Cult Icon
2585 replies · 37550 views
Can I jump in here and say how much I've enjoyed your back and forth chats?
For the movies you've mentioned, I have only seen Platoon, Black Hawk Down, The Hunt for Red October and Crimson Tide. Oh and U-571 and the submarine movie that is not really historical but more as a thriller, Below. (Love it for entirely other reasons.)
You're talking to the right guy- I've studied a great deal about Stalingrad including all the most complicated books. I would say that Enemy of the Gates should be treated as a work of entertainment. Pretend that none of the "controversial" you saw in the film was real except some of the well made set pieces.
The Pacific is based on 3-4 classic American memoirs. I enjoyed the Pacific because I had studied this growing up, and had read Eugene Sledge's book.
A bridge too far is a good movie!
Stalingrad 1993 is the best Stalingrad movie to me. It has the best imagery However, it has many flaws in its characterization and I dislike the acting/story.
The english dubbing is very bad- maybe there is a german language one with french or english subtitles for you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDR9FiSbguA
Brest Fortress was pretty good! Here are both, for free!
Another war movie I like is "Black Hawk Down".
I think i already watched with school the Stalingrad from '93, it was indeed more realistic than the last one from 2001! I have to watch Brest Fortress, thanks for the link 
I watched Black Hawk Down as well, another pretty realistic movie, this movie is one of the most symbolic about the modern wars ...
Have you watched Jarhead or American Sniper ? or Zero Dark Thirty ?
Can I jump in here and say how much I've enjoyed your back and forth chats?
For the movies you've mentioned, I have only seen Platoon, Black Hawk Down, The Hunt for Red October and Crimson Tide. Oh and U-571 and the submarine movie that is not really historical but more as a thriller, Below. (Love it for entirely other reasons.)
U-571 was entertaining too, and it's not a bad thing sometimes, when the story stay relatively credible !
I've seen Zero Dark Thirty and really enjoyed it as well. I prefer to be entertained first, then if something peaks my curiosity I'll google it or look it up for more info. Black Hawk Down was referenced in a letter about why a gentleman could not get his original birth certificate. He was from the area and he said to watch the movie and we'd understand why he couldn't get his document. I thought it was an original explanation. He even included in his letter a small copy of the movie poster.
^^
Yeah, sure Candle !!!
I've seen Zero Dark Thirty and really enjoyed it as well. I prefer to be entertained first, then if something peaks my curiosity I'll google it or look it up for more info. Black Hawk Down was referenced in a letter about why a gentleman could not get his original birth certificate. He was from the area and he said to watch the movie and we'd understand why he couldn't get his document. I thought it was an original explanation. He even included in his letter a small copy of the movie poster.
My father lived in Somalia for a time (in the 1980s). He taught english and worked in a hospital. I don't think his experience was unpleasant, although it probably changed him for reasons he wouldn't say or admit. I liked Platoon and U-571.
I saw parts of American Sniper. Black hawk down is a very entertaining action film. I never read the book though.
I like "Predator" and "Alien". Both are a bit warlike types of sci-fi.
I watched Black Hawk Down as well, another pretty realistic movie, this movie is one of the most symbolic about the modern wars ...
Have you watched Jarhead or American Sniper ? or Zero Dark Thirty ?
A bit related, but recently I had a short exchange about the usage of armor in 43-45. It's interesting that Guderian did a double face- the policymakers started to "penny-packet" their armor like the French, British, and the Soviets (fall 41-fall of 42) did during this timeframe. In France 1940 a Pz Division had 400 tanks max. By fall of 1944, it was 100 tanks max. They spread out their armor into small groups across the front. Like in France, there was a "Armor lobby" and "Infantry lobby"- the Armor lobby wants the tanks concentrated for long range maneuvers, the Infantry wants them spread out in small groups & chained to the infantry. The Infantry won, and Guderian reversed his position 180 degrees.
The reasons why they did it were multifaceted. In my view, they made a serious policy error while he believed that it was best that the circumstances allowed. I think that there the situation on the frontline did not necessitate such a radical move unless there was political/bureaucratic pressure. Napoleon is probably wrongly credited with saying "He who defends everywhere, defends nowhere".
The US, UK, and the Soviet Union, on the other hand, had no such shortages by 1944- they had plenty for both.
Fashion weeks are on and have you guys found any new, interesting models?
It's been unusually hard for me. NYFW's new models this year have been generic and depressive looking so far and it's hard to find potential stars/likes.
But it's nice to see http://www.bellazon.com/main/topic/44150-anastasia-ivanova/page-11 back again this year!
I have only 3 new ones so far:
This model has a Gemma Ward "magical fairy girl" thing going on : http://forums.thefashionspot.com/f52/amalie-schmidt-243237-4.html
The other is "Santa Struko".
I like "Predator" and "Alien". Both are a bit warlike types of sci-fi.
The same ! World Invasion: Battle LA was a pretty good movie too IMO, you should give it a try if you never yet watched it.
Have you watched Fury ?
-- --
I was too much focused on my favs on which i try to post and updates the threads to discoved new models...but these are all pretty nice.
Maybe Amali looks a bit too much young but Santa (funny name 
) looks nice !
But who is it on the first picture ? Gemma ?
Yes- sort of, I made a thread on it. I disliked it for reasons probably similar to how gang-bangers, police officers, and Narcs probably dislike the (otherwise stellar) "Training Day" (with Denzel Washington).
Who the hell named her? (lol.) The first picture is Santa.
We still have many fashion weeks coming up and I'm trying to find new names.
i see, though i never watched Training Day so far, i still have too ...
Since she's Russian, i guess her parents not even know what Santa is in the US. In France Santa mean nothing for exemple.
Do you know Rugby ? The World Cup just started and i'm quite excited about it 
Sorry, I don't follow Rugby.
Ah, I never knew she was Russian! If I were to guess, I'd would have thought American.
Watching it in french kind of ruins the point though (Washington got an Academy Award for it). I think it should stream in english somewhere.
I believe that the Fury/Training Day director's methods/projects are similar to Brian Azzarello. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Azzarello
He's a very entertaining comic book writer. Some of his stuff like 100 bullets are extremely entertaining.
They research the context at hand, and cherry pick some of the controversial stuff & string them together into a movie. Fury had a thug tank crew & greenhorn and Training day starred a criminal cop & rookie. Training Day is terrific entertainment in that way, but I can see real world professionals and criminals squirming. Still, it's amazing watch, I highly recommend it.
It's amazing that there are tons of WW2 movies but no modern ones tackle armored warfare in an acceptable way- the core of WW2 and the most fantastic part IMHO. I guess it must be a pain to get into production.
Yeah Rugby is not very popular in North America
She's Lithuanian actually, i just checked. Well it change nothing
Yes i agree to say that some movies have to be watched in their originals languages...
I try to watch more movies in English now but i still need the subtitles for a better understanding.
Thanks for the link !
I didn't know him, i'm not into Comic books, i know the classic ones, thanks to one of my brother, but not much more ...
But i will try to watch the movie, the least i can do
I think thanks to the news imagery effect and special effect they could do really great movies about it, it's so far no directors had the project in hand...
Stanley Kubrick would have been great for such a great project about it i think.
Yea, I prefer no dubbing. The worst thing I've seen is the Russian custom of dubbing with russian dialogue entirely over the original language (without erasing). Its' really awful, yet they do it frequently. If you get a chance, it would be cool to see what you think of training day.
I think a "Bridge too far" comes closest but also not really. (the bridge attack against Frost's Paras by 9.SS "H" armored recon battalion) I was hoping that Fury would help do something for the genre (like Saving Private Ryan helped spawn a wave) but wasn't counting on it. And it didn't happen!
It's funny but the spirit of "Mad Max:Fury Road" (which I really enjoyed) reminded me of North Africa and parts of the Soviet Union 1941/1942. The vision of a giant swarm of thousands of vehicles, moving and fighting as it they were one body.... with the sky dotted with aircraft.... is a stunning image. Like the stuff in star wars, really
A co-US/UK production of Normandy and the Falaise pocket would seem like a no-brainer but it hasn't happened.
Yeah i noticed, translations are never a good thing for the movies where the dialogs are the key of the movie. When a movie is English for exemple, i always try to watch the movie with originals voices...For exemple, Shaun of the Dead is french was not funny at all compared to the oringinals voices.
Saving Private Ryan has nothing to do with Fury imo...Fury is only about violence...The scene when the Americans arrive in the German village was really painful for me ...I keep a bad memory of the movie because of the that...
We can't say this movie is a realist one too...
I still have to watcg the new Mad Max too... Usually i prefer to watch SciFi movies. I really enjoyed Interstellar, have you watched it ?
Do you like Scifi ?
Nowadays WW2 isn't very trendy anymore in Hollywood it seems. When the super heroes era will be over, i guess maybe we could have more WW2 movies themed...
Why was that scene painful?
Fury was like "Inglorious Basterds" to me-just entertainment, and no genuine attempt at crafting a setting. The battle scenes were done sub-par even though they had the real equipment (Sherman, Tiger I tank). The USA only fought the tiger I tank around 2-3 times in WW2, and in very small actions.
No, I haven't seen Interstellar. I like certain types of sci-fi. I usually get my sci-fi fix from comics though..I don't watch television, but may download a film or see a film in the theater once in a while. what are your favorites? Star wars, etc?
Saving Private Ryan has nothing to do with Fury imo...Fury is only about violence...The scene when the Americans arrive in the German village was really painful for me ...I keep a bad memory of the movie because of the that...
We can't say this movie is a realist one too...
I still have to watcg the new Mad Max too...
Do you like Scifi ?
Nowadays WW2 isn't very trendy anymore in Hollywood it seems. When the super heroes era will be over, i guess maybe we could have more WW2 movies themed...
I feel like it will never come- at least in the quality that I like. In my mind, I've given up on anticipating it- I'll just read the best material. I want to see Bagration 1944, Lvov' 1944, Barbarossa, Berlin 45', Stalingrad, Caen 1944, Falaise 1944, Battle of the Bulge, etc. done on screen with top quality. Band of Brothers was a step in the right direction. Stalingrad 1993 had excellently researched set pieces. A Bridge too far was a good job. What would you like to see covering WW2? do you have any interest in specific formations?
I finished Zhitomir-Berdichev. am going to start reading "Blood Steel Myth" next week. This is a long tome based off of german primary documents on the Battle of Kursk:
http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Steel-Myth-II-SS-Panzer-Korps-Prochorowka/dp/0974838942
This is a super-book on Kursk. 1,700 pages- the result of gigantic research project at russian and german archives. As expected, it's expensive $220-250 and should be.
http://www.rzm.com/books/ab/ab5252.cfm
Bergstrom's "Ardennes Offensive" is also a superior book on the battle of the bulge. It came out last year, and supercedes the prior texts on many issues.
Idk, the story about the two germans woman/girl was painful...
Well, Star Wars is not really scifi for, it's a space opera ...Like Star Trek etc...
My favs scifi movies, hmm... a lots actually...Aliens 1 and 2, Terminator 1 and 2, Interstellar, The Island, Close Encounters of the Third Kind (not sure if it's scifi too), Jurassic Park 1, Blade Runner and so many others... i really like Speculative fiction...Prometheus was awesome !
About WW2, you mentioned the biggest episods of the war, so i would like to see a movie from all of them actually, always curious at least. But as i said, i'm interested in the biography more than in the material and etc... So, i would prefer watch some good fresco about Soviets or Germans generals ... Have you watched Valkyrie (2008) ? it was pretty good imo.
To be honest, my biggest dream about war movies or historical movies, is to watch a large fresco about the Napoleonic Era, from the wars of the French Revolution, to Waterloo. As for the WW2, the campaign of Russian 1812, is almost unknown...But not in one and only movies, in severals chapters, where we could see and understand how the Maréchal d'Empire (Davout, Lannes, Soult, Ney, or Murat) were born poor and begun Marshal or Prince of the Empire etc...
We have lots of books (von Clausewitz ...) and literature about it, but almost no movies...
Thanks for the links
text wall
My favorite Sci fi movies are:
-Blade Runner-probably number 1, Alien 1 and 2, Minority Report, The 5th Element, Terminator 1/2, Predator, Mad Max: Fury Road, The Thing, Prometheus (I've read the comics too and used to discuss it with Jennka, donbot, and Baron- the comics expand the story somewhat)
Children of Men was terrific. There are others that I can't recall now. I haven't been into movies very much these past few years, so I am probably out of date.
==========================================================
Valkyrie- a film with good production values. Another good one is "Conspiracy" (about the Wannsee conference to exterminate the Jews). As before you've noticed that I am skeptical of the post-war German stance of "normal germans" vs. "the nazis". I had the same issue with Stalingrad 1993 and the german TV series, Generation War. I consider them, on average, complicit. I believe that far more germans wanted and even enjoyed the war than they admitted to, post-war. They were promised the spoils of war-land and more wealth. Also, greatness. I have always been skeptical of von Stauffenberg. I see him less of a hero and more of an opportunist. To me, he was at heart a Prussian militarist and part of the german military elite caste. (headed by the Old Prussians and the German general staff). They wanted the war just like the nazis were and were ruthless.
Related to this is the Barbarossa 1941 and Case Blue 1942 adventures. Both are remarkable, and represent a crusade of the human spirit to me. Tremendous endurance and drama from the side of the attacker. A few words is "Overachievers, but in the other direction....". The superb book called "Death of the Leaping Horseman: The 24. Panzer-Division at Stalingrad" illustrates this with great detail. This was a professional Prussian division with blue blood personnel (from wealthier backgrounds- the "vons") with years of training and war experience. They went to war with the mentality of a "holy" crusader- trying to win glory for Germany. When they buried their dead commander in southern Russia, they proclaimed that "he lies on German soil now". That's the type of people they were. One can say that they fought for great evil, but one cannot say that they were not brave men!
With Napoleonic era I am not so familiar. But still there is that spirit of the conquer that keeps people (in the US also) fascinated with them. They are more interesting then the enemies that eventually defeated them. I remember skimming through Clautsewitz' "on war" when I was very young. There seems to be a great interest in Napoleonic maneuver and tactics that has survived the passage of time. I believe it has something to do with trying to 'escape' the cycle of frontal attrition.
There seems to be a lot of computer games/war games about Napoleonic wars as well. The Soviets also made very high budget films about the Napoleonic wars. There should be some on youtube.
What do you think of Clausewitz?
War of the Worlds was pretty interresting too. And Cloverfield.
This upcoming serie looks interesting as well : http://www.bellazon.com/main/topic/58102-the-man-in-the-high-castle/
Yes i agree, the resistants was very rare in the Reich, or very late. What amaze me is to see that only Prussian officers tried to "resist" ...But they wanted to peace on the West front to continue at the East...seems logical to me.
This idea need a Alternate history to be write about it lol
Well, i know Napoleon can be seen only as a conqueror, but IMO, it was not, or not only. The ideas of the Revolution were universal. And they stayed even after the defeat of la Grande Armée...anyway, just amtter of point of view
Yes i saw this movie, but honestly it was very bad, they showed french like nazi...it was not objective. In France we did a TV show in 4 episods who was intereting.
Here the 1rst episod in English:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5nwB4dDDgk
It was good, but only a stuff for the tv so ...It worth something better lol
Yes Napoleon Total War is a must !
About Clausewitz, his analys is very credible, it's a basic, everybody should have read it imo It's not only about the war, but it's matter of strategy too. And Philosophy of the war, why the war, and what to do with the war, it's like a guide.
I don't like Clausewitz himself, but it worth a movie too. His life was short, but passioning.
Philip K. Dick gets a lot of his material turned into movies (Blade Runner and some others).
As far as I know, prussian officers were represented disproportionately at the top levels of the german military- these are the men that are born and bred to be soldiers. (they grow up going to military academies, do general staff college education, fought in WW1, etc.) At heart they were militarists and many were wealthy propertyholders. They were also supposed to be "apolitical" in the sense that they served whatever german government was in power. This of course, often did not happen- either they held the nazis in contempt or liked them. But those that held them in contempt- like von S.- was more about the nazis not conforming to their own militarist vision. It would make sense to me that groups among them were the ones that conspired against the regime- they were up top, they understood grand strategy better than some officer in the field, etc.
Well, i know Napoleon can be seen only as a conqueror, but IMO, it was not, or not only. The ideas of the Revolution were universal. And they stayed even after the defeat of la Grande Armée...anyway, just amtter of point of view
I think the Russians and the British lean towards the negative view of Napoleon rather than position of him being the enlightened warrior. It is interesting to see these slants, often so predictable because the historian happens to live in that particular country. There are lot of Napoleon likers in the US as they were not mortal enemies of the USA.
About Clausewitz, his analys is very credible, it's a basic, everybody should have read it imo
I don't like Clausewitz himself, but it worth a movie too. His life was short, but passioning.
Why don't you like Clausewitz?
There is also Sun Tzu. Truthfully I found both classics to be difficult to image as one would need to understand ancient warfare. I remember seeking out material that summarized the main points.
I should take another look at "On War". I have a copy of it.
To me, "On War" is like "Wealth of Nations" (for economics). It does have some excellent theory but theories are very dependent on circumstances. Some are better than others, and all have the possibility of failing.
I find it interesting that the French marshals and many of the commanders are noted "personalities". It leads me to wonder if they were really this colorful or was it just wartime and post-war exaggerations by historians.
What are your favorite 'concepts' from 'On war?'
Well K. Dick and Asimov books are the classic scifi...Though Asimov did not have a that much big success at theater lol Probably because he was more into hard science fiction ...
I always thought that for Prussians, war was a way of life or even an art lol They felt the military situation was out of control, and the total war made by the nazi was not their vision of the war... The proof is the chivalrous vision of the war of Romel lol Especially near the end ...
I know in the US Napoleon has lots likers, but after all, a Bonaparte created the FBI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Bonaparte_(Attorney_General)
Napoleon as been the most prestigious enemy of Brtitain, or at least they pretend it since they defeated it Nowadays, the best specialist of Napoleon are actualy british ...
Why i don't like Clausewitz ? Well, maybe because he dedicated his whole life at the destruction of France, it's good reason ahaha
Sun Tzu is interesting but is book is only about philosophy of the war... He's a the study of the war what Platon is at the classical philosophy An introduction. It's a classic too.
What you mean by "personalities" and "colorful" ?
Well, every concepts from his analysis are interesting... Napoleon always tried to create the decisive Battle, he never succeed But What is interzting is to noticed that every concepts from Clausevitz can be applied during a campaign !
Napoleon was a mathematician, an Artillery Specialist, and a genius... He never wrote book about his art of the war, because he created it battle adter battle, so ...the war is not something we can study like this and wrote definitive balance sheet and lessons...
Asimov's book "I robot" was made into a quite throwaway will smith movie.
I have read half of GFM von Bock and Halder's war diary. Bock was the epitome of an "old Prussian" but he was exceptionally experienced with high level organizational matters and mobile warfare. In reading his thoughts and decision making, it is clear that his mental concept of war is 19th century blended in with the mid 20th. He seeks, for instance, constantly to regain maneuver, avoid attrition (Sun Tzu's 'flow like water around rocks")), and set things up to culminate into the gigantic encirclement. There are weaknesses to this approach however. They are so slanted towards maneuver that they don't optimize their forces for the "often necessary" battles of attrition.
American approaches to war is very much like an accountant/engineer/business manager's approach. We seek to manage risk. It's very different. Soviet mentality is also very different.
I have doubts about the Prussians- I find them to be incredibly archaic and rather self-centered in beliefs. While they treated the British as equals, they saw the peoples in the east as "inferiors" and a type of underclass to be ruled over. The main difference is that they did not seek to execute genocide on them like some of the extremists of the SS. After the great war, they wanted to reclaim their 'birthright' and become more important in a society that had begun distancing themselves from them.
Rommel was not a Prussian. He was from a middle class background.
====================
What I mean is the French marshals and generals all have extensive stories behind them that sound more like it's invented to make them more appealing. Stuff about their personalities, temperament, lifestyles,... Napoleon too- like many rulers he seems to have a lot of propaganda about himself so I wonder what is real and what is the exaggeration.
the war is not something we can study like this[
Most of those theories- like those in finance and economics- are like a guiding light down a dark path. Sometimes they are the wrong path, sometimes the right one. Clausewitz and say, Napoleon would put their theories down extracted from their professional experience. "Mental models of the mind".
Of my favorite -possibly apocryphal- napoleon adages is "he who defends everywhere, defends nothing".
I don't know the Napoleonic wars well enough, but from generalizations I was under the impression that Napoleon was largely an advocate of innovative approaches to operations, tactics, and organization. He understood the old forms, and then sought the new to succeed. Very much like any other innovator in other professions- people like him become competent in the old, and then seek out ways to reinvent the nature of the 'game'.
I have some material on Napoleon intelligence gathering methods and his command & control. It was clear to me they approach these things by seeking decisive improvement.
A flaw behind 19th century focus, however, is that concentrating resources on operational/tactical excellence wins battles, but not necessarily wars. This was a fundamental flaw of the germans in both world wars. Super strategy (which of course, operations and tactics are a part of ) is ultimately king. A waring party can be inferior in operations and tactics yet superior overall strategy will win them through.