Most accurate war movies?

Post by **aferguson** » Sat Mar 11, 2006 7:58 pm

Rather than poll what are people's favourites i thought i'd ask opinions on what war movies portray the real events most accurately, from an historical perspective.

Of course this will depend on each person's historical knowledge of the actual events.

To start things off i will offer the Battle of Britain and Waterloo.

The BoB had an number of small errors; Mk IX spitfires not Mk I, Spanish built Heinkels with the wrong type engines, same goes for the Me 109's but these were all that were available. The lack of other german aircraft such as Ju 88's, Me 110's and Do-17's was also a disappointment but understandable.

That said, while the actual account of the battle was simplified a bit, for both time constraints and clarity the events were portrayed fairly faithfully as to what happened during the real BoB and the air combat scenes were very realistic, to the extent of my knowledge as to what it was really like, anyway. Just a few too many exploding planes.

Waterloo: while again the events were simplified a bit it also fairly accurately outlined the events of the battle. Uniforms were beautiful and faithfully duplicated (to my eye anyway) and battle scenes were acted out in a manner representative of the time period (contrast this with very inaccurate battle sequences in more recent movies like Alexander and Gladiator where sizzle, not historical accuracy was paramount). First rate both as entertainment and as a history lesson.

There are other good ones and a lot of bad ones...but i'll leave those for someone else..

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:14 pm

I like "Band of Brothers" for accuracy. We have seen many of the original men involved in Easy company to believe the series to be as they lived it.

The equipment of course involved many "mock ups" but they looked good and we know that there is just no original tanks to blow up. The Allied vehicles looked good but that was because of the great number of original equipment available in GB.

TTT

lsc1002 · Post by **lsc1002** » Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:26 pm

I think I would agree that Band of Brothers is a really good portrayal. It shows really well the different relationships that form between the soldiers, besides just combat and blowing up stuff.

kevrut · Post by **kevrut** » Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:41 pm

I'll jump on the "Band of Brothers" bandwagon.

steelbonnet · Post by **steelbonnet** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 2:18 am

Is there really a TRUELY ACCURATE War Movie????

Maybe Accurate from one perspective though from ALL Sides involved??

After all the old cliche is "The Victor writes history".

With that i truely don`t think I could say a film I truely believe is whole heartedly accurate from all perspectives.
Some Accurate films from a particular view,there`s a fair few of them.

Ja
Steel Bonnet

Post by **aferguson** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 7:20 am

I know what you're saying SB but not sure if i agree with it.

Such movies as Tora, Tora, Tora and We Were Soldiers portray both sides of their respective conflicts quite faithfully, i feel.

They avoid the standard traps of making the bad guys look really bad and the good guys just oh so good, but make them look like humans, both good and bad. Contrast that with any John Wayne Vietnam era movie or Pearl Harbour and you'll see the difference i'm talking about.

It's hard to represent anyone or anything from history, with 100% accuracy since no one making the movie was actually there but certainly some movies do a lot better job of sticking to the historical facts than others do..

And yes, history is written by the victor but western historians tend to view and report the facts of history fairly objectively, as they generally have no political concerns (ie nobody watching over their shoulder).

Website · Post by **Teamski** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 8:23 am

I can't say that a movie not using OEM in the production of a movie is inaccurate from a historical point of view. You can only use what you have. From a factual event standpoint, the most accurate movies I know of are:

A Bridge Too Far (the most accurate in my opinion from all points of view)
Band of Brothers
The Longest day (even though the fake paratroopers weren't figures but simply filled sand bags)

Battle of Britain had too much of a theatrical bend to it that strayed too far from the topic, IMHO. The best scene was at the beginning with one of the charactors taxiing up in a Hurricane during the Battle of France. It just looks sooo right!!

Movies like Memphis Belle, Das Boote, The Winter War, Enemy at the Gates, Stalingrad, Saving Private Ryan, 12 o Clock High and Gallipoli at least do a good job of seeing what it was really like in war. Each do a respectible job.

-Ski

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 8:31 am

Aferg:

Glad you brought up "We Were Soldiers", my favorite film and book about VN. The portrayal of both sides as professionals in a fight, each believing in their sides ideals in well done.

The same fight is detailed in the book "Heart of a Soldier", a fascinating read about Rick Rescorla, a Brit soldier, then a merc in Africa and then a soldier in our Army as a Lt in the WWS story. He became one of the true heros of 9/11, after pushing his employer to have evaculation plans and to have rehersals, he led 2,700 employees of Morgan Stanley out of the Trade Center and died when he went back to insure everybody had gotten out. By the way, he ignored first announcements to stay put that morning. What he did in VN in did in NYC on 9/11.

TTT

steelbonnet · Post by **steelbonnet** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 11:03 am

Aferg,

Interesting points mate & yes the films you used as case in point, do cover BOTH sides really well. Though how accurate is the view from the Japanese & Vietnamese views or even the US?

Also how do you know one side is accounting true facts without embellishing facts?

Oh I agree also Western Historians do try moreso to account for the "Other Side" of any conflicts. Some as if it`s a quest to destroy the known facts to date.

IMHO I just think it`s truely difficult to say this film is a True & Accurate film.

With that there are some great films out there, many already mentioned in this thread I already have in my collection.

Ja
Steel Bonnet

MG-42 · Post by **MG-42** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 5:06 am

Sam Peckinpaws "Cross of Iron" is accurately portrayed IMHO. Which is based on a true story about the Eastern Front and a book written by Willie Heinrich,..which I read. The motion picture is commensurate with the book. Which is rare. **** .... I have this on DVD too,..which is also rare.

Razor17019 · Post by **Razor17019** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 8:58 am

You have to look at the time the movie was made in relation to when the events happened. For instance, Gregory Peck in "Pork Chop Hill" (1959) looks at a battle from the Korean War 1950-1953. It shows dedicated soldiers caught in a situation dictated by politics and "peace talks".

It is an excellent movie. Here is what one reviewer has said about it: "It is, from what I understand, a historically accurate account of one of the last fifty years' most famous battles, based on the book by famous military historian Gen. S. L. A. "Slam" Marshall.

Anyone seen this Black/White film??

Of course, Band of Brothers is on the top of list too.

What about Gettysburg and God and Generals?
Anyone seen these? What do you think about their accuracy??

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 9:21 am

Razor:

You asked "Did anyone see the movie Pork Chop Hil??".

Asking that question to this board is like asking have we ever heard of "To Hell and Back", or "Guaducanal Diary" or "12 O'clock High", or my personal favorite (although fictional) "Saraha", with Bogart.

Pork Chop Hill is indeed a classic battle film about one battle and the guys involved. I love it. The stars are great.....and Robert Blade as a kid looking for a rifle....great.

TTT

Razor17019 · Post by **Razor17019** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:16 am

TTT,
We have a great deal of age difference on the board. I was thinking that the younger members of our board may not have seen Pork Chop Hill.

Gettysburg is another movie I really thought was historical accurate and gave a more human side to the historical figures. (Gen. Longstreet - Tom Berranger's beard bugged me though). Best scene is where Joshua Chamberlain leads a bayonnet charge down Little Round Top.

Any thoughts on this movie?

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 12:29 pm

I agree with your comments on "Gettysburgh". I did enjoy the movie, not as much though as I should have, I kept looking for two of my buddies who are re-enactors and were in the movie. It kind of spoiled the movie for me, I kept being distracted, looking at faces. Never did spot them.

OK, lesson learned, ignore friends in movies

, enjoy the mivie.

As for your comment on age, yes, I'll agree partially, I grew up watching war movies, good and bad on TV and in the movies. You remember movies, before DVD's and casette movies when you went to a sticky foot theater with people yelling at the screen or each other and throwing popcorn around. Not like now, sitting in a quiet, dark room with surround sound DVD, where you can repeat scenes, or like when I enjoy a Brit movie and need to use a translation on the screen bottom. But then, being as old as dirt as I am and even my kids can quote every line from "1941", "Kelly's Heroes", "Sahara" and dozens of other war pics I've watched again, and again.......kind of like "King Kong" (all versions) and "Mighty Joe Young" once a year and "Christmas Story", "and the best movie ever made, bar none, "The Best Years of Our Lives".

My wife and I are movie people, my kids are now movie people. Not alot of the pap being made today, but good movies.

TTT

MG-42 · Post by **MG-42** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:44 pm

That's pretty good Charlie. I'm not old as dirt,..but I too, still enjoy all the movies you mentioned.

Razor17019 · Post by **Razor17019** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:50 pm

Threetoughtrucks wrote:and the best movie ever made, bar none, "The Best Years of Our Lives".

WOW! That is the BEST movie ever! Should have won Best Picture in 1946. You have to give the movie and it's makers kudos for dealing with post-war problems of: alcoholism, wartime marriage/divorce, wounded soldiers and their adjustment. No other war movie from that period of time even acknowledged those subjects.
TTT- you got good taste in films!

TTT

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 8:59 pm

Razor:

"The Best Years of Our Lives" won either seven or eight academy awards in 1946.

Including:

Best Picture - "The Best Years of Our Lives"
Best Actor - Frederic March (the banker)
Best Supporting Actor - Harold Russell (the sailor)
Best Director - William Wyler

If you don't already know:
Harold Russell did loose both arms during the war but his arms were lost in a training accident. It still counts but a tough way to go through life.

TTT

Razor17019 · Post by **Razor17019** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 9:18 pm

TTT,
My bad. I was thinking of "It's a Wonderful Life". It came out the same year and did not win any Oscars.

Harold Russell did a fantastic job in his role without having any professional training. I am surprised Dana Andrews didn't win anything?

Anyway- If you have seen the movie, you probably concur with us. If not, rent it or find it on AMC channel and watch it.

The scenes of the B-17 bombers lined up with their major components stripped off of them and ready to be "recycled" was bitter sweet.

steelbonnet · Post by **steelbonnet** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:39 am

Must admit I truely enjoyed Gettysburg too

Also nice that you had the Officer from the Coldstream Guards there to act as a Story relay point for the film.

The actors truely did do there characters justice in the film & with some the likeness was uncanny. To me one thing that truely does help even more

From what I`ve read of Gettsyberg it looked pretty spot on to me.
Would have been nice though to have had a few scene for Custers Cavalry whooping it up with Jebs rebel Cav

As I`d love to see who they`d get to do Custer after the attention they paid to the other characters

On Custer still,I thought that "Son of the Morning Star" was pretty close to the book too. Though HOW accurate is that? After all Custer is one of those historic people,depends on WHO writes the history on you. As he`s been covered as being the Saviour,to the Most reckless. being a supporter of the white expansion to being a supporter for the American Indian. As said history is a rather murky depth to extract the truth from. Capt Benteen & Major Reno are known to have taken advantage that there was NO ONE to challange there accusations.

History can be used to settle old scores (by both survivors & also the writters/Historian),so that`s why I hold an air of trepidation on saying "Accurate".

Still as i`ve said,there`s some very fine close to the truth films out there

ja
Steel Bonnet

Website · Post by **Teamski** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 4:23 am

Threetoughtrucks wrote:Razor:

"The Best Years of Our Lives" won either seven or eight academy awards in 1946.

Including:

Best Picture - "The Best Years of Our Lives"
Best Actor - Frederic March (the banker)
Best Supporting Actor - Harold Russell (the sailor)
Best Director - William Wyler

If you don't already know:
Harold Russell did loose both arms during the war but his arms were lost in a training accident. It still counts but a tough way to go through life.

TTT

That movie is one of the very best I've seen. I finally bought it a couple months ago on-line. A true classic.

-Ski

luftpanzer · Post by **luftpanzer** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 7:54 am

There are some early 1950s German movies about WW2 that I thought was pretty accurate as seen through the Germans point of view. Such as Stalingrad. Not the 1990s color version but the black and white, not availeble in English but has English subtitles. Forget about the wartime movies that came out during the war, All those where propaganda and patriotic. Witch at the time was a good thing. And I really get a kick of how we steriotype the Japenese with buck teeth and coke battle glasses.
As far as equipment go's The modern movies with the big budgets and all the vehicles that are avalible are pretty accurate. Nothing I cant stand is to watch a movie about the battle of the bulge and all the German Tigers are spanish M48 pattons with the German cross and numbers painted on them.

Mirage · Post by **Mirage** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 10:13 am

I would have to agree with the Band of Brothers and We were Soldiers.

Has anbody here heard of "Downfall" released in 2005 (english title). It depicts the final days of Hitler as the russians advance towards his bunker. Apparently it has very good acting and portrays this moment in time very accurately. You will most likely only be able to get this movie from an online source. I have yet to watch my copy.

STUKA · Post by **STUKA** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 8:43 pm

I'm in aggreement with "band of Brothers" and "we were soldiers"
I also like "God's and soldiers" and "Glory"

all top notch - as for "Gettysburg" I thought it accurate - except for the beard.

On a final note - just wasted $19.99 on "jarhead"

then again it is a war movie and I collect war movies.....
sigh...horrible movie

Website · Post by **Teamski** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 8:02 am

I just picked up Thunderbolt and The Fighting Lady from Amazon for $5 each. They are the WWII full color Kodachrome documentaries that are definately worth watching!! That along with my most favorite WWII Kodachrome documentary, Night Bombers, are excellent!!

-Ski

Post by **aferguson** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 9:12 am

kodachro-o-ome it brings us the niice bright colours, it brings us the gre-eens of summer, momma don't take my kodachrome away..

momma don't take my kodachrome,

momma don't take my kodacrome,..

Small Scale Military Headquarters

Most accurate war movies?

Most accurate war movies?

xd

Cross of Iron