With which undoubted certainty - completely sums every corner of my character. Consider yourself fortunate to have been graced by it.
All we need now is a picture of some Pacific flora.
(sorry, just wanted to poke the bear  :evil:)
Top 10 World War II action films of all time
-
@Private:
Isn’t that what your avatar pic is from PP?
That’s right Hoff. Perhaps not QUITE the best film ever made, but I did watch it again a few months back and find it very entertaining.
I will say this for Galaxy Quest… if you are a fan of the original Star Trek series from the 60s (and we’re only talking the original series… if you’re unfamiliar with it, or only like the newer franchises, this does not apply to you)… then you will love the heck out of Galaxy Quest. 99% of the references in Galaxy quest either are subtlety (or not so subtlety) speaking of things common to the original ST series and/or the lore and the cast rivalries with one another after the series ended. Galaxy Quest is an homage to the original Star Trek series, but if that’s not your cup of tea, then Galaxy Quest will fall flat for you.
-
_“Fit of Rage”?_� :roll:
I don’t think Mr Fantastic could reach as far as you are with that statement. At this point, you’ve pretty much gone to the Chewbacca Defense on your rant… and no… I will not look at the monkey.
It was deliberate hyperbole. Though you did seem agitated, perhaps you need another treatment?
I don’t think Mr Fantastic could reach as far as you are with that statement. At this point, you’ve pretty much gone to the Chewbacca Defense on your rant…
Hey man, if you can’t read and follow along with my spelling it out for you, that is your own problem to deal with.
and no… I will not look at the monkey.
Not sure what monkey that was but here, let’s look at this one. There are similar features between the two of you:
-
And now with the personal insults… congratulations on revealing your true self. How petty.
-
And now with the personal insults… congratulations on revealing your true self. How petty.
It was less of an insult and more of a commentary; you have to read into it a bit. You continue to avoid actually talking about the issue/evidence at hand and only respond with emotionally charged commentary.
Besides, you were the one who brought up monkeys. Even though this is an orangutan.
And my true self is very apparent on these boards. You can look at my post history and others here will vouch for me as being a fair and honest member who is not prone to throw out personal insults. It just isn’t worth my time. That said, I do welcome you to the boards because very evidently new blood revitalizes stagnant discussions.
-
@Virginia:
I will get a little personal here. My father was a ball (belly) turret gunner on a B-17. His plane was shot down over Yugoslavia, and he was rescued/saved by Yugoslav partisans. Received the Bronze Star. He HATED ‘Memphis Belle’. He said about the ‘colorful metaphors’ so often used, "We never talked liked that! We never used language that harsh" His words not mine. So I’m a little biased and would never include that movie in a top 10. Just my opinion. the movie has merits, as many of you testify. I’m just biased.
Out of curiosity, did your dad ever see the colour documentary Memphis Belle (made around 1944, and which I’ve seen), which is probably very different from more recent feature film of the same name (which I haven’t seen)? He might have liked it. That one doesn’t include any foul language. In fact, one of the things I found the most striking about dialogue in the film was the (admittedly staged for the soundtrack) intercom communication between the members of the bomber crew as they battle enemy fighters over Germany. The crew members show excellent signals discipline: they keep their voices level (no shouting) and with one exception they strictly limit their statements to businesslike tactical information: things like, “Fighters, ten o’clock high” or “B-17 going down, two o’clock low.” The single exception is the one that proves the rule: one crewmember makes an irrelevant comment or an emotional remark about something (I forget the details), and the pilot’s voice is immediately heard on the intercom circuit telling him to cut out the chatter.
-
I like Letters from Iwo Jima. Action is present and Japaneese perspective is interesting.
-
@CWO:
@Virginia:
I will get a little personal here.� My father was a ball (belly) turret gunner on a B-17.� His plane was shot down over Yugoslavia, and he was rescued/saved by Yugoslav partisans. Received the Bronze Star.� He HATED ‘Memphis Belle’.� He said about the ‘colorful metaphors’ so often used, "We never talked liked that!� We never used language that harsh"� His words not mine. So I’m a little biased and would never include that movie in a top 10.� Just my opinion.� the movie has merits, as many of you testify.� I’m just biased.
Out of curiosity, did your dad ever see the colour documentary Memphis Belle (made around 1944, and which I’ve seen), which is probably very different from more recent feature film of the same name (which I haven’t seen)? He might have liked it. That one doesn’t include any foul language. In fact, one of the things I found the most striking about dialogue in the film was the (admittedly staged for the soundtrack) intercom communication between the members of the bomber crew as they battle enemy fighters over Germany. The crew members show excellent signals discipline: they keep their voices level (no shouting) and with one exception they strictly limit their statements to businesslike tactical information: things like, “Fighters, ten o’clock high” or “B-17 going down, two o’clock low.” The single exception is the one that proves the rule: one crewmember makes an irrelevant comment or an emotional remark about something (I forget the details), and the pilot’s voice is immediately heard on the intercom circuit telling him to cut out the chatter.
I have no idea if he ever saw that.
-
I don’t need to have seen a movie for it to go on the list… if there is enough consensus that it belongs there, than I will add it for sure.
-
Sink the Bismarck?
-
The famous line from that is the captain telling his men to “keep going” even if the freaking thing is sinking into the water.
-
@Imperious:
The famous line from that is the captain telling his men to “keep going” even if the freaking thing is sinking into the water.
The captain or the “fleet” commander?
Fleet commander is my favorite! He’s very cheerful.
-
The fleet commander, Admiral Lutjens, spends much of the movie smugly saying “That is good, that is very good,” while the ship’s C/O, Captain Lindemann, spends much of the movie protesting feebly “But, Sir…” every time Jutjens decides to do something stupid or dangerous or arrogant. Lutjens only changes his tune at the end of the film when the ship is being blown to hell all around him and when Lindemann angrily asks him, “So where is your Luftwaffe cover now?” to which Lutjens replies in baffled surprise, “But the Fuhrer promised me!”
-
not sure i saw that a long time ago. Perhaps this fleet commander
-
Actually, the character in the film who says “Keep going” during the final battle is the British Commander-in-Chief (technically Admiral Tovey, though he’s not named). It’s how he replies to an officer who says that the British ships need to stop shooting at Bismark because their fuel situation is critical. Tovey, in real life, was so frustrated that Bismark was still afloat despite the pounding she was taking that he exclaimed in frustration, “Somebody get me my darts!”
-
@CWO:
The fleet commander, Admiral Lutjens, spends much of the movie smugly saying “That is good, that is very good,” while the ship’s C/O, Captain Lindemann, spends much of the movie protesting feebly “But, Sir…” every time Jutjens decides to do something stupid or dangerous or arrogant. Lutjens only changes his tune at the end of the film when the ship is being blown to hell all around him and when Lindemann angrily asks him, “So where is your Luftwaffe cover now?” to which Lutjens replies in baffled surprise, “But the Fuhrer promised me!”
Right on! :-D
-
One of the best Lutjens/Lindemann exchanges in the film occurs after the Bismarck’s rudder is damaged. Lutjens asks Lindemann when he’ll be able to put divers over the side to inspect the damage. Lindemann answers, “At first light, if the sea isn’t too rough.” Lutjens says dismissively, “I do not care about the sea.” Lindemann replies, “I was thinking about the men.”
Admittedly, this was a 1950s-era British film in which the Germans are portrayed in a somewhat cartoonish way (especially Lutjens, whose lines and their delivery are sometimes quite over-the-top), but in fairness the real Lutjens wasn’t very likeable (he was regarded as cold and distant) and the real Lindemann was greatly respected by his men as a fatherly figure to whom they could bring their problems.
-
@CWO:
One of the best Lutjens/Lindemann exchanges in the film occurs after the Bismarck’s rudder is damaged. Lutjens asks Lindemann when he’ll be able to put divers over the side to inspect the damage. Lindemann answers, “At first light, if the sea isn’t too rough.” Lutjens says dismissively, “I do not care about the sea.” Lindemann replies, “I was thinking about the men.”
Admittedly, this was a 1950s-era British film in which the Germans are portrayed in a somewhat cartoonish way (especially Lutjens, whose lines and their delivery are sometimes quite over-the-top), but in fairness the real Lutjens wasn’t very likeable (he was regarded as cold and distant) and the real Lindemann was greatly respected by his men as a fatherly figure to whom they could bring their problems.
I also don’t understand why Luntjens wouldn’t go after the cruisers and the Prince of Whales. I understand the importance of sinking merchant ships, but losing additional warship would have been a big blow for the Royal Navy.
-
I also don’t understand why Luntjens wouldn’t go after the cruisers and the Prince of Whales. I understand the importance of sinking merchant ships, but losing additional warship would have been a big blow for the Royal Navy.
In the actual Bismark operation (not the movie), Lindemann likewise strongly disagreed with the decision by Lutjens not to go after the crippled Prince of Wales after Hood was sunk. This is one of those cases where both men had a valid point, and in which the Germans didn’t possess information which might have been decisive, but in which, on the whole, Lutjens did made the wrong call.
Lutjens was right about the fact that his primary mission was convoy-raiding, and about the fact that Hitler was skittish about risking his prize battleship in a major sea battle. That being said, one gets the feeling that Lutjens wasn’t the kind of admiral who was prepared to take full advantage of an unexpected target-of-opportunity situation. (And he was certainly not a William Halsey-type admiral who was inclined to charge in battle first and think later.) Lutjens sat in silence for a long time when he heard that two major British warships – they turnd out to be Hood and PoW – were approaching, and as I recall he continued to do so even when the British ships started shooting, to the point where Captain Lindemann made the comment that he wasn’t about to let his ship get shot out from under him. Not exactly the kind of aggressiveness that Nelson would have approved of.
Blowing Hood out of the water in just six minutes should have given Lutjens a large morale boost (it certainly did so to the Bismarck crew in general), and so should have the fact that Bismarck damaged PoW sufficiently to cause her to disengage and retreat. Lindemann was quite correct in thinking that Bismarck had a golden opportunity to finish off a second British capital ship right after sinking Hood, and that this would have shocked Britain (and caused elation in Germany) even more than the sinking of Hood did, and he was quite correct that it was lame for Lutjens to dismiss that opportunity on the grounds that this wasn’t his mission. On the other hand, neither men knew the full extent of PoW’s condition. Critically, they had no way of knowing that the almost-brand-new PoW was having teething problems with the anti-flash shutters on its main guns, which tended to jam in combat. And in fairness, the stark reality was that the Royal Navy could afford to lose two capital ships to a far greater extent than Germany could afford to lose the Bismarck. Lutjens, in the end, may simply have been operating under the same principle that kept British and German capital ships in port for most of WWI: given how hugely expensive these ships were, it was considered more important for them to stay afloat than to sink the enemy.
-
And in fairness, the stark reality was that the Royal Navy could afford to lose two capital ships to a far greater extent than Germany could afford to lose the Bismarck.
I’m not sure if I agree with you there. I guess an argument could be made that keeping the Bismarck alive (for sure) and the disruption this creates is a larger advantage than the possibility of killing another capitol ship and surviving.
-
I think the obvious is missing here… Lutjens, as the overall commander of the entire operation, was actually given direct orders by the Fuhrer himself not to engage enemy capital ships in direct combat if at all possible (and as everyone knows, his main mission was the sinking of convoys, not capital ships). This direct order from the Fuhrer goes a long way in explaining why he sat doing nothing when PoW and Hood initially opened fire on the Bismarck, and why after Hood was destroyed and PoW was laying smoke and escaping why Lutjens refused to pursue… he was, quite literally, following Hitler’s orders to the letter.
I don’t recall if Lindemann was aware of Hitler’s specific instructions, but certainly Lutjens was, and this explains all the questions people have of Lutjen’s actions (or lack-there-of).
The actor portrayals of Lutjens and Lindemann in the 1960 film Sink the Bismarck should be the last thing anyone uses as a reference to anything that actually took place during Operation Rheinübung. It’s like taking Bruce Willis’ advice on how to conduct NASA spacefaring operations because he stared in Armageddon.
Suggested Topics
