Act Of Valor
- Thread starter PHArchivist
- Start date
firesprite
Master Member
I'm with Art. I don't see anything wrong with the military wanting to have something show a positive face to counter all the negative ones that we're usually shown by the news media.
Nothing wrong but some do not think it is appropriate, you know our tax dollars being used to help fund a Hollywood production.
Personally I heard about this film 2 years ago from some of my friends who are still active
duty Operators and there was some controversy among them about it
Personally I heard about this film 2 years ago from some of my friends who are still active
duty Operators and there was some controversy among them about it
I don't have a problem with it but some in that community do.
Ever since the Bin Laden Mission, I know a few members in DEVGRU that cringe every time Team Six is brought up in the media.
They do NOT like the spotlight
Ever since the Bin Laden Mission, I know a few members in DEVGRU that cringe every time Team Six is brought up in the media.
They do NOT like the spotlight
Celtic007
Sr Member
The movie was completely funded by the film makers, not tax payers
"The film cost the taxpayers nothing, Mr. Anderson emphasized. It was financed independently and made collaboratively. Although there was a script, the service members essentially played themselves. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/m...m-with-active-duty-members-of-navy-seals.html
"The film cost the taxpayers nothing, Mr. Anderson emphasized. It was financed independently and made collaboratively. Although there was a script, the service members essentially played themselves. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/m...m-with-active-duty-members-of-navy-seals.html
firesprite
Master Member
Yes, I know. Frankly, I think that they're publicizing "Team 6" too much. Having more or less instant coverage of their successes in eliminating Bin Laden (while giving a boost to morale for the country and to the White House's popularity) cut short the half-life of any intelligence they gained from it and may, in the long run, done more harm than good.
However, that said, I think that Act of Valor is a good thing to have had produced because it's "based" on actual missions that more likely than not aren't recent enough to interfere with current intelligence they're working on. It gives us insight as to how these men think and work. It shows that they're not trigger-happy 'cowboys' (as evinced by their firing discipline during the operation near the US-Mexico border). It also shows that they're not mindless grunts, but also investigators who put together pieces of what might seem like disparate information to form a picture of a threat they can act to neutralize.
I'm not under any illusions that it'll change the minds of everyone who hates the military, but it might make people be a little more open-minded about the good that can be done.
That was only to protect any secret info regarding tactics or operations.
The U.S. specops like to be in the background, but the public loves the fact that these guys are the boogie men in the terrorists' nightmares. We also like the fact that something is showing that these are the good guys not how the media loves to portray the U.S. military.
I think the thing with Team Six is that most Americans were just, I hate to say overjoyed, but glad to know that Bin Laden knew that it was the U.S. military that had him and he had a minute to let that sink in before they popped him. I think they should have just said a Navy SEAL team though. Still I can't think it would be that hard to identify any of them for any intelligence purpose. Also for anyone to know what intel they found, presumes that Bin Laden was sharing it. I don't know how they worked, so maybe it wasn't compromised in any way. Who knows.
Either way I cannot wait until next year's Oscars because I'm sure they will just throw awards at this movie... :lol
Trust me no tatical operations they did not want compromised never were even filmed.
Final cut was just the navy dotting their I's and crossing their T's.
I know a few original plank owners of Team Six would have liked to capture Obama.
They would have got ALL sorts of Info from him before the end.
Final cut was just the navy dotting their I's and crossing their T's.
I know a few original plank owners of Team Six would have liked to capture Obama.
They would have got ALL sorts of Info from him before the end.
PHArchivist
Master Member
Apollo, did you mean Osama?
Kerr Avon
Master Member
Damn! there goes that Mission!
:lol Man I am going to catch it at the re-union if I go this year! :lol
:lol Man I am going to catch it at the re-union if I go this year! :lol
cocomonk22
Sr Member
One of the SEALs in this movie, PO1 Aaron Vaughn, was one of the DEVGRU SEALs killed in the Chinook shoot down last year if Afghanistan.
(Fallen SEAL)
(Fallen SEAL)
I viewed it the other way around.
No actor could touch what these guys do.
IMO this movie made all the ones being previewed before it look silly in comparison.
It was a "reality check" that I think alot of folks need.
As i stood in a check out aisle at my local grocery store after watching this film today, I looked at all of the tabloids that litter the news stands: snooki this and snooki that.... WHO CARES!
People are so bombarded with bullsh*t that we really FORGET about the REAL heroes in this world.
Its THOSE men that I look up to.
rocketeer25
Sr Member
Saw it tonight and thought it was pretty powerful. I loved the letter that was being written to the son. Great stuff to live by.
Normally after a movie, a loud soundtrack kicks in and everyone noisily rushes to the exits. Not this one. As the credits came up, it was as quite as a church. It seemed as if the entire audience was paying their respect to the men and women represented by what we had just seen on the screen.
Lonnie
Normally after a movie, a loud soundtrack kicks in and everyone noisily rushes to the exits. Not this one. As the credits came up, it was as quite as a church. It seemed as if the entire audience was paying their respect to the men and women represented by what we had just seen on the screen.
Lonnie
Timmythekid
Sr Member
Errrr....not sure what negative faces you think the media puts on the US military, but it seems pretty much like criticism has been absolutely off-limits since '01. It's not the late '70s anymore, and no one is spitting on returning vets.
Full disclosure here, don't live in the states and look at the whole thing from the point of view as an impartial observer. As such, if they're putting this film out there as a work of fiction film I'm being asked to pay admission to go see, then I've got to evaluate it as such. I've got no axe to grind, but you can't coast by on "They're heroes in real life!" if you expect people to put out $15 bucks a pop. You need to provide a decent cinematic experience first and foremost.
That said...as a film and not as a love letter...the thing is not much of a piece of filmmaking. The writing is hackneyed, predictable, and downright offensive at times, showing off cartoonish super-villains with no concrete discernible goals or motivation beyond the absurd party line of "They hate us for our freedom!" which thankfully died nearly a decade ago (not saying we have to sympathize with the terrorists, but to give a damn about what's being put on screen we need to know WHY these guys are doing what they are, and they need to be more developed than "STINKING A-RAB TOWEL HEAD #1!!"); the performances (and, guys, these ARE performances...the fact of being real-life SEALS is a gimmick for this film - this is not real life so apart from being technical consultants their careers are irrelevant) range between high-school drama club, flat and uninteresting, and periodically embarrassingly amateurish when butted up against actual actors. Not surprising as they aren't actors. But that's not an excuse for crap acting, it's an argument that this thing needed actors. Despite a couple of interesting shots, the photography prefers to fetishize hardware over presenting compelling visual storytelling. Great I guess if you work for Janes, or are a DoD contractor, but a disservice to the film.
In the interest of not offending guys who honestly have insanely difficult and dangerous jobs, in the interest of showing appreciation to every person serving in the US forces there's been an enormous amount of excusing shoddy work over this thing. Most of you wouldn't accept this stuff from a film if it didn't have the baggage of "REAL AMERICAN HEROES!" but instead was a Segal movie, and without a horse in this race I can't excuse it here. I understand where you are coming from, but these guys deserve better than this movie.
The film is awesome no matter how you look at it. It keeps you on the edge of your seat and the combat photography is the best I've ever seen.
Why some critics blast it for plot, acting, or some other dumb reason shows me they just are on their high horse.
This is good old fashion movie fun like the old days of Rambo, Top Gun, or real old school war movies. That's what's so brilliant about it. It has the modern edge of an old formula and I miss those movies. Movies don't always need to be about plot, character development, and great acting. Sometimes they can just be fun.
Sounds like to me there is a minority of critics with a pen and paper that are too smart to have fun and try to ruin it for everyone else.
The irony is in 20 years this film will come on TV some Saturday afternoon and I won't be able to turn it off, where as most of the crap that wins awards will be collecting dust on a shelf.
Just look at Star Wars and whatever "film" won the oscar that year. Yep...I can't remember either.
Why some critics blast it for plot, acting, or some other dumb reason shows me they just are on their high horse.
This is good old fashion movie fun like the old days of Rambo, Top Gun, or real old school war movies. That's what's so brilliant about it. It has the modern edge of an old formula and I miss those movies. Movies don't always need to be about plot, character development, and great acting. Sometimes they can just be fun.
Sounds like to me there is a minority of critics with a pen and paper that are too smart to have fun and try to ruin it for everyone else.
The irony is in 20 years this film will come on TV some Saturday afternoon and I won't be able to turn it off, where as most of the crap that wins awards will be collecting dust on a shelf.
Just look at Star Wars and whatever "film" won the oscar that year. Yep...I can't remember either.
JediG60racer
Sr Member
Even instructors get deployed regularly. The local instructors take rotations between Coronado and downrange.
JediG60racer
Sr Member
Hey just a random plug for a group I support, the United Warrior Survivor Foundation. They provide assistance for the wives and children of US special forces operators killed in the line of duty. Mostly SEAL families.
United Warrior Survivors Foundation - HOME
IF you're feeling particularly thankful for the sacrifice these families have made, please do consider making a contribution. I can vouch for the integrity of the organization. The president, Nick Rocha, is an active duty SEAL with an immense sense of honor, trying to take care of the families of his fallen brothers.
United Warrior Survivors Foundation - HOME
IF you're feeling particularly thankful for the sacrifice these families have made, please do consider making a contribution. I can vouch for the integrity of the organization. The president, Nick Rocha, is an active duty SEAL with an immense sense of honor, trying to take care of the families of his fallen brothers.
Timmythekid
Sr Member
(If you not interested in an alternative view to your own in this thread, you can safely skip to the last line, no malice intended...)
"Movies don't always need to be about plot, character development, and great acting"
....
.........
What? YES. YES THEY DO!!!! That's EXACTLY WHAT THEY HAVE TO BE ABOUT!!!!!!! You've just described the possible things that can make a film work or not. A film has to tell a compelling story, and to do that it needs competent performances, and a story worth telling, told in a half-way competent way. The examples you pulled all shared charismatic lead actors, and efficient, if simple, storytelling. Top Gun without Cruise is...a commercial for Grumman? Rambo without Stallone is...I don't know, Act of Valor with better writing and worse technical consultants? What you remember from those films is the presence of the actors more than anything else. They inhabit those characters so well that the actors can do a great deal of the entertainment heavy lifting for weak, rote stories, and 1 dimensional antagonists. You wouldn't send an actor to do a SEALs job, you shouldn't send a SEAL to do an actors' job.
Calling mediocre filmmakers out on substandard work isn't being on a "high horse". This just isn't well made entertainment. It's not treason, not disrespect, not spitting on the people who choose to serve to say that this commercial piece of entertainment is weak in every area an audience should expect some value for money.
Really, guys? 29% at RT, 42% at MC...those are just examples of the evil, intellectualati liberal media ganging up this poor, defenseless, DoD funded movie?
No worries, I'll just back nervously out of this thread now...
"Movies don't always need to be about plot, character development, and great acting"
....
.........
What? YES. YES THEY DO!!!! That's EXACTLY WHAT THEY HAVE TO BE ABOUT!!!!!!! You've just described the possible things that can make a film work or not. A film has to tell a compelling story, and to do that it needs competent performances, and a story worth telling, told in a half-way competent way. The examples you pulled all shared charismatic lead actors, and efficient, if simple, storytelling. Top Gun without Cruise is...a commercial for Grumman? Rambo without Stallone is...I don't know, Act of Valor with better writing and worse technical consultants? What you remember from those films is the presence of the actors more than anything else. They inhabit those characters so well that the actors can do a great deal of the entertainment heavy lifting for weak, rote stories, and 1 dimensional antagonists. You wouldn't send an actor to do a SEALs job, you shouldn't send a SEAL to do an actors' job.
Calling mediocre filmmakers out on substandard work isn't being on a "high horse". This just isn't well made entertainment. It's not treason, not disrespect, not spitting on the people who choose to serve to say that this commercial piece of entertainment is weak in every area an audience should expect some value for money.
Really, guys? 29% at RT, 42% at MC...those are just examples of the evil, intellectualati liberal media ganging up this poor, defenseless, DoD funded movie?
No worries, I'll just back nervously out of this thread now...
Similar threads
