Latest revision as of 16:04, 17 April 2020

I was debating doing this...

But I figured since they were all pretty obvious Airsoft weapons, it really didn't feel right.-protoAuthor 00:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Nope, it's FINE to have it here. It's a legitimate entry in IMDB.com so it can have a page here. I've seen much bigger motion pictures that used mostly Airsoft guns, so that's not a disqualifier. Airsofts have been a godsend for replica guns. I remember the bad old days of the 1980s when there were so few replica NON guns available, but every idiot filmmaker wanted the latest and greatest guns, except in replica form. But they weren't available unless we smuggled them in from Japan (few people were selling the really obscure replicas from Japan. I remember an L85A1 going for $700.00 USD and it was a lousy spring air gun, and this was in 1980s dollars which were worth a lot more than today's dollars). Whether or not it sucks or not (the critics think it sucks) is not up to US to determine. It's fine having a page here. Though Fan made, it was released to the general public and has an IMDB listing. :) MoviePropMaster2008 02:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I personally thought Philanthropy was great (I just saw it for the first time a couple hours ago), but take that with a grain of sand (I liked Bloodrayne and Doom, after all...). Spartan198 02:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I hate Doom and Bloodrayne with a passion, mostly cause it's another Uwe Bolle piece of shit. Doom at least tried. Anyway, I am going to watch this MGS fan movie since I saw the trailer and it looked exceptionally good for something made by fans. Excalibur01 04:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

just a note most of them are not air soft. they fire real blanks the 10000 euros spent was mainly for the equipment. also has anyone seen the film yet if so pretty good huhsmish34

Sorry, dude, that's all CG. You can tell.-protoAuthor 02:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

also i was just wandering what you think is it a good page i created here, i have created others (mgs peace walker in particular) but i just wanted to find out what the the users of this fine website think of it. and they are bringing out two sequels philanthropy is part 1 and two more are supposed to be released but i don't know when good ting is they are going to be a quite long as well. smish34

I have this movie on my computer now. I'll see if I can get some better caps. Excalibur01 16:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

yeah i got the images from google images. i couldnt find any others. smish34

I have a collection of screen captures of the movie on my computer. snakevenom56|

LAW Confusion (moved to talk page by Spartan198)

- I believe they just edited out his grabbing a new LAW for the third shot. - Greenwolf

- There were three M72 in dead soldier's backpack, transition from second to third law was cutted ;) - Alberto Vazzola, Hive Division

Thanks for the info, Alberto. Good work on the film. I really enjoyed it and I eagerly await the next chapter. Spartan198 11:38, 23 December 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

Snake's M4 sight will not help him see anything

I noticed this several times and it's that the red dot on Snake's M4 is mounted on the rail where the carrying handle should be. It's fine, but they should have put it on an M4 with flip up front sights or absent front sights. The post in in the way. Excalibur01 18:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

It still works, the dot would just go over the front sight post, basically illuminating it and making it easier to see. It sort of replaces the rear sight and makes the front sight more visible when used that way. - Gunmaster45

No, look closer, the center of the red dot is not aligned with the front sight. It's FLAT on the top. Imagine the Aimpoint sight without the mount and picture it just sitting on the rail. I can imagine that if they have an elevated mount to put the red dot sight up higher, then it'll make you see the front better, otherwise, it gets in the way of the red dot. Excalibur01 22:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't matter how low or high the RDS is mounted, the FSP is irrelevant. You know how you can't see the bridge of your nose without closing one eye? Well, the same principle applies here. Aim with both eyes open, one eye through the sight and the other on the target. Your brain merges the two images into one and it focuses the FSP out of the picture, making it essentially invisible. All you see is the dot on the target. Spartan198 13:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Have you ever sight a rifle with the red dot like that? Notice that in all the examples of a red dot on an AR-15 rifle, the Red Dot is either elevated enough so that the front sight post is not obstructing the picture or the FSP has been removed. Looking through a RDS with both eyes open is a basic thing when sighting. It helps you see the entire picture, but if the eye that is doing the sighting is obscured with something, then you can't see the whole picture. You're not sighting the target with your left eye, or if you are left handed, your left eye. And the bridge of your nose. You're eyes aren't looking directly AT the bridge of your nose, they are looking straight ahead. Of course you wouldn't see it. Having depth perception doesn't completely take away an object in from of you. Excalibur01 14:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

This is what it would look like. I know it's from Call of Duty 4, but this is a good example of what it would look like if the front sight post was removed from the M4, you'd have a clear picture, not a thick black line right down the middle of your red dot. Excalibur01

Yes, I have sighted a rifle through an RDS. I have an Aimpoint replica on my airsoft M4 and when I aim in the method I described above, there is no thick black line right down the middle of it because it's focused out of view. Hell, even the big ass PEQ battery box mounted on the 12 o'clock rail in front of said RDS disappears. All I see is the dot on the target. Regarding depth perception, you don't have to be staring straight at something, like the bridge of your nose, in front of you to see it. Stare straight ahead at something and close one eye, for clarity let's say it's your left. Notice how you can see the bridge of your nose in the inner corner of your right eye. Now open your left eye. Can you still see the bridge of your nose from the inner corner of your right eye? No, you can't. That's because your brain has taken two images, one from each eye, and merged them into one. In the merged image, the bridge of your nose is focused out of view. The same principle occurs with the FSP when aiming through the RDS with both eyes open. Spartan198 15:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

While Snake's reddot is mounted pretty low, I agree it would be possible to use with the front sight still mounted. The dot would likely line up with the bottom of the of the front sight post. There would be no "Thick black line" through the sight picture, though it would still disrupt the picture more than if it had been on a riser... but it isn't any worse than using Iron sights. Now that doesn't mean it would be comfortable to use, or very effective. It'd have been much more realistic if they had been able to use a Comp M2 with the appropriate mount. Speaking from experience (I had a VERY similar setup when I first started airsoft), it is a pain to aim with the sight that low. You can do it, but it does partially defeat the point of a reddot.

I am only speaking from experience during Airsoft with my own M4. I had to buy a mount to raise the RDS higher so the fsp isn't bothering me. I had a fax PEQ box housing a larger battery once and I always put it on the 3 o'clock position. And if you do have an Aimpoint replica, you don't mount it directly on the rail. You get a mount and put THAT on the rail and then put your aimpoint on top of that. Excalibur01 19:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I know you can't mount an Aimpoint directly to the rail, my replica came with a very low profile mount which you can see in this pic of the exact RDS I have. It's currently sitting behind a PEQ-15 battery box and even with that and the FSP, all I see through it when aiming with both eyes open (Bindon Aiming Concept, I think that's called) is the red dot on the target. No battery box, no FSP. The brain merges the images from each eye into one and the two "obstructions" are completely focused out of view. Spartan198 12:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Google "occluded eye gunsight OEG" and/or "Armson OEG". These were the Vietnam era red dots that some of the guy's are talking about above. For short range work--say arm's reach to about 100 meters--it's fast, forces you to keep your peripheral vision, and was employed by the Special Forces guys for the Son Tay Raid. Works pretty well at night as well because of how the human eye works (cones in the middle, rods in the periphery). Putting a red-dot on the rifle and blocking the view of the target probably does the same thing--as people above have talked about.

Additionally--if it's the Snake using the eye-gizmo--using an OEG might let him aim in using that eye's vision...

--Deathbunny 06:21, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

And what if you close one of your eyes and look through it? Even for a second. Excalibur01 06:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Umm... with an OEG, if you close your right eye (assuming you're firing right handed), you lose your sighting. If you close your left eye, you lose your sighting because you can't see through an OEG. Assuming the sight's red dot is aligned with the back of the foreward sight assembly AND you can't "see" through it, you would have the same affect as an OEG and the same affect.

IRL, if that's the case, if he carried a quick-detach back-up sight (BUS), he could use the optic as an OEG (assuming it works as one) and throw the BUS on and sight through the upper portion of the optics FOV if the battery goes...

--Deathbunny 10:45, 5 March 2011 (MSK)

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 yeah i got the images from google images. i couldnt find any others. [[user:smish34|smish34]]
+I have a collection of screen captures of the movie on my computer. [[user:snakevenom56|snakevenom56|]]
 == LAW Confusion (moved to talk page by Spartan198) ==
@@ Line 21: / Line 23: @@
 :- There were three M72 in dead soldier's backpack, transition from second to third law was cutted ;) - Alberto Vazzola, Hive Division
 ::Thanks for the info, Alberto. Good work on the film. I really enjoyed it and I eagerly await the next chapter. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:38, 23 December 2009 (UTC) Spartan198
+== Snake's M4 sight will not help him see anything ==
+I noticed this several times and it's that the red dot on Snake's M4 is mounted on the rail where the carrying handle should be. It's fine, but they should have put it on an M4 with flip up front sights or absent front sights. The post in in the way. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
+:It still works, the dot would just go over the front sight post, basically illuminating it and making it easier to see. It sort of replaces the rear sight and makes the front sight more visible when used that way. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]
+:No, look closer, the center of the red dot is not aligned with the front sight. It's FLAT on the top. Imagine the Aimpoint sight without the mount and picture it just sitting on the rail. I can imagine that if they have an elevated mount to put the red dot sight up higher, then it'll make you see the front better, otherwise, it gets in the way of the red dot. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
+::Doesn't matter how low or high the RDS is mounted, the FSP is irrelevant. You know how you can't see the bridge of your nose without closing one eye? Well, the same principle applies here. Aim with both eyes open, one eye through the sight and the other on the target. Your brain merges the two images into one and it focuses the FSP out of the picture, making it essentially invisible. All you see is the dot on the target. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
+Have you ever sight a rifle with the red dot like that? Notice that in all the examples of a red dot on an AR-15 rifle, the Red Dot is either elevated enough so that the front sight post is not obstructing the picture or the FSP has been removed. Looking through a RDS with both eyes open is a basic thing when sighting. It helps you see the entire picture, but if the eye that is doing the sighting is obscured with something, then you can't see the whole picture. You're not sighting the target with your left eye, or if you are left handed, your left eye. And the bridge of your nose. You're eyes aren't looking directly AT the bridge of your nose, they are looking straight ahead. Of course you wouldn't see it. Having depth perception doesn't completely take away an object in from of you. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 14:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
+[[Image:TascoRDS.jpg]]
+This is what it would look like. I know it's from Call of Duty 4, but this is a good example of what it would look like if the front sight post was removed from the M4, you'd have a clear picture, not a thick black line right down the middle of your red dot. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]
+:Yes, I have sighted a rifle through an RDS. I have an Aimpoint replica on my airsoft M4 and when I aim in the method I described above, ''there is no thick black line right down the middle of it because it's focused out of view''. Hell, even the big ass PEQ battery box mounted on the 12 o'clock rail in front of said RDS disappears. All I see is the dot on the target. Regarding depth perception, you don't have to be staring straight at something, like the bridge of your nose, in front of you to see it. Stare straight ahead at something and close one eye, for clarity let's say it's your left. Notice how you can see the bridge of your nose in the inner corner of your right eye. Now open your left eye. Can you still see the bridge of your nose from the inner corner of your right eye? No, you can't. That's because your brain has taken two images, one from each eye, and merged them into one. In the merged image, the bridge of your nose is focused out of view. The same principle occurs with the FSP when aiming through the RDS with both eyes open. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
+::While Snake's reddot ''is'' mounted pretty low, I agree it would be possible to use with the front sight still mounted. The dot would likely line up with the bottom of the of the front sight post. There would be no "Thick black line" through the sight picture, though it would still disrupt the picture more than if it had been on a riser... but it isn't any worse than using Iron sights. Now that doesn't mean it would be comfortable to use, or very effective. It'd have been much more realistic if they had been able to use a Comp M2 with the appropriate mount. Speaking from experience (I had a VERY similar setup when I first started airsoft), it is a pain to aim with the sight that low. You can do it, but it does partially defeat the point of a reddot.
+I am only speaking from experience during Airsoft with my own M4. I had to buy a mount to raise the RDS higher so the fsp isn't bothering me. I had a fax PEQ box housing a larger battery once and I always put it on the 3 o'clock position. And if you do have an Aimpoint replica, you don't mount it directly on the rail. You get a mount and put THAT on the rail and then put your aimpoint on top of that. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 19:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
+:I know you can't mount an Aimpoint directly to the rail, my replica came with a ''very'' low profile mount [http://4imgs.com/364/x/010223a_FULL.jpg which you can see in this pic of the exact RDS I have]. It's currently sitting behind a PEQ-15 battery box and even with that and the FSP, all I see through it when aiming with both eyes open (Bindon Aiming Concept, I think that's called) is ''the red dot on the target''. No battery box, no FSP. The brain merges the images from each eye into one and the two "obstructions" are completely focused out of view. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 12:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
+::Google "occluded eye gunsight OEG" and/or "Armson OEG".  These were the Vietnam era red dots that some of the guy's are talking about above.  For short range work--say arm's reach to about 100 meters--it's fast, forces you to keep your peripheral vision, and was employed by the Special Forces guys for the Son Tay Raid.  Works pretty well at night as well because of how the human eye works (cones in the middle, rods in the periphery).  Putting a red-dot on the rifle and blocking the view of the target probably does the same thing--as people above have talked about.
+Additionally--if it's the Snake using the eye-gizmo--using an OEG might let him aim in using that eye's vision...
+--[[User:Deathbunny|Deathbunny]] 06:21, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
+And what if you close one of your eyes and look through it? Even for a second. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
+::Umm...  with an OEG, if you close your right eye (assuming you're firing right handed), you lose your sighting.  If you close your left eye, you lose your sighting because you can't see through an OEG.  Assuming the sight's red dot is aligned with the back of the foreward sight assembly AND you can't "see" through it, you would have the same affect as an OEG and the same affect.
+::IRL, if that's the case, if he carried a quick-detach back-up sight (BUS), he could use the optic as an OEG (assuming it works as one) and throw the BUS on and sight through the upper portion of the optics FOV if the battery goes...
+--[[User:Deathbunny|Deathbunny]] 10:45, 5 March 2011 (MSK)
+=Preserving Code=
+[[Image:mgsp.jpg|300px|thumb|right|''Metal Gear Solid: Philanthropy'' (2009)]]
+'''Metal Gear Solid Philanthropy''' is an Italian-made (but filmed in English) fan-made film based on the ''Metal Gear Solid'' video game franchise. The film's budget was approximately 10,000 euros and was made by Hive Division, an Italian independant film group. The entire film is availible for for free [http://www.mgs-philanthropy.net via Hive Division's website].
+'''The following weapons appear in the film ''Metal Gear Solid: Philanthropy'':'''
+__TOC__<br clear="all">
+==M4A1 Carbine==
+Snake's main weapon of the film is an [[M16 rifle series#M4/M4A1 Carbine|M4A1 carbine]], fitted with a TruGlo red dot scope and RIS foregrip. He is almost always seen with it and at some points during the shootout at the end of the film uses it on semi-automatic. It can be noted that the red dot on Snake's M4 is mounted in a way that the front sight post will be in the way and he would not be able to sight anything.
+[[Image:ColtM4.jpg|thumb|none|350px|M4A1 5.56x45mm with RIS foregrip and M68 Aimpoint red dot scope]]
+[[image:mgsp2.jpg|thumb|500px|none]]
+[[image:mgsp3.jpg|thumb|500px|none]]
+[[image:mgsp4.jpg|thumb|500px|none]]
+[[image:mgsp8.jpg|thumb|500px|none]]
+==Heckler & Koch G3SG/1==
+Pierre Leclerc's main weapon of the film is a [[Heckler & Koch G3#H&K G3SG/1|Heckler & Koch G3SG/1]]. He always uses it and is an expert marksman. Some enemies can be seen using it too.
+[[Image:H&KSG1.jpg|thumb|none|350px|Heckler & Koch G3SG/1 7.62x51mm NATO]]
+[[image:mgsp2.jpg|thumb|500px|none]]
+[[image:mgsp7.png|thumb|500px|none]]
+[[image:mgsp6.png|thumb|500px|none]]
+==FN P90TR==
+Elizabeth Laeken's primary weapon is an [[FN P90#FN P90TR|FN P90TR]]. It is usually seen suppressed but occasionally it is not. It is also fitted with a C-More red dot sight.
+[[Image:FN P90 Triple Rail (TR).jpg|thumb|none|350px|FN P90TR 5.7x28mm]]
+[[image:mgsp2.jpg|thumb|500px|none]]
+[[image:mgsp9.jpg|thumb|500px|none]]
+[[image:mgsp10.jpg|thumb|500px|none]]
+==Heckler & Koch Mark 23==
+Snake's secondary weapon is a [[Heckler & Koch Mark 23]] pistol. Normally it is suppressed and equipped with a LAM, though they are sometimes not fitted.
+[[Image:SOCOM.jpg|thumb|none|350px|Heckler & Koch Mark 23 .45 ACP with silencer & Laser Aiming Module]]
+[[image:mgsp5.png|thumb|500px|none]]
+[[image:mgsp11.png|thumb|500px|none]]
+==M72 LAW==
+Snake has a bag with two [[M72 LAW]] rockets inside it. He uses them on a Metal Gear. Though it appears the second LAW was fired twice, the transition from LAW #2 & #3 is simply just cut from the film.
+[[Image:M72A2LAW.jpg|thumb|none|350px|M72 LAW 66mm]]
+==FAMAS G1==
+A [[FAMAS#FAMAS G2|FAMAS G1]] is used by one of the intruders.
+[[Image:FAMAS G1.jpg|thumb|none|400px|FAMAS-G1 - 5.56x45mm. Older intermediate version of the G2 with magazine and magazine release system from FAMAS F1]]
+[[Image:FAMASandAKVarient.jpg|thumb|none|350px|AN airsoft FAMAS and an airsoft AK47 fitted with drum magazine. you can notice that the ak-toting guy is wearing an Italian Vegetata camo jacket.]]
+==G36C==
+A [[G36]] is used to fire at the intruders in the movie by base guards
+[[Image:G36candothers.jpg|thumb|none|350px|Two G36 (one a C, one unknown, most likely a C, and an FN Minimi]]
+==FN Minimi==
+An FN Minimi is used to fire at the intruders by a base guard.
+[[Image:G36candothers.jpg|thumb|none|350px|]]
+==Thompson SMG==
+The oddly placed [[Thompson]] in the movie
+[[Image:Thompsoninmgs.jpg|thumb|none|350px|]]
+==Trivia==
+All of the weapons used in the movie are airsoft ones (as the creator admitted when the second teaser trailer was released), whit the spent cases and muzzle flashes added by CGI. Also almost all of the armed enemies and characters in uniform (e.g. the American soldiers that escort Elizabeth Laeken at the rendezvous with Snake) are portrayed by Italian airsoft players.
+[[Category:Movie]]
+[[Category:Science-Fiction]]
+[[Category:War]]
+[[Category:Espionage]]

Talk:Metal Gear Solid: Philanthropy: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 16:04, 17 April 2020

I was debating doing this...

LAW Confusion (moved to talk page by Spartan198)

Snake's M4 sight will not help him see anything

Preserving Code

M4A1 Carbine

Heckler & Koch G3SG/1

FN P90TR

Heckler & Koch Mark 23

M72 LAW

FAMAS G1

G36C

FN Minimi

Thompson SMG

Trivia

Navigation menu

Search