...

gerard your sig makes everything take like a minute for me to load, plz make it smaller in size

------------------
http://303rdbga.com/303logo2.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Yeah, those MG-42's and .30 Cal Brownings didnt eject out of the bottom in Saving Private Ryan, They edited it coming out of the side for enjoyment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Umm what mg42 are you referring to? IF your on about the one in the Concrete bunker at omaha beach there was no casings flying anywhere. Even the one in the sandbag bunker didn't have casings bouncing anywhere. The reason i know is i have the dvd and just checked http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/gerald....Animation4.gif

!!WERMACHT!!
When you absoloutely positively have to kill every last ally accept no substitutes.

haha, my copy of the movie is at school so I cant check, but have anyone (excluding Waffen) http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/smile.gif seen the movie "Olympia 1. Teil - Fest der Völker (1938)", I bring it up because the director, Leni Riefenstahl was Hitlers favourite film director, and a film of her life is being made...oops, this should be in the other forum...

Also, remember that was an early cgi movie, if you have a look at the gamespot gameplay movie, no rounds can be seen flying from the top of the gun, in fact, no rounds can be seen whatsoever, so they must be ejecting from the bottom...

Gerard - I was being sarcastic. Jesus himself was apparently claiming that no movie has featured a Belt fed or large machine gun ejecting it's shells from the bottom.

"... dont see too many movies with guns that shoot bullet casings out the bottom.... u just dont"

When infact Saving Private Ryan featured both of these weapons ejecting their shells from the bottom. My comment on the .30 Cal Brownings and MG-42s ejecting out of the side for just the movie's sake of effect to make it more exciting, was a sarcastic remark. As in the film, they are ejecting out of the bottom like they should, and again Jesus said no movie has ever shown. There are also other films featuring the shells busting out of the bottom of the MG-42's receiver, Kelly's Heroes, To Hell & Back, The Bridge at Remagen, The Bridge (German 1950's movie), Force Ten from Navarone, Etc Etc..

So, His remark is awkward, unbalanced and unfounded.

Also note, just for the heck of it, In Saving Private Ryan, most of the time the MG-42's are NOT firing rounds. Only short true bursts with new sound overlay and edited muzzle flash. The very first shot behind the MG-42's crew up in the bunker, the weapon is only firing quick burst. Not the sustained fire you see and hear. Look at the positioning of the forward Iron sights. And when the weapon is shown close up and from the right side, you can see the empty belt only moving out of the weapon at maybe two or three links at a time, when the weapon is made to look like it's just blasting away.

Another cool little movie fact is that one of the Space Marines in Aliens is wielding a MG-42 that was mounted on a Steady Camera Hip Mount, and is changed around to look very spacy, by removing the buttstock and replacing it with a Motorcycle like braking handle. The original trigger grouping's handle was cut off and was rigged to the Braking handle to fire the weapon.
_________________

Von Paulus - The film about her life sounds interesting. Makes me wonder how they are going to film the large stage settings and Etc.. Probably computers.

(Oh yeah, Gerard, you are spelling "Wehrmacht" incorrectly)

god

coming to this forum and reading your posts make my life more amusing

*laughs*


------------------
http://3rdInfantry.homestead.com/fil.../Captblade.jpg

the movie was fiction, there was never a James Ryan who got rescued by a Capt. Miller! It was Hollywood, not history.

Do you have anything to criticize about the movie other than its plot ?

I know not *everything* was as "real" as it could have been, but hey; reality itself is not as real as it appears http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/tongue.gif mouahahahaha

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bürgen:
the movie was fiction, there was never a James Ryan who got rescued by a Capt. Miller! It was Hollywood, not history.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's a plot ! ah man, nevermind... http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/smile.gif

what I'm saying is that it seemed as if you were telling me that the movie was accurate, historically. That is what it sounded like, I'm not saying that the movie shouldn't have been made, but just that those who use it as a piece of historical reference shouldn't do so.

They use it as a historical tool in the sense that the action depicted in the movie was brutally honest.

Everything was accurate from the combat environments (omaha and other places) right down to the weapons. They weren't referring to the plot... at least I hope so. http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/biggrin.gif

yes and no, the movie is accurate in that it shows you how a combat environment is. But, there is much that is not accurate in the movie, not just the plot. of course most of the guys on this forum would say "it doesn't matter, it's just a movie". Things such as the german soldiers huddled around the tiger at the end, it was standard procedure to NOT stand around a tank! in the US army it was, but not in the wehrmacht! And why would you send the squad medic up the middle as a diversion against two MG-42 teams? If the 101st was mis-dropped all over france (which it was) then how did they mannage to get two Browning M1919A3's and an unlimmited supply of ammo for them at the end of the movie.

As you can see it wasn't just the plot that was inaccurate. It was a good movie but it wasn't any thing more than that.

Another few things (yes I'm still talking)in reference to the accurate weapons:

In the Omaha scene it shows the MG42 teams firing from a concrete pillbox, but do you notice anything lacking? Anything important? (tibi, listen up i'm on a role...) NO LAFETTE MOUNT!!!! When in a fixed position, which a pillbox is, the MG team would place the MG-42, -34, -15, -13, etc. on a heavy tripod called a lafette mount, which changed it from a light to a heavy machine gun, they would use this because they would pre-register distance, tragectory, etc, so they would cause maximum damage. but in the movie they obviously thought that they could save an extra couple thousand bucks and just leave it out.

Also, in the same scene Cpt Miller uses his thomson to take out a german MG team in a sandbag revetment, at a range of about 200 meters! the effecive accurate range of a .45cal tommy was less than 150m and yet he hits everyone in a five mile radius that is wearing feldgrau.

I could go on but it is getting late and I need some coffee

-------------------
http://www.pnwhg.org/12thss/images/equip_photo3.jpg

(that's waffenampt behind the '42)

[This message has been edited by Bürgen (edited July 16, 2001).]