Help support TMP


"Ridiculous Mistakes Made in WW2 Movies" Topic


10 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the WWII Media Message Board


Action Log

25 Jan 2019 6:39 p.m. PST
by Editor in Chief Bill

  • Removed from WWII Discussion boardCrossposted to WWII Media board


Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land
World War Two at Sea
World War Two in the Air

768 hits since 24 Jan 2019
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP24 Jan 2019 3:56 p.m. PST

"One of the biggest bombs of Ben Affleck's career, and there have been several, happens to be one of the most error-ridden war movies Hollywood has ever produced: Pearl Harbour (2001). It wasn't just a bad Affleck film, it is one of several films to come out of Hollywood's "dream factory" that can't seem to get it consistently right when telling wartime narratives.

Of course, filmmakers have to enhance stories to lure audiences into theatres. But accuracy is often sacrificed in the process. In Pearl Harbour, Affleck's character is a member of the Air Force who joins the Eagle Squadron.

In reality, that couldn't happen. Neither would he have flown a Polish plane, as he does in the film. This movie is riddled with as many errors as bullets, and bad reviews followed swiftly upon its release…."
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

mysteron Supporting Member of TMP25 Jan 2019 2:59 a.m. PST

Battle of the Bulge for me. It wasn't the use of Patton type tanks proxying WW2 tanks but the scenery . The scenery was just all wrong in my eyes.

Richard Baber25 Jan 2019 6:56 a.m. PST

1965 I`m hardly going to pick holes………

U587, Pearl Harbor, Fury – now those errors in very modern films are just totally unforgivable :(

Marc33594 Supporting Member of TMP25 Jan 2019 6:57 a.m. PST

Not a bad article. For me I can excuse the one on one confrontation in Enemy at the Gates as literary license. I do try and remember these folks are not making documentaries but trying to sell tickets. In fact most of us put up with some of the nonsense, like the insistence on some sort of romance, just to be able to see at least some war films. But some do go beyond reasonable license.

Fred Cartwright25 Jan 2019 7:19 a.m. PST

Battle of the Bulge was shot in Spain IIRC. Not very Ardennes like. Every film has a few howlers, but if the film overall is good I am willing to overlook them. Pearl Harbour stinks on so many levels, that's 3 hours of my life I won't get back.

Walking Sailor25 Jan 2019 9:57 a.m. PST

I can excuse … Enemy at the Gates
Apparently, this 'indian" didn't forgive Hollywood.
ENEMA AT THE DOOR: a Foreigner Will Not Notice, a Russian Will Not Forgive link

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP25 Jan 2019 12:00 p.m. PST

(smile)


Amicalement
Armand

Lee49425 Jan 2019 4:59 p.m. PST

Yeah. Pearl Harbor. Worst of the worst. Followed closely by Battle of the Bulge.

Still it is fun to watch some of the great actors struggling with dumb parts and some of the horrid actors trying to play heroes.

And then there is the part where the woefully undersized Oklahoma "sinks" by raising completely out of the water and then flipping upside down. Hysterical!!

If the directors had spent 5 minutes reviewing real WWII film footage then these films might not have been so lousy.

Cheers!

Marc33594 Supporting Member of TMP25 Jan 2019 5:43 p.m. PST

I said I could excuse the one on one as mentioned in the article, not that I could excuse the movie.

Mobius25 Jan 2019 6:28 p.m. PST

You don't think inglourious bastards is even worse?

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.