Pacific was a letdown for me, but BoB is one of my all-time favorites. And air warfare? The only aspect that I would be happier with would be submarine warfare (the Germans were not the only ones who did great stuff with their boats), but aerial combat comes in a close second.
More like BoB 10/10, Pacific 8/10. It was not nearly as amazing as band of brothers, but it's still a very well done show. People were just disappointed it didn't match BoB level of greatness, and i somehow doubt this will either, but fingers crossed.
fucking hell, this world NEEDS another world war just to have something fucking NEW for a change to endlessly base movies, games and tv shows on for the creatively BANKRUPT media producers of the world (primarily america, lets face it.)
More like BoB 10/10, Pacific 8/10. It was not nearly as amazing as band of brothers, but it's still a very well done show. People were just disappointed it didn't match BoB level of greatness, and i somehow doubt this will either, but fingers crossed.
Air battles will be damn fun to watch - but I'd like to see one about tanks or (as most ww2 fans keep saying they want to see) Russian/German forces...
chiv wrote:
world war 2. again.
fucking hell, this world NEEDS another world war just to have something fucking NEW for a change to endlessly base movies, games and tv shows on for the creatively BANKRUPT media producers of the world (primarily america, lets face it.)
so sick of ww2 themed shit.
Yeah well - you either hate it or love it. I love everything that has to do with WWII.
I'd give Band Of Brothers 10/10 and The Pacific 8/10. (only cos i had problem keeping track of who's who..)
shitloads of new stuff in my pc. Cant keep track of it all.
i saw bob back in when it was released by hbo, ot was fucking awesome but now if ill rewatch it, think ill find it boring, ww2 themes just dont appeal to em anymore
pacific wasnt "bad", but it lacked the characters and the emotional link you made with them. Hope they go back to BoB style, but maybe a bit more fighting. How about a good mix between BoB and Pacific ?
Band of Brothers is definitely one of my favourite shows ever, so fuck yeah (assuming that the quality will remain that high). Saving Private Ryan was damn good as well..*keeping fingers crossed*
Pacific had good production, good actors, and a good script. But the casting was terrible. I mean for starters, how do you manage to cast so many people that are completely forgettable? They were all fine actors, but their faces and their charisma was negligible at best. This is why their characters never got to you, not because of a bad script or dialogue, but because of the casting. Look at Winters, that man has a face that sticks out in a crowd, Mukk, Pinkala, Speirs... I remember them as if they were people I met in real life. That's fucking casting. Someone dropped the ball with The Pacific, I felt it in the opening 20 minutes. That rich kid had a face that said Joe Schmoe and it went downhill from there (because I can't stand a movie without characters).
Pacific had good production, good actors, and a good script. But the casting was terrible. I mean for starters, how do you manage to cast so many people that are completely forgettable? They were all fine actors, but their faces and their charisma was negligible at best. This is why their characters never got to you, not because of a bad script or dialogue, but because of the casting. Look at Winters, that man has a face that sticks out in a crowd, Mukk, Pinkala, Speirs... I remember them as if they were people I met in real life. That's fucking casting. Someone dropped the ball with The Pacific, I felt it in the opening 20 minutes. That rich kid had a face that said Joe Schmoe and it went downhill from there (because I can't stand a movie without characters).
If they are good actors they can make stand out characters.
I very much think that Pacific had a very weak script compared to BoB. No one I know cared no shit about the forced love stories in that.
Plus I and I think alot of europeans feel the same way that without Nazis in ww2 flicks, there is just something missing
More like BoB 10/10, Pacific 8/10. It was not nearly as amazing as band of brothers, but it's still a very well done show. People were just disappointed it didn't match BoB level of greatness, and i somehow doubt this will either, but fingers crossed.
This. Show was depressing, but I can only imagine that's how it was back then.
Pacific had good production, good actors, and a good script. But the casting was terrible. I mean for starters, how do you manage to cast so many people that are completely forgettable? They were all fine actors, but their faces and their charisma was negligible at best. This is why their characters never got to you, not because of a bad script or dialogue, but because of the casting. Look at Winters, that man has a face that sticks out in a crowd, Mukk, Pinkala, Speirs... I remember them as if they were people I met in real life. That's fucking casting. Someone dropped the ball with The Pacific, I felt it in the opening 20 minutes. That rich kid had a face that said Joe Schmoe and it went downhill from there (because I can't stand a movie without characters).
If they are good actors they can make stand out characters.
Naw man, I disagree. Some people are socially and genetically predisposed to not be interesting people. They can take a million acting classes and really get into their roles but by lack of charisma and posture (etc.) cannot simulate certain roles. This is why certain actors could not take on certain roles (Caesar, Hannibal Lecter, The Joker, etc.) - the guy who acted Muck in BoB could never shoulder the role of Winters, it isn't because he's a bad actor - it is because he just doesn't have the charisma or leadership qualities. The opposite is true as well, a charismatic guy like Jack Nicholson couldn't take on a "Joe Schmoe"-role either, he tried in one of his movies and he STILL (even though he toned down literally EVERYTHING) was the center of attention in pretty much every scene because of his voice, his charisma and personal qualities.
Do you honestly believe that it is a mere coincidence that only people that stand out in one way or another, regardless of acting capability tend to become famous? There are stellar "unseeming" actors out there that could never take a leading or supporting role. People like this get their moment to shine in movies like "Tinker tailor soldier spy", because movies like that have lots of room for them. But in "superhero" movies (Gladiator, Batman, Band of brothers, etc.) these people will just be a part of the side-cast, they're great actors still, just not charismatic enough. And charisma rules cinema.
BoB level productions from german and soviet POV would be great. Maybe one day. There's still loads of potential in WW2, people are just tired of the same old US-centric stories, and rightly so.
fucking hell, this world NEEDS another world war just to have something fucking NEW for a change to endlessly base movies, games and tv shows on for the creatively BANKRUPT media producers of the world (primarily america, lets face it.)
so sick of ww2 themed shit.
I feel ya, really bored of all these movies/games/w/e else based on WW2.
Pacific had good production, good actors, and a good script. But the casting was terrible. I mean for starters, how do you manage to cast so many people that are completely forgettable? They were all fine actors, but their faces and their charisma was negligible at best. This is why their characters never got to you, not because of a bad script or dialogue, but because of the casting. Look at Winters, that man has a face that sticks out in a crowd, Mukk, Pinkala, Speirs... I remember them as if they were people I met in real life. That's fucking casting. Someone dropped the ball with The Pacific, I felt it in the opening 20 minutes. That rich kid had a face that said Joe Schmoe and it went downhill from there (because I can't stand a movie without characters).
If they are good actors they can make stand out characters.
Naw man, I disagree. Some people are socially and genetically predisposed to not be interesting people. They can take a million acting classes and really get into their roles but by lack of charisma and posture (etc.) cannot simulate certain roles. This is why certain actors could not take on certain roles (Caesar, Hannibal Lecter, The Joker, etc.) - the guy who acted Muck in BoB could never shoulder the role of Winters, it isn't because he's a bad actor - it is because he just doesn't have the charisma or leadership qualities. The opposite is true as well, a charismatic guy like Jack Nicholson couldn't take on a "Joe Schmoe"-role either, he tried in one of his movies and he STILL (even though he toned down literally EVERYTHING) was the center of attention in pretty much every scene because of his voice, his charisma and personal qualities.
Do you honestly believe that it is a mere coincidence that only people that stand out in one way or another, regardless of acting capability tend to become famous? There are stellar "unseeming" actors out there that could never take a leading or supporting role. People like this get their moment to shine in movies like "Tinker tailor soldier spy", because movies like that have lots of room for them. But in "superhero" movies (Gladiator, Batman, Band of brothers, etc.) these people will just be a part of the side-cast, they're great actors still, just not charismatic enough. And charisma rules cinema.
A good actor ofcourse means that he has got "it" and has charisma. About Jack Nicholson are you talking about The Last Detail, because he did a very good job at that I thought. You also mention few people can play The Joker - where you the 1 guy that along with the casting team and Nolan, thought that Heath Ledger would do a good Joker, not to say anywhere near Jacks?
But ya I know what you are saying - there is a reason for type casting, but as with Heath Ledger you just never know.
A good actor ofcourse means that he has got "it" and has charisma.
In that case our definitions differ. I can recognice small-part actors that do excellent roles and act very proficiently, but lack the charisma to be recognizable.
Quote:
About Jack Nicholson are you talking about The Last Detail, because he did a very good job at that I thought.
No, I mean that movie where he plays this average nobody. The character is meant to be low-key and unassuming but Jack being Jack naturally made the role very, very interesting and he, as he almost always does, stole the scenes.
About Schmidt I think it was called.
Quote:
You also mention few people can play The Joker - where you the 1 guy that along with the casting team and Nolan, thought that Heath Ledger would do a good Joker, not to say anywhere near Jacks?
But ya I know what you are saying - there is a reason for type casting, but as with Heath Ledger you just never know.
Did you see Heath's audition? I haven't. But from the interviews and "behind the scenes" the audition for the role made him one of two or three that were considered and he apparently knocked them out of the water.
Face it men. There will never be anything as good as BOB.
Yep, I think you're damn right Monkey , but one can dream..
BoB was so great that I would be content even with a slightly more "bastardized" show, go figure. xD
I have no idea. I didn't watch any of his movies... or maybe one, that comedy where he played a knight. Could barely remember it. I didn't have any expectations of him as I didn't really know him prior to that role. Oh yeah! Looking at IMDB, I did see "The sin eater", he was good there.
A series on a WWII bomber squad? Sign me up!
It's a great heroic theme, lots of potential awesome dogfighting scenes, and probably the one WWII theme that has not been overused. I only remember Memphis Belle from the 90s. Liked that one, if not just because of the subject.
The Pacific wasn't that bad, but it needed perhaps a bit more backstory for the characters. I didn't like it the first time, some characters playing a big part in one episode and then just disappearing just confused me.
But after reading the book on which it was based (by Hugh Ambrose, great read btw), I enjoyed it a lot more the second time.
The chance to get shot down while bombing cities in deep German territory was in the area of 80%, maybe more. Either by the flak from the ground, or the Luftwaffe, one of the strongest and experienced air forces at that time. The planes weren't bulletproof, and had a crew of 10. A tour of duty was set to 25 missions, and the average crewman had one chance in four to survive a mission.
it takes balls to jump off a roof but it's not heroic
mass murder with little strategic value is not heroic
a bomber who risked themselves to get more accurate hits on strategic targets would be heroic
i have high hopes but i hope they made pointers about the weakness in the pacific script
having a proper airwar sounds awesome though
it hasn't really been done well yet
there's been a bunch of films but none have really captured all it can be
memphis belle was a fun bomber film and one of the few successful films in the man-machine genre (das boot, beast of war)
bomber squads are for cowards, who have no issue killing thousands without seeing them. And especially in ww2, when they basically just bombed cities ....
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
(assuming that the quality will remain that high). Saving Private Ryan was damn good as well..*keeping fingers crossed*
