| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:We Were Soldiers: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→MAT-49) |
StanTheMan (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== About the ARVN Interpreter == | __TOC__<br clear=all> | ||
=Additional Screencaps= | |||
[[Image:Vlcsnap-156900.jpg|thumb|none|600px|NVA soldiers armed with AK-47s.]] | |||
[[Image:Vlcsnap-128590.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A Vietcong gets shot and drops his AK-47. Note bayonet attached.]] | |||
=Discussion= | |||
==About the ARVN Interpreter== | |||
He is an ARVN Ranger. He has the ARVN Ranger patch on his uniform. | He is an ARVN Ranger. He has the ARVN Ranger patch on his uniform. | ||
== About The ARVN Soldier == | ==About The ARVN Soldier== | ||
He's ARVN, note the beret [[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]] | He's ARVN, note the beret [[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]] | ||
:You´r right. I Dont really know much about the ARVN. [[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] | :You´r right. I Dont really know much about the ARVN. [[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] | ||
== About the XM16A1 == | ==About the XM16A1== | ||
These are actually M16E1s, which were available to the men of the 1st Cavalry Division at the time of the Battle of Ia Drang and therefore not an anachronism. The M16E1 (sometimes also known as the XM16E1) was a variant of the M16 that featured a forward assist but maintained the three-pronged flashhider of the original M16. If you look closly in some of the posted photographs as well as throughout the film, this is readily apparent.[[User:SAWGunner89|SAWGunner89]] 20:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC) | These are actually M16E1s, which were available to the men of the 1st Cavalry Division at the time of the Battle of Ia Drang and therefore not an anachronism. The M16E1 (sometimes also known as the XM16E1) was a variant of the M16 that featured a forward assist but maintained the three-pronged flashhider of the original M16. If you look closly in some of the posted photographs as well as throughout the film, this is readily apparent.[[User:SAWGunner89|SAWGunner89]] 20:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
:You´r right too. I never noticed the forward assist on the pre-1967 M16.[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] | :You´r right too. I never noticed the forward assist on the pre-1967 M16.[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] | ||
== SKS Rilfes == | ==SKS Rilfes== | ||
You see an SKS here and there in the hands of North Vietnamese soldiers and on the pile of guns at the end of the film. | You see an SKS here and there in the hands of North Vietnamese soldiers and on the pile of guns at the end of the film. | ||
== Need Help == | ==Need Help== | ||
I need help identifying the guns in those screencaps: The Mosin-Nagant is a Model 44 not sure about the country of origin but can check during the week. The Mauser is a K98K that came from Israel chamber for 7.62 NATO we used in the location. - [[User:Phoenixent|Steve]] | I need help identifying the guns in those screencaps: The Mosin-Nagant is a Model 44 not sure about the country of origin but can check during the week. The Mauser is a K98K that came from Israel chamber for 7.62 NATO we used in the location. - [[User:Phoenixent|Steve]] | ||
(comment-Yeah the Mosin is a M44. I would recognize that gun anywhere.-S&Wshooter) | (comment-Yeah the Mosin is a M44. I would recognize that gun anywhere.-S&Wshooter) | ||
I need help identifying the mosin-nagant that the Viet Minh is carrying in the centre and the mauser rifle the Viet Minh is carrying in the right side. | |||
[[Image:Vlcsnap-70352.jpg|thumb|none|500px|I think the rifle the vietcong fighter is carrying in this screencap is the same mauser rifle from the screencap above.]] | [[Image:Vlcsnap-70352.jpg|thumb|none|500px|I think the rifle the vietcong fighter is carrying in this screencap is the same mauser rifle from the screencap above.]] | ||
| Line 38: | Line 42: | ||
I need help identifying the machine gun being carried by the Viet Minh soldier in the screencaps below. | I need help identifying the machine gun being carried by the Viet Minh soldier in the screencaps below. | ||
:It is a Czech [[ZB26]] sold the the Chinese and was converted to 7.62x39 later in it's life. The weapon has Chinese characters on the side of the receiver.- [[User:Phoenixent|Steve]] | :It is a Czech [[ZB26]] sold the the Chinese and was converted to 7.62x39 later in it's life. The weapon has Chinese characters on the side of the receiver.- [[User:Phoenixent|Steve]] | ||
Is the ZB26 the same machine gun seen in the ending where GIs pile up dead NVAs? It is carried by one of the GIs to the gun pile. | |||
[[Image:Vlcsnap-34273.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]] | [[Image:Vlcsnap-34273.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]] | ||
| Line 71: | Line 77: | ||
::Actually during the battle of Ia drang Joe Galloway carried a XM16E1 and a revolver for self-defense and before going in the battle he was trained on how to use it while in the movie he goes to the battlefield empty handed.[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 16:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC) | ::Actually during the battle of Ia drang Joe Galloway carried a XM16E1 and a revolver for self-defense and before going in the battle he was trained on how to use it while in the movie he goes to the battlefield empty handed.[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 16:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::He also fed an M60 with Chargin' Charlie Beckwith's forces, and his non-combatant status was discussed with Beckwith himself a week prior to landing the valley, rather than being mentioned when tossed a rifle. --[[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 01:52, 21 August 2014 (EDT) | |||
==Mosin Rifles== | ==Mosin Rifles== | ||
I really feel for the poor sons of bitches that got stuck with the M44's. That gun is a monster to shoot and the bolt is the exact opposite of smooth-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 03:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC) | I really feel for the poor sons of bitches that got stuck with the M44's. That gun is a monster to shoot and the bolt is the exact opposite of smooth-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 03:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 79: | Line 87: | ||
::A lot of surplus German weapons were handed out to other countries and resistance movements by the USSR in the 1950s and 1960s. I have seen photos of MG34 and MG42 machine guns in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Even captured tanks were sent to other countries. PzKpfw IV (Panzer-IV) tanks were sent (sold?) to Syria and used against Israel. So a MG34 appearing in Indo-China in that period is not only historically correct, but a good example of attention to detail by the producers and movie armorers. (Wraith) | ::A lot of surplus German weapons were handed out to other countries and resistance movements by the USSR in the 1950s and 1960s. I have seen photos of MG34 and MG42 machine guns in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Even captured tanks were sent to other countries. PzKpfw IV (Panzer-IV) tanks were sent (sold?) to Syria and used against Israel. So a MG34 appearing in Indo-China in that period is not only historically correct, but a good example of attention to detail by the producers and movie armorers. (Wraith) | ||
== Almost Finished == | ==Almost Finished== | ||
I'm almost finished with this. I only need to find out about the Mosin Nagants and put pictures of the Miniguns and the grenades and some other things.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC) | I'm almost finished with this. I only need to find out about the Mosin Nagants and put pictures of the Miniguns and the grenades and some other things.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
== Screencap | ==Screencap Descriptions== | ||
Who added the stupid-ass descriptions under the screencaps that have absolutly no relation to the movie? -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]] | |||
Who added the stupid-ass | |||
:::I agree, Dumbass sarcastic remarks are stupid. Made by guys who like to belittle a film based on a single FRAME of film. BTW, people in the industry do look at this site, and those dumbass sarcastic comments do rub them the wrong way. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | :::I agree, Dumbass sarcastic remarks are stupid. Made by guys who like to belittle a film based on a single FRAME of film. BTW, people in the industry do look at this site, and those dumbass sarcastic comments do rub them the wrong way. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
::::I suppose you hate the [[Far Cry 2]] comments too.--[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | ::::I suppose you hate the [[Far Cry 2]] comments too.--[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::::I don't look at VG game pages as a rule. I have absolutely no interest in them. But I glanced at it, but there is a big difference. On movie pages you're insulting real people who actually look at this site, on a video game page, comments usually are insulting bad decisions in development or game play or artwork which is not the same as insulting a human being. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 19:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | :::::I don't look at VG game pages as a rule. I have absolutely no interest in them. But I glanced at it, but there is a big difference. On movie pages you're insulting real people who actually look at this site, on a video game page, comments usually are insulting bad decisions in development or game play or artwork which is not the same as insulting a human being. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 19:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
::Yes, but we are insulting a human being's work. Anyway, i see the difference and i see that i taking the Far Cry 2 article as a reference was foolish. I also asked Vangelis to do that because the captions were getting boring and generic. Ben41 fixed that though.--[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 20:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | ::Yes, but we are insulting a human being's work. Anyway, i see the difference and i see that i taking the Far Cry 2 article as a reference was foolish. I also asked Vangelis to do that because the captions were getting boring and generic. Ben41 fixed that though.--[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 20:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::I agree that making jabs and jokes about the actors or the guns and whatnot is bad taste for a war movie, or any movie based on actual events. However, Oliveia has a point. If it isn't fine to make fun of film depictions of guns, then it's not fine for anything. Especially if we consider that holding a gun correctly takes all of five seconds to figure out if you ask the right person, making an accurate gun model in a videogame takes countless hours depending on the complexity, and this isn't even considering all the people responsible for creating a finished product: concept artists, modelers, texture artists, animators, and for that matter, the people who decide what guns are going to be in a game in the first place. So in other words, a typical mistake in a movie takes one man to create and would be easy to fix(before filming is finished), while a mistake in a game could be any one person in the pipeline, and would take good time to fix, yet it's okay to ridicule ''all'' of them despite developers having to ''create everything from nothing''. What I'm trying to say is this: ''actors deserve ridicule for bad handling more than developers do for bad gun modeling''. Developers are real people too, only we can't see their faces in the finished product. Regardless, a war movie like this is the wrong place for such comments.--[[User:Mr-Jigsaw|Mr-Jigsaw]] 22:48, 28 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
: I did, because Oliveira asked me to when he was updating the article. To be honest, I wasn't that sure about some of them, though in many cases the captions they replaced were useless to the point of being insulting (describing what was obviously going on in the shot, typically, as if we write captions for the selectively blind). Also, pointing out people in the background are grinning like idiots ''does'' have something to do with the movie, much like pointing out people have very poor weapon handling skills does (and is done on many other pages). [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 20:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC) | : I did, because Oliveira asked me to when he was updating the article. To be honest, I wasn't that sure about some of them, though in many cases the captions they replaced were useless to the point of being insulting (describing what was obviously going on in the shot, typically, as if we write captions for the selectively blind). Also, pointing out people in the background are grinning like idiots ''does'' have something to do with the movie, much like pointing out people have very poor weapon handling skills does (and is done on many other pages). [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 20:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
:Also, the captions are hilarious-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 20:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC) | :Also, the captions are hilarious-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 20:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 95: | Line 103: | ||
:Well thats war for you. This is one of the more accurate war movie in Hollywood and it is susposed to be depressing. The dumb comments are rude and dishonorable to the vets and men who died. -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]] | :Well thats war for you. This is one of the more accurate war movie in Hollywood and it is susposed to be depressing. The dumb comments are rude and dishonorable to the vets and men who died. -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]] | ||
== Safety First. | ==Safety First.== | ||
Anyone notice that in two of the AK47 screencaps the safeties are on in combat situations? | Anyone notice that in two of the AK47 screencaps the safeties are on in combat situations? | ||
== M1911 (moved from main) == | ==M1911 (moved from main)== | ||
:No, he really did that-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 21:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC) | :No, he really did that-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 21:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
::Wait, Plumley actually carried a M1911 not an M1911A1 in the battle?--[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 14:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC) | ::Wait, Plumley actually carried a M1911 not an M1911A1 in the battle?--[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 14:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 109: | Line 116: | ||
I am guessing this, dont take my word, but I think The real Plumley used an M1911A1. If it was easy to aquire a regular M1911 during the early 1960s then it could be likely, but I doubt this. It is true though that the real Plumley didnt use an M16. | I am guessing this, dont take my word, but I think The real Plumley used an M1911A1. If it was easy to aquire a regular M1911 during the early 1960s then it could be likely, but I doubt this. It is true though that the real Plumley didnt use an M16. | ||
Bare in mind Plumley was a World War II vet as well. He could have had an original M1911 issued to him around that time. It's unlikely but he enlisted in 1942 which was close to the height of WWII, maybe they ran out of M1911A1s and issued him an original M1911. Or maybe the film makers gave him an M1911 to further distinguish him from the young grunts. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 15:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Crandall's Revolver== | |||
The revolver uses by Crandall is a Model 15 with 2 inches barrel and not a Model 13. When Major Crandall points his snub are clearly visible 3 important details: adjustable rear sight, a linear profile that continue upside the 2 inches barrel and Baughman front sight. All particulars that the model 13 does not have. However the Model 15 snub is still accurate because some M15 were produced in short version for the pilots.--[[User:Charly Driver|Charly Driver]] 15:32, 12 March 2010 (UTC) | The revolver uses by Crandall is a Model 15 with 2 inches barrel and not a Model 13. When Major Crandall points his snub are clearly visible 3 important details: adjustable rear sight, a linear profile that continue upside the 2 inches barrel and Baughman front sight. All particulars that the model 13 does not have. However the Model 15 snub is still accurate because some M15 were produced in short version for the pilots.--[[User:Charly Driver|Charly Driver]] 15:32, 12 March 2010 (UTC) | ||
[[Image:RevolverSoldiers.jpg|thumb|none|350px|Note the details.]] | [[Image:RevolverSoldiers.jpg|thumb|none|350px|Note the details.]] | ||
| Line 116: | Line 124: | ||
[[Image:M13air.jpg|thumb|none|350px|Smith & Wesson Model 13 Lightweight Revolver.]] | [[Image:M13air.jpg|thumb|none|350px|Smith & Wesson Model 13 Lightweight Revolver.]] | ||
== MAT-49 == | ==MAT-49== | ||
I can't tell if some of the MAT-49's used by the commies in the movie are 9mm or 7.62mm Soviet. You can tell if a MAT-49 is chambered in 7.62mm if it's barrel is longer. I really doubt that Hollywood would have such a rare gun (just were the hell would they get it? Off một VC đã chết?) Can somebody please tell me if if looks like this. - [[User:Kilgore|Kilgore]] 19:37, 9 August 2010 (UTC) | I can't tell if some of the MAT-49's used by the commies in the movie are 9mm or 7.62mm Soviet. You can tell if a MAT-49 is chambered in 7.62mm if it's barrel is longer. I really doubt that Hollywood would have such a rare gun (just were the hell would they get it? Off một VC đã chết?) Can somebody please tell me if if looks like this. - [[User:Kilgore|Kilgore]] 19:37, 9 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
[[Image:MAT-49 7.62mm Soviet.jpg|thumb|none|550px|A rare MAT-49 SMG captured by Communist Forces during the French-Indochina War and converted to 7.62x25mm Tokarev.]] | [[Image:MAT-49 7.62mm Soviet.jpg|thumb|none|550px|A rare MAT-49 SMG captured by Communist Forces during the French-Indochina War and converted to 7.62x25mm Tokarev.]] | ||
| Line 123: | Line 130: | ||
:The MAT-49s converted to 7.62x25 not only had a longer barrel, but the magazine was curved as well. (Wraith) | :The MAT-49s converted to 7.62x25 not only had a longer barrel, but the magazine was curved as well. (Wraith) | ||
==No Jams? == | ==No Jams?== | ||
I would like to start off by saying this was a great movie, but I was suprised that the movie didn't show any of the M16's jamming. Weren't they | I would like to start off by saying this was a great movie, but I was suprised that the movie didn't show any of the M16's jamming. Weren't they infamous for jamming in Vietnam? --[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 23:35, 27 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
::Only after weeks/months in the field with bad ball powder and misinformed GIs NOT CLEANING their guns. These guys just came off a forward base, they were elite soldiers and probably CLEANED their weapons before battle. The guns would not have jammed on the first three days of battle. :) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:23, 28 October 2010 (UTC) | ::Only after weeks/months in the field with bad ball powder and misinformed GIs NOT CLEANING their guns. These guys just came off a forward base, they were elite soldiers and probably CLEANED their weapons before battle. The guns would not have jammed on the first three days of battle. :) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:23, 28 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
*In 1965 the tales of the M-16 jamming were rife in the news media. The General's original book made no mention of jamming whatsoever. I've heard someone who was in the 173rd on Okinawa and with the initial deployment to Vietnam being told the weapon was "self cleaning" with them soon finding out that wasn't true scoop. I also believe an original issue steel 'waffle design' magazine had problems.[[User:Foofbun|Foofbun]] 21:42, 29 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Need Help Identifying Stuntmen== | |||
:If anyone could help me identify some of the unknown actors or various other stunt men (whether Viet Cong or Marines), that would be absolutely helpful so thanks in advance. --[[User:Gunman5|Gunman5]] ([[User talk:Gunman5|talk]]) 05:02, 24 November 2012 (EST) | |||
==Browning Hi-Power== | |||
If the pistol in the movie being used by the French Foreign Legion officer is a Hi-Power, it is not the version illustrated. Note the distinctive "hump" at the rear of the slide, below the sights, visible in the screen shots. This would be characteristic of early Hi-Powers (such as the Inglis production for Allies during WWII, which became the Canadian and British standard sidearm), but not the version shown. During the war in IndoChina, French forces were armed with a variety of weapons, including large numbers of surplus WWII Allied and Axis firearms, as the French military gradually resupplied itself with French arms. Browning Hi-Powers were used by both sides during WWII, and were among the surplus pistols used by the French army. | |||
Otherwise, the pistol looks similar to a French army model 1935S or 9mm 1950 (aka MAC 50, which was based on the 1935S), both of which have a similar "hump" and were in use in the IndoChina wars. Of these, the long grip is more characteristic of the model 1950, although obtaining those is very difficult. | |||
BTW, I have corrected the comment about the movie makers being unable to get a MAB so instead using a Hi-Power. The .32 MAB model D (the only MAB pistol used by the French army) was used only as a stopgap while production of the more powerful 1935A & 1935S ramped up to meet military needs when WWII started (in Europe) in 1939 and in the immediate post-war years. By the time of this ambush (1954) the MAB had been retired from use as an army sidearm, although it was popular with French colonial soldiers and Legionaires as a privately-owned personal weapon. [[User:Gun Shy|Gun Shy]] ([[User talk:Gun Shy|talk]]) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:00, 6 May 2015
Additional Screencaps
Discussion
About the ARVN Interpreter
He is an ARVN Ranger. He has the ARVN Ranger patch on his uniform.
About The ARVN Soldier
He's ARVN, note the beret The Winchester
- You´r right. I Dont really know much about the ARVN. Oliveira
About the XM16A1
These are actually M16E1s, which were available to the men of the 1st Cavalry Division at the time of the Battle of Ia Drang and therefore not an anachronism. The M16E1 (sometimes also known as the XM16E1) was a variant of the M16 that featured a forward assist but maintained the three-pronged flashhider of the original M16. If you look closly in some of the posted photographs as well as throughout the film, this is readily apparent.SAWGunner89 20:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
- You´r right too. I never noticed the forward assist on the pre-1967 M16.Oliveira
SKS Rilfes
You see an SKS here and there in the hands of North Vietnamese soldiers and on the pile of guns at the end of the film.
Need Help
I need help identifying the guns in those screencaps: The Mosin-Nagant is a Model 44 not sure about the country of origin but can check during the week. The Mauser is a K98K that came from Israel chamber for 7.62 NATO we used in the location. - Steve
(comment-Yeah the Mosin is a M44. I would recognize that gun anywhere.-S&Wshooter)
I need help identifying the mosin-nagant that the Viet Minh is carrying in the centre and the mauser rifle the Viet Minh is carrying in the right side.
Need Help identifying the rocket launcher in the screencap below. The Rocket Launcher is a M1A1 Bazooka it has only one forward grip and a modified rear sight.- Steve
I need help identifying what kind of mosin-nagants are those in the screencaps below. These are M91/38 Carbines used on the show we also had M91/30 rifles.- Steve
- Steve, could you tell me at what part in the movie do M91/30 rifles appear? I didn't see them.Oliveira 18:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- We had them on the truck and issued them to background but not sure if they made it to the final cut. - Steve
- Those two Mosin Nagants in the above pictures are M91/30 rifles or M91/38 rifles?Oliveira 13:04, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I need help identifying the machine gun being carried by the Viet Minh soldier in the screencaps below.
- It is a Czech ZB26 sold the the Chinese and was converted to 7.62x39 later in it's life. The weapon has Chinese characters on the side of the receiver.- Steve
Is the ZB26 the same machine gun seen in the ending where GIs pile up dead NVAs? It is carried by one of the GIs to the gun pile.
I need help identifying the pistol that the french officer uses in the intro sequence. I will get back to you on this one later.- Steve
- Went back and looked at the weapons list for the film it was a Browning Hi Power since we were unable to get a French MAB and HiPowers were in the region at that time. - Steve
I need help identifying the grenade in the screencap below. The grenade is a Chinese Type 67 Hand Grenade.- Steve
I need help identifying the machine gun carried by the NVA soldier in the left-centre of the screencap. I think it might be a RPD but i am not sure. The weapon is a RPD that the NVA soldier is carrying. Loaded many belts for the weapon during filming. - Steve
I also need help identifying what kind of degtyaryov machine gun is in the screencaps below. The weapon is a DP-28 that we used on the show. - Steve
I think i gonna need Steve to help me in this one.Oliveira 01:36, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
In the foreground is one of our DP-28's and the Huey gunship has two M134 miniguns supplied by Dillon Aero for the film. Steve
Taken from the main article
- He was a non combatant Army soldier, who mostly likley fired that or the M14 during basic. He knows how to shoot. I.E. Saving Private Ryan."- Tyler Durden
- Actually during the battle of Ia drang Joe Galloway carried a XM16E1 and a revolver for self-defense and before going in the battle he was trained on how to use it while in the movie he goes to the battlefield empty handed.Oliveira 16:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Mosin Rifles
I really feel for the poor sons of bitches that got stuck with the M44's. That gun is a monster to shoot and the bolt is the exact opposite of smooth-S&Wshooter 03:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
MG34
How did the VC get the German weapons?Did they get it from the Soviet Union who scavenged it from German troops during WW2? - Kenny99 02:23, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yep, that's where they got the Kar98ks and MP40s. Both were common in the hands of NVA and Victor Charlie troops in the Nam. They also got some K98ks from China.-Oliveira 13:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- A lot of surplus German weapons were handed out to other countries and resistance movements by the USSR in the 1950s and 1960s. I have seen photos of MG34 and MG42 machine guns in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Even captured tanks were sent to other countries. PzKpfw IV (Panzer-IV) tanks were sent (sold?) to Syria and used against Israel. So a MG34 appearing in Indo-China in that period is not only historically correct, but a good example of attention to detail by the producers and movie armorers. (Wraith)
Almost Finished
I'm almost finished with this. I only need to find out about the Mosin Nagants and put pictures of the Miniguns and the grenades and some other things.-Oliveira 17:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Screencap Descriptions
Who added the stupid-ass descriptions under the screencaps that have absolutly no relation to the movie? -The Winchester
- I agree, Dumbass sarcastic remarks are stupid. Made by guys who like to belittle a film based on a single FRAME of film. BTW, people in the industry do look at this site, and those dumbass sarcastic comments do rub them the wrong way. MoviePropMaster2008 01:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- I suppose you hate the Far Cry 2 comments too.--Oliveira 17:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- I don't look at VG game pages as a rule. I have absolutely no interest in them. But I glanced at it, but there is a big difference. On movie pages you're insulting real people who actually look at this site, on a video game page, comments usually are insulting bad decisions in development or game play or artwork which is not the same as insulting a human being. MoviePropMaster2008 19:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- I suppose you hate the Far Cry 2 comments too.--Oliveira 17:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, Dumbass sarcastic remarks are stupid. Made by guys who like to belittle a film based on a single FRAME of film. BTW, people in the industry do look at this site, and those dumbass sarcastic comments do rub them the wrong way. MoviePropMaster2008 01:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, but we are insulting a human being's work. Anyway, i see the difference and i see that i taking the Far Cry 2 article as a reference was foolish. I also asked Vangelis to do that because the captions were getting boring and generic. Ben41 fixed that though.--Oliveira 20:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that making jabs and jokes about the actors or the guns and whatnot is bad taste for a war movie, or any movie based on actual events. However, Oliveia has a point. If it isn't fine to make fun of film depictions of guns, then it's not fine for anything. Especially if we consider that holding a gun correctly takes all of five seconds to figure out if you ask the right person, making an accurate gun model in a videogame takes countless hours depending on the complexity, and this isn't even considering all the people responsible for creating a finished product: concept artists, modelers, texture artists, animators, and for that matter, the people who decide what guns are going to be in a game in the first place. So in other words, a typical mistake in a movie takes one man to create and would be easy to fix(before filming is finished), while a mistake in a game could be any one person in the pipeline, and would take good time to fix, yet it's okay to ridicule all of them despite developers having to create everything from nothing. What I'm trying to say is this: actors deserve ridicule for bad handling more than developers do for bad gun modeling. Developers are real people too, only we can't see their faces in the finished product. Regardless, a war movie like this is the wrong place for such comments.--Mr-Jigsaw 22:48, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- I did, because Oliveira asked me to when he was updating the article. To be honest, I wasn't that sure about some of them, though in many cases the captions they replaced were useless to the point of being insulting (describing what was obviously going on in the shot, typically, as if we write captions for the selectively blind). Also, pointing out people in the background are grinning like idiots does have something to do with the movie, much like pointing out people have very poor weapon handling skills does (and is done on many other pages). Vangelis 20:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Also, the captions are hilarious-S&Wshooter 20:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- I am sorry, I too feel that they are somewhat inappropriate. I realize that it is a movie, but these are not fictional characters, they are based on real people. I feel those regarding the wounded are espiecially inappropriate. If you wish to find hilarity, watch a comedy, this is a serious war film and this is a serious webpage regarding it, so let the content reflect that. User:SAWGunner89|SAWGunner89]] 07:09, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
- I actually had the idea of the descriptions because the movie is depressing as all hell.--Oliveira 16:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well thats war for you. This is one of the more accurate war movie in Hollywood and it is susposed to be depressing. The dumb comments are rude and dishonorable to the vets and men who died. -The Winchester
Safety First.
Anyone notice that in two of the AK47 screencaps the safeties are on in combat situations?
M1911 (moved from main)
- No, he really did that-S&Wshooter 21:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Wait, Plumley actually carried a M1911 not an M1911A1 in the battle?--Oliveira 14:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
No, he didn't use an M16 because it looked too flimsy-S&Wshooter 21:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oh. Okey then. I wasn't saying he used and M16. I was just saying that he probably used an M1911A1.--Oliveira 21:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
--AdAstra2009 19:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Sam Elliot carried an M1911 NOT an M1911A1 in the film. that is 100% confirmed. Mel Gibson did carry an M1911A1, but Elliot carried the M1911. MoviePropMaster2008 23:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- I was refering to the real battle.--Oliveira 23:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Sam Elliot carried an M1911 NOT an M1911A1 in the film. that is 100% confirmed. Mel Gibson did carry an M1911A1, but Elliot carried the M1911. MoviePropMaster2008 23:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
I am guessing this, dont take my word, but I think The real Plumley used an M1911A1. If it was easy to aquire a regular M1911 during the early 1960s then it could be likely, but I doubt this. It is true though that the real Plumley didnt use an M16.
Bare in mind Plumley was a World War II vet as well. He could have had an original M1911 issued to him around that time. It's unlikely but he enlisted in 1942 which was close to the height of WWII, maybe they ran out of M1911A1s and issued him an original M1911. Or maybe the film makers gave him an M1911 to further distinguish him from the young grunts. --cool-breeze 15:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Crandall's Revolver
The revolver uses by Crandall is a Model 15 with 2 inches barrel and not a Model 13. When Major Crandall points his snub are clearly visible 3 important details: adjustable rear sight, a linear profile that continue upside the 2 inches barrel and Baughman front sight. All particulars that the model 13 does not have. However the Model 15 snub is still accurate because some M15 were produced in short version for the pilots.--Charly Driver 15:32, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
MAT-49
I can't tell if some of the MAT-49's used by the commies in the movie are 9mm or 7.62mm Soviet. You can tell if a MAT-49 is chambered in 7.62mm if it's barrel is longer. I really doubt that Hollywood would have such a rare gun (just were the hell would they get it? Off một VC đã chết?) Can somebody please tell me if if looks like this. - Kilgore 19:37, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- The MAT-49s converted to 7.62x25 not only had a longer barrel, but the magazine was curved as well. (Wraith)
No Jams?
I would like to start off by saying this was a great movie, but I was suprised that the movie didn't show any of the M16's jamming. Weren't they infamous for jamming in Vietnam? --MarineCorps1 23:35, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
- Only after weeks/months in the field with bad ball powder and misinformed GIs NOT CLEANING their guns. These guys just came off a forward base, they were elite soldiers and probably CLEANED their weapons before battle. The guns would not have jammed on the first three days of battle. :) MoviePropMaster2008 02:23, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- In 1965 the tales of the M-16 jamming were rife in the news media. The General's original book made no mention of jamming whatsoever. I've heard someone who was in the 173rd on Okinawa and with the initial deployment to Vietnam being told the weapon was "self cleaning" with them soon finding out that wasn't true scoop. I also believe an original issue steel 'waffle design' magazine had problems.Foofbun 21:42, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Need Help Identifying Stuntmen
- If anyone could help me identify some of the unknown actors or various other stunt men (whether Viet Cong or Marines), that would be absolutely helpful so thanks in advance. --Gunman5 (talk) 05:02, 24 November 2012 (EST)
Browning Hi-Power
If the pistol in the movie being used by the French Foreign Legion officer is a Hi-Power, it is not the version illustrated. Note the distinctive "hump" at the rear of the slide, below the sights, visible in the screen shots. This would be characteristic of early Hi-Powers (such as the Inglis production for Allies during WWII, which became the Canadian and British standard sidearm), but not the version shown. During the war in IndoChina, French forces were armed with a variety of weapons, including large numbers of surplus WWII Allied and Axis firearms, as the French military gradually resupplied itself with French arms. Browning Hi-Powers were used by both sides during WWII, and were among the surplus pistols used by the French army.
Otherwise, the pistol looks similar to a French army model 1935S or 9mm 1950 (aka MAC 50, which was based on the 1935S), both of which have a similar "hump" and were in use in the IndoChina wars. Of these, the long grip is more characteristic of the model 1950, although obtaining those is very difficult.
BTW, I have corrected the comment about the movie makers being unable to get a MAB so instead using a Hi-Power. The .32 MAB model D (the only MAB pistol used by the French army) was used only as a stopgap while production of the more powerful 1935A & 1935S ramped up to meet military needs when WWII started (in Europe) in 1939 and in the immediate post-war years. By the time of this ambush (1954) the MAB had been retired from use as an army sidearm, although it was popular with French colonial soldiers and Legionaires as a privately-owned personal weapon. Gun Shy (talk)