AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion › Act of Valor - new film starring active duty Navy Seals..
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Act of Valor - new film starring active duty Navy Seals.. - Page 2

post #31 of 97
2/18/12 at 4:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Yup...says me.
I have no problem showing the military I pay for in a "positive light," as long as it is a realistic portrayl.


I like The Message here....military service rarely resembles a Hollywood movie.



If our taxes are paying for it and there is profit generated, I want it to go to the U.S. Treasury (where it belongs).

Agreed on all points!

As for realistic protrayal of the SEALS, the documentaries on History and others of their training brings as realistic portrayal as possible. I suspect that Act of Valor will be the other end of the spear, so to speak. I, too, hope it's done well.

Heaven knows your second point is very true. I am a retired pilot of the A-7, A-10, and F-16. I saw Top Gun on opening night with another pilot buddy a the Chinese in Hollywood (we were in Chino for the airshow). I can tell you that despite the silly relationship story line, when the movie ended, my buddy and I were suprised to agree that it was a pretty good portrayal of many things about that world. We all knew/know guys that were much like the characters in that movie. The flying wasn't bad either. I'll take that over the CG as in Red Tails any time.

The night at the bar at Miramar was absolutely true to life for fighter pilot bars up until about the end of the 80s. That particular bar was hopping on Wednesday nights, and was infamous. That era has gone thanks to too many DUIs and political correctness. The culture has also changed, at least in my branch, the air force. That is actually somewhat detrimental to the esprit de corps that is so important in that world. Maybe the navy & marine corps still hang on to some of that. Don't know.

I'll also give a thumbs up for The Right Stuff. (Another infamous bar. )

Regarding profits from Act of Valor, the Treasury in general...or maybe Veterans Affairs, etc. ?
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #32 of 97
2/19/12 at 5:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

The night at the bar at Miramar was absolutely true to life for fighter pilot bars up until about the end of the 80s.

When I watched the Top Gun doc, the real instructors told, that after the movie, they had maybe 18(?) instructors working at Miramar, but the bar had about 500 instructors visiting each night.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 97
2/19/12 at 10:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Agreed on all points!

As for realistic protrayal of the SEALS, the documentaries on History and others of their training brings as realistic portrayal as possible. I suspect that Act of Valor will be the other end of the spear, so to speak. I, too, hope it's done well.

Heaven knows your second point is very true. I am a retired pilot of the A-7, A-10, and F-16. I saw Top Gun on opening night with another pilot buddy a the Chinese in Hollywood (we were in Chino for the airshow). I can tell you that despite the silly relationship story line, when the movie ended, my buddy and I were suprised to agree that it was a pretty good portrayal of many things about that world. We all knew/know guys that were much like the characters in that movie. The flying wasn't bad either. I'll take that over the CG as in Red Tails any time.

The night at the bar at Miramar was absolutely true to life for fighter pilot bars up until about the end of the 80s. That particular bar was hopping on Wednesday nights, and was infamous. That era has gone thanks to too many DUIs and political correctness. The culture has also changed, at least in my branch, the air force. That is actually somewhat detrimental to the esprit de corps that is so important in that world. Maybe the navy & marine corps still hang on to some of that. Don't know.

I'll also give a thumbs up for The Right Stuff. (Another infamous bar. )

Thanx for the stories....and thank you for your service.


Quote:


Regarding profits from Act of Valor, the Treasury in general...or maybe Veterans Affairs, etc. ?

Sure, that works too.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 97
2/19/12 at 12:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Thanx for the stories....and thank you for your service.

Sure, that works too.

My pleasure.

Last night as I was channel surfing and came across the director and producer of Act of Valor, and I thought you'd find it interesting. I did.

After hearing them I began to re-think my opinion about the profits from this. It is difficult for us to know exactly what the arrangement with the Navy was on this regarding costs, therefore exactly who spent for what and how value was assigned/prioritized. This stands to be the Top Gun for the SEALS, therefore has significant value to the SEALS and special ops in general.

They spoke about how they were very dedicated to documenting this story rather than fabricating it. They interviewed a lot of operators and selected four guys that they wanted as the major characters...and all four turned them down. But they did find the guys eventually.

They also pointed out the amazing fact that much of what transpires in the way of action is the real deal as far as continuing training goes. A you probably know, SEALS train with live ammo, and so they used it in Act of Valor. They pointed out that there is zero CGI in the movie. The muzzle flashes, tracers, and impacts are all real. I can't imagine that that was true for all shots like interiors in buildings, but I don't know. I know that you don't want to be anywhere near where larger caliber ammo like 20mm or 30mm is impacting. Even if just steel TP rounds, when that much energy hits the metal frame or parts of a vehicle, there is an intense large flash from each impact and bad hot stuff flies everywhere...much more so that you see in Hollywood effects. Imagine just a typical one second burst from a 4000 round/minute gattling gun! All hell breaks loose.

My point is that participation in this by the SEALS was not necessarily without benefit in the form of continuing training, not to mention the PR benefit. Conversely, none of the flying in Top Gun was routine training missions where a doc camera team could come along and grab shots. Those were Top Gun dedicated sorties. Who paid for the JP-8? Don't know. It can be said that every minute of flying is training to some extent.

Having been assigned as the project officer for a couple of USAF recruiting commerical shoots back in the 80s and 90s that came through our area, I can tell you that those flights are usually dedicated for the commercial shoot. One day of that shoot, a flight of F-16s joined with a KC-135 on an air refueling track up in nothern Arizona. Clay Lacy joined them with his Astrovision Learjet. That was an example of some beneficial (requirement fullfilling) training being accomplished, despite the fact that part of the time was spent getting all the aircraft positioned in hero shots.

Hopefully, there is some proportional sharing of profits, but I wonder if there are specific laws forbidding such. Don't know.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 97
2/19/12 at 1:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

My pleasure.

Last night as I was channel surfing and came across the director and producer of Act of Valor, and I thought you'd find it interesting. I did.

After hearing them I began to re-think my opinion about the profits from this. It is difficult for us to know exactly what the arrangement with the Navy was on this regarding costs, therefore exactly who spent for what and how value was assigned/prioritized. This stands to be the Top Gun for the SEALS, therefore has significant value to the SEALS and special ops in general.

They spoke about how they were very dedicated to documenting this story rather than fabricating it. They interviewed a lot of operators and selected four guys that they wanted as the major characters...and all four turned them down. But they did find the guys eventually.

They also pointed out the amazing fact that much of what transpires in the way of action is the real deal as far as continuing training goes. A you probably know, SEALS train with live ammo, and so they used it in Act of Valor. They pointed out that there is zero CGI in the movie. The muzzle flashes, tracers, and impacts are all real. I can't imagine that that was true for all shots like interiors in buildings, but I don't know. I know that you don't want to be anywhere near where larger caliber ammo like 20mm or 30mm is impacting. Even if just steel TP rounds, when that much energy hits the metal frame or parts of a vehicle, there is an intense large flash from each impact and bad hot stuff flies everywhere...much more so that you see in Hollywood effects. Imagine just a typical one second burst from a 4000 round/minute gattling gun! All hell breaks loose.

My point is that participation in this by the SEALS was not necessarily without benefit in the form of continuing training, not to mention the PR benefit. Conversely, none of the flying in Top Gun was routine training missions where a doc camera team could come along and grab shots. Those were Top Gun dedicated sorties. Who paid for the JP-8? Don't know. It can be said that every minute of flying is training to some extent.

Having been assigned as the project officer for a couple of USAF recruiting commerical shoots back in the 80s and 90s that came through our area, I can tell you that those flights are usually dedicated for the commercial shoot. One day of that shoot, a flight of F-16s joined with a KC-135 on an air refueling track up in nothern Arizona. Clay Lacy joined them with his Astrovision Learjet. That was an example of some beneficial (requirement fullfilling) training being accomplished, despite the fact that part of the time was spent getting all the aircraft positioned in hero shots.

Hopefully, there is some proportional sharing of profits, but I wonder if there are specific laws forbidding such. Don't know.


Damn pilots. Probably the only guys who get to use 20mm or 30mm. Lol the biggest round I've fired was a 25 from an LAV lol. I honestly find it hard to believe they are using live ammo and that fact they claim no cgi. I've seen what happens when a 25 AP/HE round hits and they would have to be far away to prevent any possible injuries to the film crew. They probably only used live ammo for certain scenes

I have a feeling the Navy doesn't want any profits from this film. It's a great way to show the world what the Navy (SEALS) do and will probably pursue them to keep spending on the military
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 97
2/19/12 at 2:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post


My point is that participation in this by the SEALS was not necessarily without benefit in the form of continuing training, not to mention the PR benefit.

SEALS (and other Special Ops) have to train continously, or risk losing their edge when called upon to use their skills "in anger."
And that is expensive and very time-consuming.

Ideally, Special Ops sould spend more time concerned with their mission, and not have to worry about where to stand during the filming of a Hollywood movie.

The PR benefit...I don't know...we have always put those guys up on pedestals (rightfully so).
IIRC, their has been no shortage of volunteers trying out for Special Operations units.


Quote:
Hopefully, there is some proportional sharing of profits, but I wonder if there are specific laws forbidding such. Don't know.

Yeah, I thought active service members were forbidden to do such things....


Quote:
Originally Posted by pokekevin View Post

I have a feeling the Navy doesn't want any profits from this film. It's a great way to show the world what the Navy (SEALS) do and will probably pursue them to keep spending on the military

I would prefer the world DIDN'T know what the SEALs can do.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 97
2/19/12 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

SEALS (and other Special Ops) have to train continously, or risk losing their edge when called upon to use their skills "in anger."
And that is expensive and very time-consuming.

Ideally, Special Ops sould spend more time concerned with their mission, and not have to worry about where to stand during the filming of a Hollywood movie.

The PR benefit...I don't know...we have always put those guys up on pedestals (rightfully so).
IIRC, their has been no shortage of volunteers trying out for Special Operations units.





Yeah, I thought active service members were forbidden to do such things....


I would prefer the world DIDN'T know what the SEALs can do.

Those who do really know what the Seals can do are probably in gitmo are dead by now haha
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 97
2/19/12 at 2:45pm
I'm not as skilled at pasting quotes as you guys.

Oink: "IIRC, their has been no shortage of volunteers trying out for Special Operations units."

But the washout attrit rate is huge! I think there may be some concern. Don't know for sure.

Oink: "....and not have to worry about where to stand during the filming of a Hollywood movie."

As you've read, I've worked in that field for a couple of decades, too. I would agree, but I would bet that the normal way of shooting and set operations were greatly modified to accommodate these guys.

Oink: "Yeah, I thought active service members were forbidden to do such things...."

I've been in that boat. I was already messing around with filmmaking while I was on active duty. I would schedule to do a short film project while on leave. Of course for years I flew as a part-time (traditional) air guard member while doing the mainstream Hollywood work. My point is that there is no restriction as long as it doesn't interfere with your duty or performance or cause a conflict of interest...or a security issue.

Pokekevin: "I would prefer the world DIDN'T know what the SEALs can do."

Great point, and that was brought up and talked about at length last night. They explained that the Navy carefully vetted first the script, then everything that happened to make sure that no classified methods or tactics were revealed. But I'm with you, the more that is not known of those things, the better.
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 97
2/19/12 at 3:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

I'm not as skilled at pasting quotes as you guys.

Use, multiquote.

Quote:

Oink: "IIRC, their has been no shortage of volunteers trying out for Special Operations units."

But the washout attrit rate is huge! I think there may be some concern. Don't know for sure.

No video in the world would prevent that. You dont know if you have what it takes, until you are out there in the mud.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 97
2/20/12 at 5:50am
I just saw a few clips of this that were new to me on an online news piece on this movie. Lots of camera angles from the first-person view. It reminds me A LOT of first-person video games. I'm a big fan of those games, but they are clearly targeting young males. Maybe that's a big "well duh", and it's not necessarily a bad thing, just different from my expectations. I'll still will go see it, just may not bring the wife with me

Cary
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 97
2/20/12 at 6:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokekevin View Post

Damn pilots. Probably the only guys who get to use 20mm or 30mm. Lol the biggest round I've fired was a 25 from an LAV lol.

84mm here.

But I still think Cam Man winns, because an A-10 is just plain awsome.

As for the movie, I do hope they stay on the realistic level. Because it can backfire if its obvious propaganda. I think Black Hawk Down found a great balance in this regard.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 97
2/20/12 at 7:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

As for the movie, I do hope they stay on the realistic level. Because it can backfire if its obvious propaganda. I think Black Hawk Down found a great balance in this regard.

I agree. The use of the "first person view" makes it feel more like a recruitment device. I understand that the Navy initiated the making of this film but I was hoping for more of a Black Hawk Down vibe.

Cary
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 97
2/20/12 at 7:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post


84mm here.

But I still think Cam Man winns, because an A-10 is just plain awsome.

As for the movie, I do hope they stay on the realistic level. Because it can backfire if its obvious propaganda. I think Black Hawk Down found a great balance in this regard.

Those things were beastly. I have some footage of em giving us cas lol. The gau on em is a reallll subwoofer hahah
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 97
2/20/12 at 7:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RolandOG View Post

Says who, you? What's your problem with showing the military in a positive light?


warning: ARFcommer sighted
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 97
2/20/12 at 7:46am
Synopsis...

A Navy SEAL squad goes on a covert operation to rescue a kidnapped CIA officer, while also taking down terrorists who aim to strike America.

Sounds like one of the Rambo movies, or pick your favorite war movie with the same premise. We've seen this before, but this does look to be unique for obvious reasons. This, IMO, is the only way to fight terrorism, not full-blown wars.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 97
2/20/12 at 8:15am
It'll have to go a long way to beat "Battlefield LA", which seemed pretty much like a recruiting film for the Marine Corps. At times it seemed like it was constructed like one of those WWII morale/propaganda films, and maybe that was the intent. Lots of video game type action to appeal to the young male. Not even a hint of character development or plotline for the alien invaders. They existed simply to provide the heroes one heroic situation after another.

One thing you can count on if your film is viewed favorably by the military is access to lots of cool hardware. I kind of enjoy seeing my tax dollars at work.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 97
2/20/12 at 8:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

I think Black Hawk Down found a great balance in this regard.

I agree.
Perhaps some of it had to do with the fact the movie was based on a non-fiction book....


Quote:
Originally Posted by archiguy View Post

It'll have to go a long way to beat "Battlefield LA", which seemed pretty much like a recruiting film for the Marine Corps. At times it seemed like it was constructed like one of those WWII morale/propaganda films, and maybe that was the intent. Lots of video game type action to appeal to the young male. Not even a hint of character development or plotline for the alien invaders. They existed simply to provide the heroes one heroic situation after another.

+1...not a very good movie IMO.


Quote:


I kind of enjoy seeing my tax dollars at work.

I would rather just have the 70k I paid last year returned to me.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 97
2/20/12 at 8:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I agree.
Perhaps some of it had to do with the fact the movie was based on a non-fiction book....

+1...not a very good movie IMO.

I would rather just have the 70k I paid last year returned to me.

Love using tax payers money DD
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 97
2/20/12 at 9:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by archiguy View Post

...
I kind of enjoy seeing my tax dollars at work.

No offense, but I cringe every time I hear the phrase "my tax dollars at work". I'd rather have "my tax dollars" be used on a fun movie than put the soldiers at risk fighting dubious wars.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 97
2/20/12 at 9:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by raaj View Post


No offense, but I cringe every time I hear the phrase "my tax dollars at work". I'd rather have "my tax dollars" be used on a fun movie than put the soldiers at risk fighting dubious wars.

Aww thank you
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 97
2/20/12 at 10:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I agree.
Perhaps some of it had to do with the fact the movie was based on a non-fiction book....

To bad there are no real cool stories with the SEALS involved they could film. But I guess if you want helicopter chrash landings, explosions and terrorist getting shot, you have to turn to Hollywood.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 97
2/20/12 at 11:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

To bad there are no real cool stories with the SEALS involved they could film.

Ms. Bigelow is trying to do just that:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1790885/
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 97
2/20/12 at 1:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokekevin View Post

Those things were beastly. I have some footage of em giving us cas lol. The gau on em is a reallll subwoofer hahah

Wine bottle for scale. Gau-8, 30mm, 2000-4000 rounds per minute. Almost all of my time in it was as an instructor, so I only chewed up old trucks and tanks on the tactical gunnery ranges. It was lots of fun. Remarkably accurate even with the non-computed sight which is all it had when I was flying it.

In those videos you might occasionally notice what sounds like a double burst. Double bursts aren't done, so that is most likely what we heard when on the ground at the range. First you hear the "burst" which is the sonic boom behind all the rounds, then a second later you hear the burst from the aircraft. The first is a loud crackling sound followed by the low "Brrrrrrr" from the gun itself.
LL
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 97
2/20/12 at 2:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

My point is that there is no restriction as long as it doesn't interfere with your duty or performance or cause a conflict of interest...or a security issue.

Quite true. I worked 2 part time jobs when I was in the Army.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I would rather just have the 70k I paid last year returned to me.

Wow. If you really paid 70K in Federal tax, you are in a way different bracket than me!

BTW, thank you for your donation!

Art
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 97
2/21/12 at 1:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I would rather just have the 70k I paid last year returned to me.

Must feel good that what took you a year to collect, only took minutes for Cam man to spend.

Or if a may quote Spock

Quote:


As a matter of cosmic history, it has always been easier to destroy than to create.

But I think no movie have made the SEALS look as good as The Rock did (if we just count out one little incident)

John Schwartzman images and Hans Zimmer composing was apperently a good combination.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 97
2/21/12 at 4:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

But I think no movie have made the SEALS look as good as The Rock did (if we just count out one little incident)

What no love for G.I. Jane?
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 97
2/21/12 at 7:11am
Oink, congratulations on your success. I'm sure that you have already paid your "fair share."

Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

Must feel good that what took you a year to collect, only took minutes for Cam man to spend.

Yes, the cost per hour to operate any of those jets like I flew is pretty impressive. And it was not taken lightly. One thing that is a mild disappointment in that field is that there is never any time on a sortie for just enjoying the flying. Every sotire is cram packed with things to do so that every inch of training and productivity is accomplished. The flight lead has the responsibility to plan, organize and conduct the flight in that way. There would very rarely be the exception that a wingman in a 2-ship would need to RTB due to a problem, and the lead would have some time alone in the MOA (training airspace) to just...fly until the fuel was low enough to RTB. As long as you didn't do something stupid, it was a real treat.

"But I think no movie have made the SEALS look as good as The Rock did (if we just count out one little incident)"

Not top teir PQ, but I really like that movie! I thought Connery and Cage were really good together. I also am biased to like John Spencer who I knew from The West Wing. Terrific guy who always stopped to chat with me on the WB lot. R.I.P. David Morse was also very good in that. He always plays an interesting heavy. I worked on the re-make of The Getaway with him. He drove a '92 Land Cruiser, and I had a '90...so we had fun talking vehicles while in Yuma to do the Juarez hotel shoot-out sequence. He is an imposing 6'6" or better.

"John Schwartzman images and Hans Zimmer composing was apperently a good combination."

I think John does brilliant work. Even Pearl Harbor in gorgeous eye candy. Never worked for him, but met on my first job as an operator when he came to visit the DP I was working for...in 1987 He was really new in town and one of the first notable things he did was shoot a Paula Abdul music video that looked great. Coincidentally, Paula Abdul did a day of choreography on that movie in '87. She choreographed "The African Anteater Ritual." If you know from what movie, you are a movie trivia champion. I worked a number of times with the camera assistants who work with John. Once I mentioned that I would loved to have worked on Pearl Harbor. They immediately said "No you wouldn't!"...indicating that wishing yourself to work with Michael Bay was not advised.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 97
2/21/12 at 9:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

They immediately said "No you wouldn't!"...indicating that wishing yourself to work with Michael Bay was not advised.

Why? Because it's fashionable? Because Megan Fox was right about him on a set? ...One thing for sure his movies, whether people like them or not are often pure delight to look at. Like you said, gorgeous eye candy, and not just for Pearl Harbor.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 97
2/21/12 at 9:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Pearl Harbor

I liked this one....Kate was in it.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 97
2/21/12 at 10:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHolleman View Post

warning: ARFcommer sighted

After a google search I know what that means. No, I'm not a member of that or any gun forum. I'm just tired of people bitching about the military being shown positively.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion › Act of Valor - new film starring active duty Navy Seals..