War on the Rocks just published an article on their best (and worst) war movies. The article is here:
https://warontherocks.com/2023/08/strategic-outpost-goes-to-the-movies/?__s=xlwaqxfp3j5d8o2leqan
To summarize:
Best Movies (in no order)
- Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)
- Restrepo (2010)
- Greyhound (2020)
- The Hunt for Red October (1990)
- Twelve O'Clock High (1949)
- Apocalypse Now (1979).
- The Best Years of Our Lives (1946).
- The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957).
- Dunkirk (2017)
- All Quiet on the Western Front (1930, 2022).
- Top Gun (1986) and Top Gun: Maverick (2022).
Worst Movies:
- Pearl Harbor (2001)
- Battleship (2012)
- Starship Troopers (1997)
- The Hurt Locker (2008)
While I don't disagree with the list, IMHO, there is a huge gap in the list in that it didn't mention Gettysburg, Glory, or "Winds of War/War and Remembrance" (which is admittedly a TV miniseries, and not a movie, but still....)
I can sorrrrt of understand them neglecting the Gods and Generals / Gettysburg duology, for political controversy, but not Glory? Oh well, lots and lots and lots of good war movies.
I for one enjoy "Pearl Harbor" and for that matter the recent "Midway" pseudo-sequel remake a lot -- they're no more ridiculous than "Battle of the Bulge", which I also enjoy more than I suppose I should. And "The Beast" for that matter.
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 03, 2023, 09:28:07 AMI can sorrrrt of understand them neglecting the Gods and Generals / Gettysburg duology, for political controversy, but not Glory? Oh well, lots and lots and lots of good war movies.
I for one enjoy "Pearl Harbor" and for that matter the recent "Midway" pseudo-sequel remake a lot -- they're no more ridiculous than "Battle of the Bulge", which I also enjoy more than I suppose I should. And "The Beast" for that matter.
Midway was pretty good, but I agree it wasn't a great war movie. It was more on the order of "Battle of Britain" or "The Longest Day", in that it is required watching, but it isn't thought provoking, inspiring or otherwise gives an unusual perspective. One thought: Should the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy (extended version, of course) be considered a war movie? After all, they have "Starship Troopers" on the list. If so, it should also be on the list and near the top.
Oh, yeah, didn't even notice Starship Troopers. I don't regard that as being "worst" of anything (nor the best, just entertaining in some ways); but as a "war movie" that opens up a LOT of potential. Including the Starship Troopers anime series, which was much closer to codex, so to speak.
On balance, I'd say StarTroop has more claim to being a war movie per se, than LotR (extended or otherwise) which I'd consider more of a film with war topics and scenes. Sort of like the recent "Dune" duology.
I believe there was a poll of top war films not long after LOTR's came out that picked it as the favorite war movie amongst the voters and yes, I think it's definitely as war movie especially the second and third films. The Raid was also one of my favs that wasn't listed along with the HBO series, Band of Brothers and The Pacific. Glory would probably be my all-time favorite for historical accuracy and just plain-old entertainment. Many I'm sure I have forgotten about.
A best war movies list without Paths of Glory, Waterloo, Das Boot or Come and See?
platoon, casualties of war, we were soldiers, heartbreak ridge, full metal jacket
I notice no one is disagreeing with "Pearl Harbor" being on the "worst movie" list :evil:
Pearl Harbor is schlock of the first order.
Agree with CptHowdy - how are Full Metal Jacket and Platoon not on there??
I don't really think "Red October" and "Dr. Strangelove" are "war movies" but I agree they are very good (except the part where Sean Connery tries to speak Russian). I think of them more as techno thrillers or generic military movies...but I concede there is combat in both of them.
Top Gun '86 is basically a music video with some other bits thrown in to fill up the time...IMHO.
I've always considered that Starship Troopers had its tongue firmly planted in its cheek...and in that light bends toward..."goodish".
In agreement on Pearl Harbor...I still have not been able to watch it all...I always have an urge to lose my lunch watching it overuse the Vaseline Lens effect.
What have they got against "Hurt Locker?"
^Yeah agreed on Top Gun and I also noticed Hurt Locker...weird.
Geesh, Patton didn't even make the list. Although I enjoyed many on the list, not sure I agree with them all being considered at the top of my own list.
Quote from: SirAndrewD on August 03, 2023, 11:16:59 AMA best war movies list without Paths of Glory, Waterloo, Das Boot or Come and See?
This. Also, The Thin Red Line deserves a spot on the list.
Starship Troopers being on the "worst" list makes me raise an eyebrow. It's not really a war movie so much as an over-the-top satire.
And yeah, Top Gun? That's gonna be a nah dawg from me. I'll die on the hill that Top Gun is a terrible movie that only endures because of pop culture nostalgia.
I wouldn't go that far, I love me some Top Gun.
That said, it should not be on the list...especially in lieu of Platoon and Full Metal Jacket.
FIGHT!!
Quote from: Gusington on August 03, 2023, 02:23:24 PMI wouldn't go that far, I love me some Top Gun.
That said, it should not be on the list...especially in lieu of Platoon and Full Metal Jacket.
FIGHT!!
I don't think anyone's going to fight you over that.
I'd hesitate to call either Top Gun "war" movies. I say that having quite liked Maverick.
^Me too.
havent seen a mention of saving private ryan. is schindlers list considered a war movie?
Probably need to bolt down what is actually to be considered a war movie
IIRC there is no war in top gun just a skirmish that no one knows about
Same for red October
Quote from: CptHowdy on August 03, 2023, 08:21:28 PMhavent seen a mention of saving private ryan. is schindlers list considered a war movie?
SPR has a better claim on the list than a few of the others. I absolutely consider it a war movie and a great one. It's not typically in my absolute top but it's solid and there are a few moments in it that I even used to lecture on in class.
I don't consider Schindler's List a War movie. Holocaust films I think have a separate category although there is some crossover.
Come and See is possibly the greatest Holocaust AND war film ever made in combo. It's the most egregious missing item from the list.
"Pork Chop Hill" was a damned fine war movie, also a place that sounds good to eat at. Anything with Audey By-God Murphy in it's got to be a war movie because he was a By-God genuine war hero. By God! :grumpy:
For me the biggest miss is Platoon very closely followed by Full Metal Jacket, for so many reasons that are no doubt clear to everyone here. Come on now.
Quote from: Tripoli on August 03, 2023, 12:33:44 PMI notice no one is disagreeing with "Pearl Harbor" being on the "worst movie" list :evil:
I would definitely not put it on the "worst" war movie list. Technically it's a fine film, looks and sounds great, well paced. Bay meant it to be a modern throwback to 40s patriotic rah-films, and that's exactly what it does.
Bay can do serious films when he cares to. Including one of the best war films ever, "13 Hours"!
Quote from: Gusington on August 04, 2023, 08:07:47 AMFor me the biggest miss is Platoon very closely followed by Full Metal Jacket, for so many reasons that are no doubt clear to everyone here. Come on now.
I agree.
But the problem for me is I could easily come up with a hundred great war movies that 'should be on the list.'
I could easily start rattling off movies like:
-We Were Soldiers
-1917
-Enemy at the Gates
-Master and Commander
-The Longest Day
-Tora, Tora, Tora
-The Enemy Below
-The Alamo (2004)
On top of that...I could probably easily list 200 if you are going to open the aperture and let in techno-thrillers and general military movies.
Then you could start listing movies like:
-The Seven Samurai
-No Time for Sergeants
-A Few Good Men
-The Imitation Game
But that is just me, and besides, nobody really wants to read a list of a hundred or two hundred movies...
^I do!
And sorry Pratt, I love you like another weird uncle, but 2001's Pearl Harbor is hot dog vomit.
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 04, 2023, 08:18:37 AMQuote from: Tripoli on August 03, 2023, 12:33:44 PMI notice no one is disagreeing with "Pearl Harbor" being on the "worst movie" list :evil:
I would definitely not put it on the "worst" war movie list. Technically it's a fine film, looks and sounds great, well paced. Bay meant it to be a modern throwback to 40s patriotic rah-films, and that's exactly what it does.
Bay can do serious films when he cares to. Including one of the best war films ever, "13 Hours"!
OK, I'd be willing to take it off the list and switch it with "Battle of the Bulge." BotB easily gets to the top of the "worst" list after a ten second review of the final battle scene where Henry Fonda's men roll burning barrels of fuel downhill and stop Robert Shaw's advancing German tigers. The movie has only a little redeeming value with its 'panzer porn' scene; "Panzerlied"
To come up with a list of the 10 best war movies, it probably is useful to define what is meant be "best". I would argue that in the context of a war movie, it should provide some interesting insight into man or the human condition, and/or the nature of war, while being largely historically accurate. Using this definition, both LotR and Starship Troopers would probably be kicked off the list right away, as they are fantasy/science fiction. Of course, by saying this, I immediately run into problems with whether to include "Apocalypse Now", so my requirement for reasonable historical accuracy may be "A Bridge too Far" (sorry, I couldn't resist....).
How about this definition: to be considered one of the best war movies, the film or miniseries should, in the context of a reasonably believable combat setting, provide interesting insight into man or the human condition, and/or the nature of war."
This definition would eliminate holocaust movies (as they are not in a combat setting) but also likely eliminate my beloved "Winds of War/War and Remembrance" as it is not in a combat setting (as is really more of a holocaust movie). It may also bump out "From Here to Eternity" for the same reason. But the definition does give a way to "rack and stack" the various candidates.
Also: Glory.
What about, "Enemy Below"? Is that a war movie or a Sub movie? What about, "Memphis Belle", is that a war movie or an Air Force movie? One of the greatest combat scenes ever was in the History Channel's, "Vikings" when they assaulted Paris in Season 4 or 5 I Can't remember, Is that a war series or a Viking series?
We could go on and on what is or isn't a war film and probably never settle it. But it's fun doing it isn't it? BTW, I liked Pearl Harbor, the perfect war movie for people who know nothing about WWII except who won. "13 Hours" was also excellent even though...maybe not a war movie?
^If you're gonna go that way let's never forget the Battle of the Bastards in Game of Thrones.
Quote from: Sir Slash on August 04, 2023, 10:43:18 AMWhat about, "Enemy Below"? Is that a war movie or a Sub movie? What about, "Memphis Belle", is that a war movie or an Air Force movie? One of the greatest combat scenes ever was in the History Channel's, "Vikings" when they assaulted Paris in Season 4 or 5 I Can't remember, Is that a war series or a Viking series?
We could go on and on what is or isn't a war film and probably never settle it. But it's fun doing it isn't it? BTW, I liked Pearl Harbor, the perfect war movie for people who know nothing about WWII except who won. "13 Hours" was also excellent even though...maybe not a war movie?
I would argue that "Enemy Below" is a war movie. You might say it is also in the sub-genre of "submarine movie" :grin: Something like "The Bridge over the River Kwai" is different, as it doesn't fit my definition of being in combat (neither would "Stalag 17"), so possibly there needs to be a separate category of "Military Movies" for those movies in a military setting, but not directly dealing with a combat environment. The "Memphis Belle" (the one done in 1944) I would argue is more of a documentary.
and none of you even mention The Beast. :idiot2:
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 04, 2023, 01:44:56 PMand none of you even mention The Beast. :idiot2:
TANK BOY!!!
I'm actually starting to take some of what I learned being a professional podcaster for my company and starting my own venture on a personal podcast with a friend of mine.
I think this thread has inspired a topic for an early episode. We'd already decided we needed to do something concentrating on MASH and Kelley's Heroes so this could be an expansion on what we'll be doing.
Kellys Heros you say :tophat:
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 04, 2023, 03:06:08 PMKellys Heros you say :tophat:
One of my favorite war movies. Possibly not on a best list, but absolutely a favorite.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 04, 2023, 03:06:08 PMv
v
v
v
v
v
v
Fun fact, I'm going as Oddball to a Halloween Party this year. I just need to get the pants.
Sadly I am NOT sewing any insignia on my 30 year old A-2 but there have to be concessions.
the solution to that are micro magnets. glue them to the patches and put the other magnets inside the sleeve.
production secrets. :magnify:
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 04, 2023, 03:35:09 PMthe solution to that are micro magnets. glue them to the patches and put the other magnets inside the sleeve.
production secrets. :magnify:
Holy crap, that's genius and I have a ton of them in my 40k hobby drawer.
Quote from: SirAndrewD on August 04, 2023, 03:25:42 PMFun fact, I'm going as Oddball to a Halloween Party this year.
Did you also cry when the mean old Sherman beat up the poor Tiger?
I thought I was feeling some, 'Negative Waves' from somewhere.
Quote from: Sir Slash on August 04, 2023, 09:52:40 PMI thought I was feeling some, 'Negative Waves' from somewhere.
POSITIVE WAVES MORIARTY!
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 04, 2023, 01:44:56 PMand none of you even mention The Beast. :idiot2:
See, this is what you get for glazing your eyes over when I haven't even written a wall of text yet!
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 03, 2023, 09:28:07 AMI can sorrrrt of understand them neglecting the Gods and Generals / Gettysburg duology, for political controversy, but not Glory? Oh well, lots and lots and lots of good war movies.
I for one enjoy "Pearl Harbor" and for that matter the recent "Midway" pseudo-sequel remake a lot -- they're no more ridiculous than "Battle of the Bulge", which I also enjoy more than I suppose I should. And "The Beast" for that matter.
Literally the entirety of my first post in the thread, and the second post overall, includes The Beast! (Which reminds me I should get a DVD/Blu of that someday, as my VHS copy is long gone...)
Quote from: Tripoli on August 04, 2023, 09:40:47 AMHow about this definition: to be considered one of the best war movies, the film or miniseries should, in the context of a reasonably believable combat setting, provide interesting insight into man or the human condition, and/or the nature of war."
I could argue that Bay's Pearl Harbor does that, along with being technically an outstanding movie, and set during a war per se (not merely combat -- which I'll allow might disallow Bay's 13 Hours, despite being the superior film in many regards.)
After all, MOST OF Pearl Harbor is a reasonably accurate depiction of the battle of that war (or two battles really, three if you count some Battle-of-Britain thrown in for good measure). The two fictional characters thrown in to replace and do more than two historical soldiers are the primary exceptions, and even they're acting within the context of reasonably accurate history. Its insights into the human condition, or historical people, or war generally and combat more specifically, aren't original (at all), but they're still there.
By that standard, "Battle of the Bulge" still fits, too! -- despite being even more fictional than PH (and technically somewhat weaker in competent production, even for the standard of its time.) The grand finale for 'stopping the offensive' is totally cornball fiction, but most of it up to that point is reasonably accurate; and it has some interesting human-condition situations. Its nature-of-war points are, again, not very original, but they're there!
"Reasonably believable", I'll note, is not quite the same thing as "reasonably accurate
history". Most people accept the combat scenes in the LotR trilogy (two films at least of which are set in the context of a
war per se, not merely combat) as being reasonably believable
under the setting of the story, with a few fantastic-fun exceptions that stretch credulity (usually involving Legolas as the wuxia character). One reason the Hobbit Trilogy isn't as well liked is that its combat scenes are rather less believable, even under the given circumstances, mainly because Peter Jackson made the fantastic-fun more the rule than the exception -- which in itself fits the somewhat different tone of the source material. I still love that trilogy a lot more than most people apparently, but I wouldn't regard even the third film as one of the best
war films -- though it had potential and could have been, and all three films are still very technically competent at being
films which I think has to be part of the criteria. But LotR, or 2/3 of it anyway? -- yeah, I'd rank those as among the best 'war' films, even though they aren't remotely historical (being fantasy fiction).
"Reasonably believable", much moreso "reasonably accurate history", is admittedly a matter of taste to some extent. But that works both ways: despite a lot of historical accuracy, clearly I'm in the minority about PH being reasonably believable overall.
Pearl Harbor may be technically well done but the acting and dialogue are so horrible they overshadow any amazing effects. Come on.
I think we could eliminate some of the more contriverial choices by adding "and not something a woman would be caught dead watching" to the definition.
"300" hasn't been mentioned! :outtahere:
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 07, 2023, 07:25:01 AMQuote from: GDS_Starfury on August 04, 2023, 01:44:56 PMand none of you even mention The Beast. :idiot2:
See, this is what you get for glazing your eyes over when I haven't even written a wall of text yet!
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 03, 2023, 09:28:07 AMI can sorrrrt of understand them neglecting the Gods and Generals / Gettysburg duology, for political controversy, but not Glory? Oh well, lots and lots and lots of good war movies.
I for one enjoy "Pearl Harbor" and for that matter the recent "Midway" pseudo-sequel remake a lot -- they're no more ridiculous than "Battle of the Bulge", which I also enjoy more than I suppose I should. And "The Beast" for that matter.
Andrew missed it also, admittedly many eyes autoglaze a Pratt post due to your verbose nature. :ThumbsUp:
Quote from: Gusington on August 07, 2023, 09:14:47 AMPearl Harbor may be technically well done but the acting and dialogue are so horrible they overshadow any amazing effects. Come on.
I don't think we've watched enough of the same other movies to compare what horrible acting and dialogue are like. Some of the acting and dialogue are fine, they aren't like cheap 1950s Bert T Gordon sci-fi flicks a la MST3K.
(I did say "some". ;) )
Quote from: bobarossa on August 07, 2023, 09:37:00 AMI think we could eliminate some of the more contriverial choices by adding "and not something a woman would be caught dead watching" to the definition.
"300" hasn't been mentioned! :outtahere:
Speaking of some occasionally horrible acting and dialogue...! But still not 'worst' level horrible.
"Autoglaze" may be the name of my techno-trance performance club-jockey name if I decide to go into that business.
Hm, considering the number of hot Ukrainian babe-jockeys in techno-trance music, maybe I shouldn't be joking about that...!
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Ukrainian+techno+trance+2023
I read your posts Pratt, even if I don't always understand everything in them. :headscratch: But there's a lot of other stuff that gets by me as well.
One of my all-time favorite War Movie scenes, even if it may not be a War Movie, is the superbly well-done naval battle at the end of, "In Harm's Way". I could watch it a hundred times and it'd never get old. How often do you see John Wayne blown out of the water?
I will go a step further and say the acting in Pearl Harbor is, indeed, some of the worst I have ever seen.
I'll just leave you with this - for a movie about the Navy there sure are a ton of wooden soldiers in it.
Thank you, thank you...please try the veal.
Pearl Harbor is pretty bad but no, most of their "worst" movies don't truly belong on a worst list.
MANos thE HANDS of FATE?
(As an example of what I regard as bad acting.)
Again, restarting an old, dead and buried thread.
WTF is Top Gun on that list for???? Gawd damn son, but that's nuttier than a peanut field.