The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I saw Black Hawk down last night (friday) and let me tell you, war films don't come much more action packed than this masterpeice directed by Ridley Scott who also directed The Matrix and other films. Based on a real event, Black Hawk Down is about a group of Delta Force Rangers sent on a mission in Somalia to capture an evil man (I can't remember who) and he's starving all the civilians of food and killing any who try to take it back. The mission was only supposed to take 30 mins but it all goes wrong when a Black Hawk helicopter gets shot down. This triggers many events causing the mission plan to get messed up leaving the group of about 30 rangers stranded with about 5000 arabs armed with Ak47's and RPG launchers. I'll stop there. Black Hawk down has a guaranteed 2 hours action and half and hour leading up to the mission. The only bad point about the film is that it's all about one mission set in the same location all the way through. This film is also not for the feint hearted. This one guy gets shot in the back of the leg and it cuts his main artery so the medic and a soldier have to hold the wound open and find the vein in his leg. Another guy is shot by a rocket launcher through the side of a truck and it gets lodged in his stomach and points out the other side. Trust me, if you like Saving Private Ryan you'll love this.
Page:
Goatboy wrote:
Or any country that refuses to classify Al-Queda
> prisoners as "prisoners of war" so they do not have to comply to the
> Geneva Convention in regards to treatment of prisoners.
Okay, I obviously missed the news braodcast where war was declared... America and its allies were given a UN mandate to pursue the perpetrators, finanaciers, support, planning and all other Taliban/Al Queda targets/personnel in Aghanistan by the UN Security Council, which unanimously passed the motion. Chine and Russia have never been the best of friends with America but they passed it. Only Iraq has voiced true opposition - does that tell you something ? You cannot be a prisoner of war if there is no war. September 11ths victims were murdered, not casualties of war. The Taliban and Al Queda hits the Us and her allies, and now they are lost. They are terrorists, murdererer, and illegal combatants and as such do not come under the Geneva Convention.
>The USA is a
> bullying, retard nation (as a whole, not the people) that lords it over everyone
> else and acts however it wants to without thought or question as to how others
> may view it.
And a nation that makes patriotic floater movies and calls them
> "Docu-tainment".
Because it is the only surviving hegemonic power now that the USSR is consigned to history. The US does not always do as it wants, but I see no reason why the wishes of countries like Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, and so on should be respected whilst they harbour terrorists and dictators. Someone on this planet has got to be there to exert power and keep smaller nations in check. You want to see Palestinians rolinf tanks over the Israelis, or Kuwait under Iraqi rule ? How about massive civilian massacres in Rwanda, Bosnia, FRY ? Widespread proliferation of WMDS ? Terrorist attacks in every western nation ? Massive outpourings of drugs from South America ? I doubt it, America is playing the main part in holding all these back.
Its not a perfect world, and to expect any nation to act without harming another,ever, is plain ridiculous. Who else, apart from America would do the same as America has done ? Britain ? We tried that in the 18th-19th century and caused more suffering and future conflicts thatn America ever has or will. In many ways Britain left America, and the rest of the world, with the mess the world is today.
Or any country that refuses to classify Al-Queda
> prisoners as "prisoners of war" so they do not have to comply to the
> Geneva Convention in regards to treatment of prisoners.
Okay, I obviously missed the news braodcast where war was declared... America and its allies were given a UN mandate to pursue the perpetrators, finanaciers, support, planning and all other Taliban/Al Queda targets/personnel in Aghanistan by the UN Security Council, which unanimously passed the motion. Chine and Russia have never been the best of friends with America but they passed it. Only Iraq has voiced true opposition - does that tell you something ? You cannot be a prisoner of war if there is no war. September 11ths victims were murdered, not casualties of war. The Taliban and Al Queda hits the Us and her allies, and now they are lost. They are terrorists, murdererer, and illegal combatants and as such do not come under the Geneva Convention.
>The USA is a
> bullying, retard nation (as a whole, not the people) that lords it over everyone
> else and acts however it wants to without thought or question as to how others
> may view it.
And a nation that makes patriotic floater movies and calls them
> "Docu-tainment".
Because it is the only surviving hegemonic power now that the USSR is consigned to history. The US does not always do as it wants, but I see no reason why the wishes of countries like Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, and so on should be respected whilst they harbour terrorists and dictators. Someone on this planet has got to be there to exert power and keep smaller nations in check. You want to see Palestinians rolinf tanks over the Israelis, or Kuwait under Iraqi rule ? How about massive civilian massacres in Rwanda, Bosnia, FRY ? Widespread proliferation of WMDS ? Terrorist attacks in every western nation ? Massive outpourings of drugs from South America ? I doubt it, America is playing the main part in holding all these back.
Its not a perfect world, and to expect any nation to act without harming another,ever, is plain ridiculous. Who else, apart from America would do the same as America has done ? Britain ? We tried that in the 18th-19th century and caused more suffering and future conflicts thatn America ever has or will. In many ways Britain left America, and the rest of the world, with the mess the world is today.
I take umbrage with any country that acts like a big retarded child whacking a wasp-nest with a stick, who gets stung and acts surprised, then smashes the nest over and over whilst crying.
Or any country that refuses to classify Al-Queda prisoners as "prisoners of war" so they do not have to comply to the Geneva Convention in regards to treatment of prisoners.
The USA is a bullying, retard nation (as a whole, not the people) that lords it over everyone else and acts however it wants to without thought or question as to how others may view it.
And a nation that makes patriotic floater movies and calls them "Docu-tainment".
And Ewan McGregor still looks like Renton.
Or any country that refuses to classify Al-Queda prisoners as "prisoners of war" so they do not have to comply to the Geneva Convention in regards to treatment of prisoners.
The USA is a bullying, retard nation (as a whole, not the people) that lords it over everyone else and acts however it wants to without thought or question as to how others may view it.
And a nation that makes patriotic floater movies and calls them "Docu-tainment".
And Ewan McGregor still looks like Renton.
Goatboy wrote:
> Excellent, a bite.
Shall we discuss the history of CIA intervention in
> Somalia and their continued attempts to dethrone military leaders not
> pro-US?
Go on, I'm bored.
Its not really worth discussing is it really ? Neither of us will ever back down from our points of view so we'd just raise our word counts and number of posts :) Your view that people holding weapons are not legitimate targets seems to suggest that to you, anyone who opposes the US/UN is innocent ! Seriously, is it just America you have a problem with ? 'cause the British have done quite a bit too...
> Excellent, a bite.
Shall we discuss the history of CIA intervention in
> Somalia and their continued attempts to dethrone military leaders not
> pro-US?
Go on, I'm bored.
Its not really worth discussing is it really ? Neither of us will ever back down from our points of view so we'd just raise our word counts and number of posts :) Your view that people holding weapons are not legitimate targets seems to suggest that to you, anyone who opposes the US/UN is innocent ! Seriously, is it just America you have a problem with ? 'cause the British have done quite a bit too...
Excellent, a bite.
Shall we discuss the history of CIA intervention in Somalia and their continued attempts to dethrone military leaders not pro-US?
Go on, I'm bored.
Shall we discuss the history of CIA intervention in Somalia and their continued attempts to dethrone military leaders not pro-US?
Go on, I'm bored.
>Goatboy wrote:
> *stands in front of a rippling Stars and Stripes*
>God Bless our heroic
> rangers. Even when faced with women and kids armed with, >possibly, machine guns
> (it was tense and we couldn't really tell), we mowed them >all down.
Kinda sorry to break his to you, but once a civilian picks up a weapon they are not a civilian anymore, whether they are a kid or a woman. Read the book (as I think you have) and you'd see numerous eye witness accounts of women and children attacking the rangers - especially at the crash sites. These people sought to take advantage of wounded men and to use the Rangers values against them, they misclaculated and paid the price. No one forced those somalis to converge on the rangers - they went by their own free will, they wanted to kill the Rangers and Delta, they are in NO WAY innocent.
>Give me a
> medal and make a movie about those boys please, heroic acts of forced
> intervention by the CIA to install a pro-US democracy need a Ridley Scott
> movie.
They do, unless you'd rather Somalia continued to be a warlord state wracked by civil war and poverty. the Un sat by happily in its fortified bases and did nothing, only america, as usual, was willing to actually do something and risk their people.
>I
> like Ridley Scott, but I don't like watching Scottish actors play American
> soldiers in a futile movie about botched intelligence-agency insertions.
I thikn you're real argument with this film is the "american soldiers" part, whats your feelings on a Bridge Too Far ?
> *stands in front of a rippling Stars and Stripes*
>God Bless our heroic
> rangers. Even when faced with women and kids armed with, >possibly, machine guns
> (it was tense and we couldn't really tell), we mowed them >all down.
Kinda sorry to break his to you, but once a civilian picks up a weapon they are not a civilian anymore, whether they are a kid or a woman. Read the book (as I think you have) and you'd see numerous eye witness accounts of women and children attacking the rangers - especially at the crash sites. These people sought to take advantage of wounded men and to use the Rangers values against them, they misclaculated and paid the price. No one forced those somalis to converge on the rangers - they went by their own free will, they wanted to kill the Rangers and Delta, they are in NO WAY innocent.
>Give me a
> medal and make a movie about those boys please, heroic acts of forced
> intervention by the CIA to install a pro-US democracy need a Ridley Scott
> movie.
They do, unless you'd rather Somalia continued to be a warlord state wracked by civil war and poverty. the Un sat by happily in its fortified bases and did nothing, only america, as usual, was willing to actually do something and risk their people.
>I
> like Ridley Scott, but I don't like watching Scottish actors play American
> soldiers in a futile movie about botched intelligence-agency insertions.
I thikn you're real argument with this film is the "american soldiers" part, whats your feelings on a Bridge Too Far ?
Ant wrote:
What?!? Black Hawk Down is an awful movie!!
They based it too much on the
> true events, which meant the whole thing was just a lot of shooting!
It showed signs of promise. Such as when the prisoner and the Somalian guy talked for a bit, but we never saw them again.
No time spent on character development, no decent baddies, and after an hour it just got dull.
Hate to disappoint ya there, Ant. But, unlike Star Wars, most real life events aren't mean't to have "decent baddies". They're supposed to be based around the actual event. What would of happened in Saving Private Ryan was set in the future, or the first scene was a battle that never took place (Although it was made showing that the Americans did all the work)?
Shame on your notabalism skills ;-)
What?!? Black Hawk Down is an awful movie!!
They based it too much on the
> true events, which meant the whole thing was just a lot of shooting!
It showed signs of promise. Such as when the prisoner and the Somalian guy talked for a bit, but we never saw them again.
No time spent on character development, no decent baddies, and after an hour it just got dull.
Hate to disappoint ya there, Ant. But, unlike Star Wars, most real life events aren't mean't to have "decent baddies". They're supposed to be based around the actual event. What would of happened in Saving Private Ryan was set in the future, or the first scene was a battle that never took place (Although it was made showing that the Americans did all the work)?
Shame on your notabalism skills ;-)
*stands in front of a rippling Stars and Stripes*
God Bless our heroic rangers. Even when faced with women and kids armed with, possibly, machine guns (it was tense and we couldn't really tell), we mowed them all down.
Give me a medal and make a movie about those boys please, heroic acts of forced intervention by the CIA to install a pro-US democracy need a Ridley Scott movie.
And Jerry Bruckheimer.
What's with his orange-filter fetish?
I like Ridley Scott, but I don't like watching Scottish actors play American soldiers in a futile movie about botched intelligence-agency insertions.
God Bless our heroic rangers. Even when faced with women and kids armed with, possibly, machine guns (it was tense and we couldn't really tell), we mowed them all down.
Give me a medal and make a movie about those boys please, heroic acts of forced intervention by the CIA to install a pro-US democracy need a Ridley Scott movie.
And Jerry Bruckheimer.
What's with his orange-filter fetish?
I like Ridley Scott, but I don't like watching Scottish actors play American soldiers in a futile movie about botched intelligence-agency insertions.
Ant wrote:
> What?!? Black Hawk Down is an awful movie!!
They based it too much on the
> true events, which meant the whole thing was just a lot of shooting!
!!! The whole point of the movie is to show the heroism of the soldiers involved so obviously it needs to stick to the true story. Read the book, that preceded the film by 4 years, and you'll see its about shooting and what happens amidst the shooting. Black Hawk Down is about as faithful as any movie gets to the true story, with a few obvious exceptions. This is a war film, and shootings the main thing in a war film. The prisoner bit is okay, but in the book its only briefly reflected on as there was very little moe than was shown - the american was the enemy to the Somalian guy and didnt talk to him about anything much. Another point of them making the film was so that people would go buy the book, or find out more, and see the whole story behind it, because the book uses far more material from the few Somali's who survived and would actualy talk to the journalist involved in the book, Mark Bowden.
> What?!? Black Hawk Down is an awful movie!!
They based it too much on the
> true events, which meant the whole thing was just a lot of shooting!
!!! The whole point of the movie is to show the heroism of the soldiers involved so obviously it needs to stick to the true story. Read the book, that preceded the film by 4 years, and you'll see its about shooting and what happens amidst the shooting. Black Hawk Down is about as faithful as any movie gets to the true story, with a few obvious exceptions. This is a war film, and shootings the main thing in a war film. The prisoner bit is okay, but in the book its only briefly reflected on as there was very little moe than was shown - the american was the enemy to the Somalian guy and didnt talk to him about anything much. Another point of them making the film was so that people would go buy the book, or find out more, and see the whole story behind it, because the book uses far more material from the few Somali's who survived and would actualy talk to the journalist involved in the book, Mark Bowden.
I've already downloaded it, I just haven't watched it yet. I know it'll be better on the big screen so I reckon I'll go and see it first
Page: