explodes unless an allied soldier first picks it up and throws it at some german.
2) German sentries smokes all the time (especially at night) they carry their rifle slung over the shoulder, and they will run or walk towards any sound without first calling for reinforcements.
3) Any German force regardless of size will walk into any ambush or trap, no matter how obvious the trap or ambush is. German units on march will move with their tanks first followed by soldiers in trucks. The halftracks comes last together with the recon units.
4) It is against the laws of nature that any German soldier should win in hand to hand combat. This regardless of his or his opponents size.
5) German tactics. When ordered to attack, a German soldier will run as fast as he can towards his objective. If a unit is ordered to attack, the entire unit will run as fast as they can towards their objective, preferably in a straight line.
6) German units never have panzerfausts.
7) German tanks will drive buttoned towards the enemy without infantry support.
Perhaps Sahara is the worst movie ever, I dont know who came up with the original story, but he must have been on drugs or something. 7 Allied soldiers armed with small arms and one tank defends a well in the desert against a German "elite mechanized batallion". Well..lets see...the first attack says it all, the German soldiers standing in one long line and marched fully erect and painfully slow towards the allied machine guns. Yup..thats elite for ya, thats standard German tactics in wwii.
I dont know if its just me, but I have a real problem with warmovies made in 1940-1960 where all German soldiers are depicted as handicapped morons. So, in my opinion the only movie worth watching is SPR, perhaps Cross of iron and Stalingrad too. But the rest of them...
More:
German soldiers never notice the English accent when US or British soldiers speak to them. In fact, many German soldiers speak their native language with an English accent too.
German soldiers always appear for battle in perfectly matching and tailored uniforms. They are also very good at keeping their helmets shiny.
-
Ilja Varha
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Kouvola, Finland
- Contact:
And more:
Germans say small words like "Himmel, scheisse, engländer, führer..." in German and all other stuff they speak in perfect american english.
I would say the worst movie is Thin Red Line or the one about the war in Ardenned were the Chaffees kick the german Patton-Tiger ass 10-0... There are many others too...
Ilja
Germans say small words like "Himmel, scheisse, engländer, führer..." in German and all other stuff they speak in perfect american english.
I would say the worst movie is Thin Red Line or the one about the war in Ardenned were the Chaffees kick the german Patton-Tiger ass 10-0... There are many others too...
Ilja
Ilja Varha
Leader (and proud of it!)of the SPMW development team.
Leader (and proud of it!)of the SPMW development team.
Yup, The Thin Red Line was a terrible book/movie cross over.
Following on from the same thread about.
German Soldiers went to the same shooting school as the Storm Troopers from Star Wars.
German Soldiers always look at the sound of a stone landing in the bushes, not the 10 GIs in full gear, blundering through the bush two feet away.
German Soldiers, at the begin of the movie, always; kill most of the strike force; Destroy the one piece of equiment the allies needed to complete the mission; Wound the movie star; kill the heroine right near the end of the movie;
German Commanders always have a six inch scare down the right side of the face, but the eye is always good
Following on from the same thread about.
German Soldiers went to the same shooting school as the Storm Troopers from Star Wars.
German Soldiers always look at the sound of a stone landing in the bushes, not the 10 GIs in full gear, blundering through the bush two feet away.
German Soldiers, at the begin of the movie, always; kill most of the strike force; Destroy the one piece of equiment the allies needed to complete the mission; Wound the movie star; kill the heroine right near the end of the movie;
German Commanders always have a six inch scare down the right side of the face, but the eye is always good
-
Peregrine Falcon
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Finland
- Contact:
Well I liked Thin Red Line and yes - those guns were authentic...Originally posted by Recon:
I nominate The Thin Red Line.
On the other hand, the Japanese machine gun looked authentic.
Type 92, 96 - some howitzers...
That 20mm looked strange though....
Worst war-movie(s) from my POV?
Most WWII-movies Made In USA during 1940-1960
All Chuck Norris-style Vietnam-movies from 80's...
(racist/political stars&stripes-stuff)
Hey! You are from Australia? Right?
Ever seen "The Last Bullet"?? Australian Tv-movie...1995...
It think it was pretty good, considering it was only made for Tv...
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0113606
[This message has been edited by Peregrine Falcon (edited October 23, 2000).]
--Peregrine Falcon--
-
Ilja Varha
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Kouvola, Finland
- Contact:
-
Supervisor
- Posts: 5160
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 12:00 am
-
Supervisor
- Posts: 5160
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 12:00 am
You mean "Battle of the Bulge". I have to agree with you there. I also noticed that Germans in this movie react to any event by screaming in unison: "Es kam von da oben!"Originally posted by Ilja Varha:
And more:
Germans say small words like "Himmel, scheisse, engländer, führer..." in German and all other stuff they speak in perfect american english.
I would say the worst movie is Thin Red Line or the one about the war in Ardenned were the Chaffees kick the german Patton-Tiger ass 10-0... There are many others too...
Ilja
How pathetic can you get?
------------------
Fabs
Fabs
The Germans in "The Eagle has Landed" kick butt but the movie still stinks. "Elite" German units are always destroyed by special commando unit containing Clint Eastwood and Richard Burton. The "Rat Patrol" use to destroy 50 german tanks per week using 50cals on jeeps. What was the movie that had a SS Division get whacked in Greece?
Other things the German army never learned in movies
1. What a flank is
2. Not to run out of barracks when shooting starts (go to windows silly boys)
3. What cover and concealment are
4. What "bounding" and "over watch" are
Many years ago in a "Sgt Rock" comic one German asked another German why these few Americans always won...answer he got "Because you dumkoff it is an American comic"
But the Germans should not take it too hard the armys of Japan and N Korean and China never learned how to fight ethier.
But the All time worst war movie...I have said it before and I will say it again
"Zero"
------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!
Other things the German army never learned in movies
1. What a flank is
2. Not to run out of barracks when shooting starts (go to windows silly boys)
3. What cover and concealment are
4. What "bounding" and "over watch" are
Many years ago in a "Sgt Rock" comic one German asked another German why these few Americans always won...answer he got "Because you dumkoff it is an American comic"
But the Germans should not take it too hard the armys of Japan and N Korean and China never learned how to fight ethier.
But the All time worst war movie...I have said it before and I will say it again
"Zero"
------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Most Hollywood war movies would fit into this category.
Altough Hollywood has made some potentially great war movies, there are ingredients that spoil even their best endeavours.
Lionizing the "goodies" (smart, decent and always good and right)and demonizing the "baddies" (stupid, evil and always bad and wrong)is one of the greatest such sins.
Few Hollywood movies escape this trap, but the best they can do then is just de-personalize the enemy.
In other words, Hollywood producers treat audiences as morons and feel that they must take sides.
One exception I can think of is "The young lions", although that was more a drama staged during the war than a proper war movie.
"Cross of Iron" and "The Eagle has landed" are also notable exceptions. Both attempt to show a non-stereotype German point of view, which takes some courage, and probably kills the box office. (I would like to emphasize that I am not pro-German, but I am tired of seeing the Germans stereotyped and their position oversimplified).
Another beef I have is the battle re-creations, which often are simply shoddy. Battle scenes can be so badly re-created as to make me want to smash the screen. There are very few movies that get this right.
"Stalingrad" is the most noteworthy exception to this rule, in my book better than even SPR. Although after watching "Stalingrad" you have to go on suicide watch for a while!
I suppose making a truly great movie about World War II is a challenge that would tax the skills of modern film makers.
European directors from the first half of the last century may have been intellectually better equipped, but in those days it was the technology and the finances at their disposal that created limitations.
Modern directors would rather spend massive amounts on special effect intensive science fiction blockbusters than take up this challenge, and when they do the result is SPR, with excellent special effects but a very poor, totally fictional storyline that, as usual, oversentimentalizes some aspects and totally re-writes others, or "Thin red line", with the liberal moralizing that has been criticised in another post and that misses the point of the War in the Pacific entirely, not to mention the schizophrenic efforts to portray the Viet Nam conflict.
A movie (more likely a series of movies) that would fully and objectively explore the realities of the people involved in the conflict and give a less "carboard cutout", more realistic idea of what large scale battles looked, sounded and felt like, at the macro as well as the individual level, while being a very worthy idea, would probably not interest the sort of audience size that would cover the enormous cost of making it.
I also suspect that watching combat reproduced more realistically may not be at all exciting.
Long periods of silence and apparent inactivity broken by sudden, fast, furious, confusing and frantic activity, involving death and mutilation, followed by a return to sudden silence and apparent inactivity until the next furious burst is not a recipe for riveting audiences to their seats, and there are abject aspects of combat that most people would probably not want to know about.
So we have to make do with the substandard productions that find the money to be made and the audiences to pay for watching them.
I'd rather play Steel Panthers World at War any day these days.
------------------
Fabs
[This message has been edited by Fabs (edited October 23, 2000).]
Altough Hollywood has made some potentially great war movies, there are ingredients that spoil even their best endeavours.
Lionizing the "goodies" (smart, decent and always good and right)and demonizing the "baddies" (stupid, evil and always bad and wrong)is one of the greatest such sins.
Few Hollywood movies escape this trap, but the best they can do then is just de-personalize the enemy.
In other words, Hollywood producers treat audiences as morons and feel that they must take sides.
One exception I can think of is "The young lions", although that was more a drama staged during the war than a proper war movie.
"Cross of Iron" and "The Eagle has landed" are also notable exceptions. Both attempt to show a non-stereotype German point of view, which takes some courage, and probably kills the box office. (I would like to emphasize that I am not pro-German, but I am tired of seeing the Germans stereotyped and their position oversimplified).
Another beef I have is the battle re-creations, which often are simply shoddy. Battle scenes can be so badly re-created as to make me want to smash the screen. There are very few movies that get this right.
"Stalingrad" is the most noteworthy exception to this rule, in my book better than even SPR. Although after watching "Stalingrad" you have to go on suicide watch for a while!
I suppose making a truly great movie about World War II is a challenge that would tax the skills of modern film makers.
European directors from the first half of the last century may have been intellectually better equipped, but in those days it was the technology and the finances at their disposal that created limitations.
Modern directors would rather spend massive amounts on special effect intensive science fiction blockbusters than take up this challenge, and when they do the result is SPR, with excellent special effects but a very poor, totally fictional storyline that, as usual, oversentimentalizes some aspects and totally re-writes others, or "Thin red line", with the liberal moralizing that has been criticised in another post and that misses the point of the War in the Pacific entirely, not to mention the schizophrenic efforts to portray the Viet Nam conflict.
A movie (more likely a series of movies) that would fully and objectively explore the realities of the people involved in the conflict and give a less "carboard cutout", more realistic idea of what large scale battles looked, sounded and felt like, at the macro as well as the individual level, while being a very worthy idea, would probably not interest the sort of audience size that would cover the enormous cost of making it.
I also suspect that watching combat reproduced more realistically may not be at all exciting.
Long periods of silence and apparent inactivity broken by sudden, fast, furious, confusing and frantic activity, involving death and mutilation, followed by a return to sudden silence and apparent inactivity until the next furious burst is not a recipe for riveting audiences to their seats, and there are abject aspects of combat that most people would probably not want to know about.
So we have to make do with the substandard productions that find the money to be made and the audiences to pay for watching them.
I'd rather play Steel Panthers World at War any day these days.
------------------
Fabs
[This message has been edited by Fabs (edited October 23, 2000).]
Fabs
Movies are not, nor should they ever be, considered "history". There are 7 stories in literature, whether Western Middle Eastern, or Asian. War movies use conflict as a basis for these 7 themes.
Now that the theory's out of the way, my nominee has to be:
"Battle of the Bulge"
Honorable Mention "Merrill's Marauders" where this time it's Americans who forget everything about tactics and just sort of run at Japanese machine guns. Although the effects of the extended walk in the bush are well illustrated.
Now that the theory's out of the way, my nominee has to be:
"Battle of the Bulge"
Honorable Mention "Merrill's Marauders" where this time it's Americans who forget everything about tactics and just sort of run at Japanese machine guns. Although the effects of the extended walk in the bush are well illustrated.
"...these go up to eleven."
Nigel Tufnel
Nigel Tufnel
-
JW at work
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
My wife always gets mad at me when I point out the historical errors in a movie. She says, "Shut up. It's just a movie."
I did not like The Thin Red Line at all. I actually like Battle of the Bulge, even though it is one of the worse of the war movie genre. It is so bad it is good in a way, like a cult classic. Notice how many of you talked about it. Maybe they could start showing it again at theaters and grognards could show up dressed in uniforms and make fun of it just like Rocky Horror Picture Show.
I did not like The Thin Red Line at all. I actually like Battle of the Bulge, even though it is one of the worse of the war movie genre. It is so bad it is good in a way, like a cult classic. Notice how many of you talked about it. Maybe they could start showing it again at theaters and grognards could show up dressed in uniforms and make fun of it just like Rocky Horror Picture Show.
-
Kluckenbill
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Lancaster, PA, USA
Fabs Posted:
[QUOTE}Another beef I have is the battle re-creations, which often are simply shoddy. Battle scenes can be so badly re-created as to make me want to smash the screen. There are very few movies that get this right.
"Stalingrad" is the most noteworthy exception to this rule, in my book better than even SPR. Although after watching "Stalingrad" you have to go on suicide watch for a while!
I suppose making a truly great movie about World War II is a challenge that would tax the skills of modern film makers.
[/QUOTE]
I think one problem is that in modern war, especially mechanized war, there just isn't a whole lot to look at. In modern war the troops are pretty thin on the ground and they use as much cover and concealment as possible. When I was a tank platoon leader in Germany ('76-'78) and we went on maneuvers it was pretty rare to see more than a few vehicles at any one time, and we were more limited in where we could go by the maneuver damage rules.
I live near Gettysburg and I've had several ex-Military friends comment on the small size of the battlefield, especially the site of Pickett's Charge. Today the entire frontage of the Confederate division would be defended by a company or two of troops.
Its been a couple of years since I've seen Stalingrad, but even that movie suffered (IMHO) from having a lot of combatants bunched together. Look how close everyone is and how close together the foxholes are in the scene where they are stopping the Russian tank attack.
Finally, there have been so many dreadful war movies that I just can't pick one as the worst.
------------------
Target, Cease Fire !
[QUOTE}Another beef I have is the battle re-creations, which often are simply shoddy. Battle scenes can be so badly re-created as to make me want to smash the screen. There are very few movies that get this right.
"Stalingrad" is the most noteworthy exception to this rule, in my book better than even SPR. Although after watching "Stalingrad" you have to go on suicide watch for a while!
I suppose making a truly great movie about World War II is a challenge that would tax the skills of modern film makers.
[/QUOTE]
I think one problem is that in modern war, especially mechanized war, there just isn't a whole lot to look at. In modern war the troops are pretty thin on the ground and they use as much cover and concealment as possible. When I was a tank platoon leader in Germany ('76-'78) and we went on maneuvers it was pretty rare to see more than a few vehicles at any one time, and we were more limited in where we could go by the maneuver damage rules.
I live near Gettysburg and I've had several ex-Military friends comment on the small size of the battlefield, especially the site of Pickett's Charge. Today the entire frontage of the Confederate division would be defended by a company or two of troops.
Its been a couple of years since I've seen Stalingrad, but even that movie suffered (IMHO) from having a lot of combatants bunched together. Look how close everyone is and how close together the foxholes are in the scene where they are stopping the Russian tank attack.
Finally, there have been so many dreadful war movies that I just can't pick one as the worst.
------------------
Target, Cease Fire !
Target, Cease Fire !
Ok, Stalingrad is a great, personal story, so perhaps if you combined the story from Stalingrad with the special effects from SPR you would have the "perfect" movie.
There is one very good point that got me thinking. Fabs wrote "I also suspect that watching combat reproduced more realistically may not be at all exciting.
Long periods of silence and apparent inactivity broken by sudden, fast, furious, confusing and frantic activity, involving death and mutilation, followed by a return to sudden silence and apparent inactivity until the next furious burst is not a recipe for riveting audiences to their seats, and there are abject aspects of combat that most people would probably not want to know about."
Now I have never been in combat, but I am a military man. And I guess I have always been wondering what combat would be really like. I dont know if you guys have had these thoughts too, but anyway...When I first saw SPR it hit me like a ton of bricks, suddenly I realized what it must be like, and it scared the **** out of me.
Perhaps this is a point we are missing. In the search for our "perfect" warmovie, we fail to realize that noone in their right frame of mind would want to watch real combat, even if its only on the silver screen...
I dunno...am I just rambling here?
------------------
Panzerjaeger Hortlund
-=Fear is only a state of mind=-
There is one very good point that got me thinking. Fabs wrote "I also suspect that watching combat reproduced more realistically may not be at all exciting.
Long periods of silence and apparent inactivity broken by sudden, fast, furious, confusing and frantic activity, involving death and mutilation, followed by a return to sudden silence and apparent inactivity until the next furious burst is not a recipe for riveting audiences to their seats, and there are abject aspects of combat that most people would probably not want to know about."
Now I have never been in combat, but I am a military man. And I guess I have always been wondering what combat would be really like. I dont know if you guys have had these thoughts too, but anyway...When I first saw SPR it hit me like a ton of bricks, suddenly I realized what it must be like, and it scared the **** out of me.
Perhaps this is a point we are missing. In the search for our "perfect" warmovie, we fail to realize that noone in their right frame of mind would want to watch real combat, even if its only on the silver screen...
I dunno...am I just rambling here?
------------------
Panzerjaeger Hortlund
-=Fear is only a state of mind=-
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
-
troopie
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Directly above the centre of the Earth.
Real combat is a few minutes of shooting preceded and followed by silence or shouting. At least modern combat is. You seldom see whom you are shooting at, just puffs of smoke.
'Where Eagles Dare' or 'The Dirty Dozen' are my nominees for worst war movie. They have all the cliches about Germans. Dirty Dozen also has a number of American cliches.
troopie
------------------
Pamwe Chete
'Where Eagles Dare' or 'The Dirty Dozen' are my nominees for worst war movie. They have all the cliches about Germans. Dirty Dozen also has a number of American cliches.
troopie
------------------
Pamwe Chete
Pamwe Chete
Nominees,
The Alamo
Gettysburg
Tobruk
B of the B (yep pretty bad)
Santa Fe Trail (i know its a western but Ronald Reagan as Custer saying gee alot.)
Inchon (produced by Sun Yun Moon staring Lawrence Olivier as MaCarthur-I kid you not)
Give me more time I will come up with some.
The Alamo
Gettysburg
Tobruk
B of the B (yep pretty bad)
Santa Fe Trail (i know its a western but Ronald Reagan as Custer saying gee alot.)
Inchon (produced by Sun Yun Moon staring Lawrence Olivier as MaCarthur-I kid you not)
Give me more time I will come up with some.
I HATE LONG LANCE TORPEDOES!