What Do You Like in a War Movie?

[Jungle Rot]

Along with militaria collecting, I also make films as a hobby. Often times, I incorporate militaria into my movies (don't worry - the valuable stuff stays at home or has a reproduction version!) In the past I've focused on the Vietnam conflict as it was my main interest getting into the hobby. Recently though I've decided that I'd like to try and make a WWII movie, as my interest has shifted more towards it and I finally have the capabilities to pull it off.

 

I don't have a strong idea on what direction I want to go with it, though I've been playing with some plot ideas in my head. However, as I think about it, I decided I wanted to know what my primary audience - fellow collectors, history buffs, and reenactors - like to see in war movies (so like a real Hollywood studio, I can market to you ). So, what do you like to see in war movies? What about them draws you to see them? I know historical and uniform accuracy is a key point, but what do some war movies do that appeal to you otherwise? Or likewise, what do some war movies do that you don't like (cliches etc.)

 

Interested to hear what you have to say. Just to be clear, I'm not asking for concepts for war movies like in the "What would you like a miniseries about" thread.

 

-Brent

[KySoldier]

I find it very hard to watch a war movie or any time period movie, that's not authentic. The movie has to be very detailed in every aspect to appear set in whatever time and place of the story.

[ka bar]

What a fantastic topic!

 

I like war movies that have realism (authenticity and honesty), plenty of flowing action and are based on real events and as you said correct gear.

 

I like them to be gritty and emotional

 

I like WW2 as a setting as that period really interests me

 

A movie that has made an effort with production is awesome

[Hellcat]

Authenticity/Accuracy is of the utmost importance.

[RustyCanteen]

IMHO films (as a medium) do different things. For example 'Patton' was a pretty good example of acting, and George C. Scott was very engaging with a powerful performance and that is a good thing. Like any good actor, he brought his character to life and I could overlook inaccuracies because his acting was convincing. But another contemporary movie "Tora! Tora! Tora!" brought aboard a lot of big name actors, good authenticity but too much material to fit into a film; result is that it was a great war film but the cast (for the most part) did not have a chance to really connect and that hurt the story a little IMHO. I'm fine with something that is accurate historically and has good acting, I'm not okay with a film that sacrifices acting and plot to get that 30 second closeup (insert cool collectible) every 5 minutes. Let the props speak for themselves, we don't really need to see the 1944 date and manufacturer name on a lensatic compass, or the 'type II, 3rd pattern' doohickey screw that holds the rear site onto a rifle.

 

I realize films are limited by budget and what you can get, stand-ins and mock-ups are a fact of life. I agree with the above posters that authenticity can make or break a film for a lot of people into vintage things or militaria. If a film is set in 1942 and a soldier is wearing a mitchell cover on a helmet then (to a lot of collectors) that bursts the bubble and we know we are not in 1942. Bottom line, we see a movie because we are willing to believe we are seeing the depicted event/time period, but if props are bad/inaccurate then it can break that illusion and that detracts from the entire movie. Just do not go overboard on making the focus of historical accuracy 'in your face' quite literally. I am okay with seeing actors tell the story the best they can while the props take a backseat ride.

 

So research and don't be afraid to double check the specifics. (Hairstyles! One of the greatest flaws in some otherwise good period films is the hair. Women in the 1940s did not have 1960s beehives, etc).

 

Just my thoughts.

[Clayton]

I like war movies that are shot in black and white, Schindler's List comes to mind.

 

I'm also hoping as the 100th anniversary of WWI generates more interest among the public, there will be an important WWI movie.

 

And I would add to this thread, I like commercials that have historic military themes. I remember I once saw a commercial, also shot in black and white, as I recall, about a bank some where that was introducing some new banking program. The theme of this commercial was the importance of innovation. This mini drama showed WWI German officers being surprised and in a state of fearful confusion as an Allied tank came rumbling on the battlefield for the first time.

 

Last year I saw a commercial presenting an American Spanish-American soldier and a beautiful Cuban woman enjoying the mixture of cola and Bacardi rum and the subsequent Cuba Libre cocktail created by this concoction. I find these military themed commercials entertaining.

 

Best regards to all,

 

Clay

[ka bar]

Oh, I WOULD like to see a great WW2 movie based on the field medic.

 

They are usually as background characters in the movies I see

[David D]

What I look for in a war movie is...

- historical acuracy

- good acting

- using slang from the time period

- music from the era, it is always good to through a little Glenn Miller in a WWII movie

-good back ground like if you are doing a January 1945 movie make sure there is snow

That's pretty much all I can think of right now.

 

-Dave

[BOLO]

Historical reenactment , life in the field, firing weapons, the same stuff they show on the History Channel

 

you could even do a film without any talking and have a story told by a narrator while soldiers can be reenacting a battle or walking through the jungle , mountains, etc more like a documentary.

 

you could do a story about WWII small arms and tell the history and use old war time photos along with some reenactment and firing demos of small arms like the M1 carbine, the M1 Garand, the M16, etc

[V42]

Hi,

 

For me, the movie has to be a really good one. Should be taken from a real event, if possible. Acting, actors, equipment and special effects have to be right on. Too many stupid movies out there just for the sake of making a movie. The way 'Fury' was filmed along with 'Band of Brothers', 'Saving Private Ryan', 'We Were Soldiers' and 'The Pacific' were all excellent movies or made for TV and they should set the standard of how war movies should be made.

 

Bill

[VladimirBerkov]

Authenticity is important, but story and acting is too. I enjoy watching things just for the scenes of the period, trying to pick apart details, etc, but those aren't the movies that really resonate. That's why so many particularly older films where by today's standards the period authenticity is sub-par are still so enjoyable; the creators knew how to tell a story and the actors were well chosen and good. All the stitch-nazis and little details won't save a bad plot.

[45ACP]

The average movie fan is not going to know how many stitches a 1942 blouse is suppose to have and they don't care. They are there for the action, acting and story line. I'm going to get a lot of heat but if your going to make money you have to do what you can to keep costs down. That my mean a reproduction of a 1942 blouse with the wrong number of stitches. Most movie fans are like me I go to movie to be entertained so I can over look a of the a few flubs for good acting and plot. Plus movie goers won't know or care they want a good movie. So be as accurate as you can afford.

[Steve B.]

I like authenticity and NO love story.

[audacia cum prudentia]

The most important things :

 

1) A good and entertaining and believable plot

 

2) Quality acting

 

3) Quality directing

 

4) historical authenticity as eye wateringly wrong stuff turns me right off, but I understand that 99.9% don't give a monkey's turd if that type of undershorts weren't in use until August 1946

 

5) Something that does not depict Airborne/Para/Ranger/8th AF - again

 

6) A film about the friggin' Hammelburg raid, come on somebody, I first gave the book to Spielberg when they were making SPR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Sregez80]

Coming from the younger generation I would have to say the best part of any war movie is intense, seat gripping fight scenes.

 

But from a history buffs view I would have to say there are a couple key things.

 

1. Sound accuracy... I hate it when movies use the same gun sounds for each gun, a BAR is not going to sound the exact same as a Thompson. Make sure the sounds are realistic.

 

2. New story line.....showing a side of war that hasn't already been done a million times before helps a lot to keep watchers interested, this is why I LOVED Fury.

 

I would have to agree with all the other earlier posts with everything else mentioned. Just thought I would throw in my Two Cents

[ww2imp]

Something along the lines of Company Commander http://www.amazon.com/Company-Commander-Classic-Infantry-Memoir/dp/1580800386

. Don't get to broad in your subject matter. This is why Platoon, To Hell and Back, The Story of GI Joe, and the Combat TV series was so successful. Small unit action and stories are easy to compile and depict and don't cost a fortune. You can even embelish a little with the micro plots becuase localized actions (IE 2 man recon scouting missions) could be made up of anything. You can even throw in a little romance in there as well. There is one huge requirement though. The writer must be excellent and not corny. The more intelligent and not gratuitous the narrative the better. You must have an excellent military/technical advisor to make it credible. Just my two cents...

[Bellumbill]

Good topic - I've always said a really true war movie no one would go see! My thought for a screen play would start with a huge open field, completely denuded of trees and full of mud with Monte Cassino in the background. First thing you see is a hand come up with an empty k ration box being tossed out full of a soldiers morning bowel movement. Then a few shells fly over and some explode on the foreground. Then its over a few heads pop up - first line "anyone get hit"? Next thing you see is a bloody fox hole and some medics checking around. Then later some guys come up with some food, ammo crates, and letters. Maybe a patrol is run at dusk. I think you can all see my point. Life in an infantry unit is pretty boring and brutal punctuated by moments of sheer terror and not the sustained action a minute, jump cut stuff that has typically been war movie style. I like to see something like that regardless of what the general public needs or wants.

 

Best to all!

 

Bill K.

[TLHSS]

I like aliens, swimsuit models, and hip hop singers in my war movies ...

 

[Backtheattack]

Most important things are a correct action in time, like movies "build" around real actions in wartime, and correct uniforms, weapons and equipment of this time. For instance, there are so much movies around using modern tanks in World War II action. Better ones where done during the last years, but some low money movies are still terrible productions.

[12thengr]

Like this one......

[38Driver]

Go track down a copy of "Battleground". Small unit, good acting, authentic, not too preachy, black and white. Better yet go online and search for an image of Sgt Kinney played by James Whitmore. Just a single image demands that you learn more.

 

Still top of the heap for me in War Movies.

[stealthytyler]

Realism... when was the last time you heard a supersonic crack in a war movie?