Definition of war movie

[Kuokkanen]

When you watch a movie, what makes you think if it is war movie or not? How do you define war movie?

[andym]

A film that has a main storyline that includes scenes and references of warfare and battle.

[JudgeDredd]

A movie with a war theme and the lack of a "love interest"..."for the ladies"!

[sullafelix]

It is true to facts. Either with fictional names or real but definitely real situations. Also real period weapons, I can't stand to see Pattons with iron crosses on them. I have tried to like " Battle of the Bulge " for so long but it is just so out there with some things and the incorrect weapons.  " Steiner ?"  ( Coburn ) is an excellent war movie even though it does have a love interest and all fictional characters. Then again I can't stand " Zulu " even though it seems to fit my bill. I think of it as a love story between the two British officers. I also liked the Stalingrad sniper movie ( ? ) even with the love interest and inaccuracies. I guess it's the individual move and how it " takes me there " instead of feeling I'm sitting in my living room watching a movie.

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: sulla05

It is true to facts. Either with fictional names or real but definitely real situations. Also real period weapons, I can't stand to see Pattons with iron crosses on them. I have tried to like " Battle of the Bulge " for so long but it is just so out there with some things and the incorrect weapons.  " Steiner ?"  ( Coburn ) is an excellent war movie even though it does have a love interest and all fictional characters. Then again I can't stand " Zulu " even though it seems to fit my bill. I think of it as a love story between the two British officers. I also liked the Stalingrad sniper movie ( ? ) even with the love interest and inaccuracies. I guess it's the individual move and how it " takes me there " instead of feeling I'm sitting in my living room watching a movie.

Sulla

That speaks volumes...the fact that you liked Enemy at the Gates and not Zulu!!![:'(]

Also, each to there own, but seriously...how can you state "It's true to facts" and mention Enemy at the Gates in the same post? Doesn't work m8. There was very little accurracy about Enemy at the Gates. The premise was there, but the execution was bloody terrible.

As for Battle of the Bulge...they didn't have the "equipment" that film makers have today. At least they tried to recreate the Battle of the Bulge. So they used Pattons. I expect if they had CGI (as Enemy at the Gates did) they would have created a masterpiece...as it was, they did what they could with the technology of the day and made a pretty good effort.

[Peter Fisla]

Stalingrad (from the director of Das Boot)
The tin red line
Letters from Iwo Jima

These are my top 3 war movie choices...

[Zakhal]

War movie is a movie abt people fighting in a war. If they dont fight or there is no war then its not a war movie.

[Big B]

I would think the appropriate definition of a war movie would be a movie that; has combat sequences, and its focal story is somehow about characters in battle.
For example, "Good Morning Vietnam" was not a war movie - and "Platoon" was. Even though both are set in Vietnam during the Vietnam War - only the latter is about men in combat - while the former is about individuals during a war. In the same vain - "Empire of the Sun" was not a war movie - while Tora Tora Tora - was, even though both dealt with aspects of WWII in the Pacific.

B

[jwilkerson]

A "War Movie" is a good anti-war movie.
[:)]

[Big B]

[:D]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

A "War Movie" is a good anti-war movie.
[:)]

John Houston, during the Second World War produced "The Battle of San Pietro" (a masterpiece of the anatomy of a real battle that has never been equaled).
He was an Army officer at the time - and produced the movie at the Army's request.
After completing the project, the Army shelved it - saying it was too 'anti-war' for the public to see.

John Houston told the general who made that decision (after being told the news of its being shelved) - (and I quote) "If I ever make a 'pro-war' movie...shoot me".[;)]

B

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Big B

I would think the appropriate definition of a war movie would be a movie that; has combat sequences, and its focal story is somehow about characters in battle.
For example, "Good Morning Vietnam" was not a war movie - and "Platoon" was. Even though both are set in Vietnam during the Vietnam War - only the latter is about men in combat - while the former is about individuals during a war. In the same vain - "Empire of the Sun" was not a war movie - while Tora Tora Tora - was, even though both dealt with aspects of WWII in the Pacific.

B

I thought that was a good idea when I read it, until I realised that Pearl Harbour (the remake) could be included...somehow I lost faith [:D]

[Zakhal]

ORIGINAL: Big B
John Houston, during the Second World War produced "The Battle of San Pietro" (a masterpiece of the anatomy of a real battle that has never been equaled).

The movie is available in the net:

Documentary of the US efforts to take Italy by acclaimed director John Huston. The US Army which commissioned the film refused to show it because it was too honest in its portrayal of the high cost of battle and the difficulties faced.

http://www.archive.org/details/battle_of_san_pietro

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 1290954373

EDIT: Ok I can see why they shelved it

[sullafelix]

I do agree with the inaccuracies of Enemy at the Gates, however it made me feel like I was looking at Stalingrad. Zulu although historically accurate and perfect as far as the uniforms etc. just never grabs me in and it almost feels that I'm watching an English tea party. It might well be my affinity for the Zulu's because there hasn't been an Isandlwana movie that I didn't really like.
 
The different parts of EATGs just feel right. The ferry bombings the human lemming approach to the Soviet attacks etc. The central story I could care less about because I don't believe anything written during the Soviet period to have any truth to it. If Bulge had been done like A Bridge To Far I wouldn't be able to keep my eyes off it, even with the wrong equipment. The ending battle at the ammo dump is just so off from history that it's to much.  The " we have 50 hours ability to attack " and similar things just turn me off completely. It could also be the fact that the Bulge offensive had no chance whatsoever to work, might be clouding my judgement of the movie. Even rabid nazi's like Dietrich and Model thought it was stupid.
 
Saving Private Ryan has some of the best battle scenes, if not the best ever seen. But besides the landing and the battle at the end I'm not really a fan.
 
Then again I don't like reading accounts of what individual soldiers did before or during a battle. I really couldn't care where private Smith bedded down the night before Waterloo or whatever. I like my history dry with very little, I guess you could call it the " human element ". To each their own. I also think that I'm attracted to war movies where I'm interested in the battle.
 
I guess I'm veering from the topic and answering what war movies I like or dislike and not what makes a movie a war movie.

[Dennistoun]

I must say that my top 3 war movies are;
A Bridge Too Far, Gettysburg and the exceptional Ealing Studio classic - Went the Day Well. I don't know if some of you have ever watched this little gem about an advance German unit dropping over a part of Southern England in preparation for the main German invasion, dressing up as British troops, billeting in a quaint English village because its location is of strategic value and how they beat off the Jerries. It is just a really good film. Try it!

[goodwoodrw]

ORIGINAL: teddy

I must say that my top 3 war movies are;
A Bridge Too Far, Gettysburg and the exceptional Ealing Studio classic - Went the Day Well. I don't know if some of you have ever watched this little gem about an advance German unit dropping over a part of Southern England in preparation for the main German invasion, dressing up as British troops, billeting in a quaint English village because its location is of strategic value and how they beat off the Jerries. It is just a really good film. Try it!

I'm with you teddy, ABTF one of my favorite movies, I like Pte Ryan as well, and The Longest Day to. Just purchased and watched Gettysburg for first time this week. A looong movie, but most enjoyable, however, because the sheer length of it, I'm not sure if I could watch it over and over like the others I mentioned. For sheer entertainment value I liked Where Eagles Dare, Burton and Eastwood great casting.
Ron

[JudgeDredd]

If I could just take this opportunity to remind people what the original post was about...[:D]

ORIGINAL: Matti Kuokkanen

When you watch a movie, what makes you think if it is war movie or not? How do you define war movie?

For your favourite war movies thread, either dig out one of the other 5,000 or start another one.

So what makes a war movie to you?

[Big B]

Oh 'Pearl Harbor' was indeed a war movie...it was just a really awful war movie...[:D]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

ORIGINAL: Big B

I would think the appropriate definition of a war movie would be a movie that; has combat sequences, and its focal story is somehow about characters in battle.
For example, "Good Morning Vietnam" was not a war movie - and "Platoon" was. Even though both are set in Vietnam during the Vietnam War - only the latter is about men in combat - while the former is about individuals during a war. In the same vain - "Empire of the Sun" was not a war movie - while Tora Tora Tora - was, even though both dealt with aspects of WWII in the Pacific.

B

I thought that was a good idea when I read it, until I realised that Pearl Harbour (the remake) could be included...somehow I lost faith [:D]

[Grell]

ORIGINAL: andym

A film that has a main storyline that includes scenes and references of warfare and battle.

Exactly, nothing more, nothing less.

Regards,

Greg

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: Grell

ORIGINAL: andym

A film that has a main storyline that includes scenes and references of warfare and battle.

Exactly, nothing more, nothing less.

Regards,

Greg

I would also agree with that, but where does this leave films like The Great Escape and The Colditz Story? Whilst soldiers and WW2 are at the heart of both of these films, the central storyline does not revolve around combat. However, they do not fit easily into another category that I can think of and they are generally regarded as war films...

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: Grell

ORIGINAL: andym

A film that has a main storyline that includes scenes and references of warfare and battle.

Exactly, nothing more, nothing less.

Nothing more? Not even boot camp and propaganda lecture at school, as in All quiet on the Western Front?

Now I throw some titles, and let you judge whether or not it's war movie or not. I'd be grateful if you can tell why it is or not. And try to be serious

The Guns of Navarone
Tora Tora Tora
Pearl Harbor
Ambush (Finnish movie with stupidly translated title)
Kelly's Heroes
Full Metal Jacket
Good morning Vietnam
Courage under fire
Starship Troopers
The Empire Strikes Back
The Chronicles of Riddick