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:Battleship (2012): Difference between revisions

From Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games
Jump to navigation Jump to search
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(62 intermediate revisions by 21 users not shown)
Line 6: Line 6:
:::Mind you, PotC is still around because it worked. Disney also tried Country Bears and Haunted Mansion movies, and they didn't. I'm with you, when I heard that they wanted to make a movie out of the game Battleship, I thought it was ludicrous, but if you just think of it as an alien attack movie that just happens to involve a battleship, it's not as silly anymore. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 17:55, 23 August 2011 (CDT)
:::Mind you, PotC is still around because it worked. Disney also tried Country Bears and Haunted Mansion movies, and they didn't. I'm with you, when I heard that they wanted to make a movie out of the game Battleship, I thought it was ludicrous, but if you just think of it as an alien attack movie that just happens to involve a battleship, it's not as silly anymore. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 17:55, 23 August 2011 (CDT)
::::Wait, wait, wait... A thought just stuck me here about this upcoming film, folks. Usually when a movie gets made about a children's board game, it is rushed out on a direct-to-video/DVD release, and a majority of the time, it's all cartoony, campy, silly, and targeted at the children that are under 7 years old, very much like how the Candy Land films from the 90s during that board game's popularity peak were all campy, cartoony, and for the kids under 7. But from what I got when seeing this trailer, is that this film is an ''updated'' version of the board game, and it's appealing to the grownups who played and were fans of this board game when they were kids (like me for instance). It doesn't look like a film that's appealing to the 7 year old audience, but rather, to the grownups who want to take a trip down memory lane and see a more 'modernized' and 'cooler' version of their favorite board game when they were children. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 09:18, 26 August 2011 (CDT)
::::Wait, wait, wait... A thought just stuck me here about this upcoming film, folks. Usually when a movie gets made about a children's board game, it is rushed out on a direct-to-video/DVD release, and a majority of the time, it's all cartoony, campy, silly, and targeted at the children that are under 7 years old, very much like how the Candy Land films from the 90s during that board game's popularity peak were all campy, cartoony, and for the kids under 7. But from what I got when seeing this trailer, is that this film is an ''updated'' version of the board game, and it's appealing to the grownups who played and were fans of this board game when they were kids (like me for instance). It doesn't look like a film that's appealing to the 7 year old audience, but rather, to the grownups who want to take a trip down memory lane and see a more 'modernized' and 'cooler' version of their favorite board game when they were children. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 09:18, 26 August 2011 (CDT)
:::::Here's the thing though: I don't see any connection to the actual game itself other than the fact that they went out of their way to put a battleship in it. They probably could've gotten away with calling [[Under Siege]] "Battleship" if they really wanted to. Unless there's actually a scene where someone fires the battleship's guns by sticking a little peg in a hole, I don't see how it's related to the game. (And I think this has cartoony down pat.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 09:53, 26 August 2011 (CDT)
[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1468290/ Well, we now know what's next]. I assume that the bad pilot who just spins in circles in the middle will die and leave it all up to a young maverick who knows his advanced space fighter has a boost button and that if you hit the edge of space you come out on the other side. In the end he enters "DIK" on the high score table and is remembered forever because he saved an area of empty space from vector graphics and annoying noises. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:34, 11 May 2012 (CDT)
Hate to break it but, A Monopoly film is in the works, and a remake of Clue. Whatever next? Parcheesi? Sorry? Candlyland?-[[User:The Gunslinger 3|The Gunslinger 3]] 20:17, 31 May 2012 (CDT)
==This is what I'm hoping==
(a) There is some sort of explanation why the US Navy UN-retires one or more battleships for a military exercise.
(b) Based on the trailer, the alien device creates a force field bubble that encompasses a huge portion of the Pacific (including the entire state of Hawaii if I'm not mistaken)
(c) The aliens force the US Navy into some sort of 'duel to the death' under gladiator type restrictions (why I don't know).
(d) Ultimately after conventional battle, some sort of event occurs where the ships are blinded from seeing each other and each ship has to launch a salvo based on where they 'think' the enemy is. 
(e) The film ends when the hero ship ultimately sinks the last Alien war machine ... but then this assumes that we've lost thousands of Naval and Marine Corp personnel from all the other ships that were destroyed, which would SUCK. 
''Just some musing that's all.  In all probability, knowing Hollywood, NONE of the obvious explanations will be offered and fans will be annoyed by the lack of logic in the script, but what else is new?'' [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 13:22, 26 August 2011 (CDT)
:Well MPM, you are correct on the part where the trailer showcased the forcefield encompassing a huge portion of the Pacific including Hawaii. And I guess as far as everything else is concerned with this film, chances are it will be in the same vein as the Transformers films (since both Transformers and Battleship are owned by Hasbro); a 2 hour toy commercial. However, instead of it being about giant robots fighting, it'll be about naval warships blowing the shit out of each other. I just hope they include the classic line that the boardgame is known for ("Aargh! You sunk my Battleship!"). Also, if my assumptions serve me right, this movie is gonna be a giant advertisement tool that the U.S. Navy ''might'' use to get more and more people to enlist in that branch of the United States military. Just wait and see, there will probably be a huge increase in enlistment for the U.S. Navy after the debut of this film ;) --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 10:49, 16 September 2011 (CDT)
::*cough*''[[Top Gun|TopGun]]''*cough* [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 13:26, 16 September 2011 (CDT)
:::Exactly! --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 21:42, 16 September 2011 (CDT)
::::Didn't ''Battle: Los Angeles'' also cause an influx in recruit numbers for the Marine Corps? I vaguely remember reading something about this, but I don't recall where or when. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:48, 19 September 2011 (CDT)
:::::Nope, I believe it was in your overactive imagination! LOL! jk But in the case of [[Top Gun]], the U.S. navy did have a huge spike in recruitment.  What I found funny was that there were guys I knew who enlisted in the Navy to become 'Top Gun' pilots, without realizing that (a) you have to get into the Naval Aviator program, which is damned hard to do, (b)  you have to be really good, in fact, tops in your field and (c) it's a total crapshoot whether or not you get picked to be sent to Top Gun in the first place, even if you fulfill the first two requirements.  A lot of guys with 'stars in their eyes' ended up being either logistical support in the bowels of an aircraft carrier or a minor logistical job at a land based Naval Air Station. ;) Doh!!!!!! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 15:04, 19 September 2011 (CDT)
I'm just watching it in case Liam Neeson says, "You sank my battleship."
- [[User:Scattergun|Scattergun]]
::Apparently, from those who have supposedly seen it, that phrase IS UTTERED in the film. :D  [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:11, 7 May 2012 (CDT)
:"It's on J-10." "But nobody ever puts anything on J-10!" "THAT'S WHY IT'LL BE THERE!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:42, 7 May 2012 (CDT)
Just saw this movie for myself, and well... it's a good film as far as the visuals, effects and battle sequences go, especially the U.S.S. Missouri scenes, now that was an EPIC battle, and it was a nice tribute/salute to all the retired vets who served on that ship. But the story? Well, a little lacking... but then again, that didn't surprise anyone. Also, it's really disappointing that there's NO submarines featured AT ALL in this film, cause then they could have been a real help against the alien threat through underwater combat... oh well. In closing, this is yet another "popcorn entertainment" film that yes, is a glorified, over-the-top toy commercial/subtle Navy recruitment ad/tribute to the United States Navy and to all it's active and retired servicemen. And I liked it. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 02:30, 26 May 2012 (CDT)
So now we got a Navy SEALs movie ([[Act of Valor]]), an MC movie ([[Battle: Los Angeles]]), a Navy movie ([[Battleship]]), and an AF movie ([[Top Gun]]). Hmm, I wonder what's next. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 13:12, 30 May 2012 (CDT)
:''[[Top Gun]]'' was naval aviation, not AF. The AF has... ''[[Transformers]]''? Basically, the Navy gets around. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 13:45, 30 May 2012 (CDT)
And Army: [[Black Hawk Down]]?
::Hmm... well, I guess there could be a movie that focuses solely on the National Guard branch of the U.S. Armed Forces? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 00:39, 2 June 2012 (CDT)
:::''[[Southern Comfort]]''  --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:11, 2 June 2012 (CDT)
::::And ''[[First Blood]]''. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 09:47, 2 June 2012 (CDT)
== Minigun ==
I don't think the minigun is a Dillon, as it has the wrong berrel set-up. I think it might be an earlier Garwood Industries M134G. The earlier versions had the triple barrel clamp with solid flash hider unlike the Dillon which I have only ever seen with the single barrel clamp. Or does anyone know if the earlier Dillon barrel clamps were the same design as the Garwoods?
[[File:Early Garwood M134G.jpg|thumb|450px|none|Garwood Industries M134G - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
:According to Navweapons, the Navy uses [http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_30-cal_GAU17.htm  M134Ds]. It may be the first one on [http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_30-cal_GAU17_pics.htm  this page.] --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 18:05, 18 November 2011 (CST)
::The first one on that page is a regular Dillon M134D. Note how the barrels on a DIllon have 1 thick ring in the middle and a flash hider on the end, as opposed to the movie gun which has the thick ring, two thinner rings and then the flash hider, like the M134G pic above. I have never seen anything apart from a single clamp Dillon or a GAU-17A being used by the real US Navy, so this gun caught my eye. Could be a standard GE M134 barrel clamp with a fake (and by fake I mean armourer made, will serve the same purpose as it is just a cylinder) flash hider attached. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)
:::Also, just checked the Garwood website, and it isn't the early models that have the 4 flanged barrel clamp but it is a standard option for better heat dissipation.  --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:37, 18 November 2011 (CST)
::The Miniguns used in this film were old GE's upgraded by Garwood Industries. --[[User:Phoenixent|phoenixent]] 19:55, 18 November 2011 (CST)
== Movie miniguns ==
You have a good eye, all of the latest movies which incorporate minigun's are either live M-134G weapons manufactured at Garwood Industries of Display minigun's manufactured specifically for the movie industry. The vast majority of movie weapons are supplied by Independent Studio Services (ISS) based in California. ISS has purchased several live minigun's and Display minigun's from G.I. for their support of the latest movies. Battle Ship 2012, Transformers, Green Hornet, Green Lantern, and the latest Predator (Backpack included) movie was supported by Garwood Industries and utilize the G.I. M-134G  exclusively. The Garwood Industries M-134G has been US Military proven to be superior in performance and reliability and is used in the movie industries primarily for the fact that our system handles the blanks used in the filming without jams or failures.
Garwood Industries components are being integrated into the US DOD minigun program to upgrade the old Dillon/GE style weapons.
And yes, the version pictured is one of our earlier versions from 2004.
Regards,
Tracy Garwood
President
Garwood Industries
::Thanks for the response but not all of the Miniguns used in the latest films are Garwood Industries. Independent Studio Services gives that line that they supply all the movies. The company I do work for an developed parts for the Miniguns to work at perfectly on blanks has four times as many M134's than ISS. We supplied the M134's for [[We Were Soldiers]],[[Death Race]], [[Mr. & Mrs. Smith]],[[Terminator Salvation]], [[G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra]], [[Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen]], [[Transformers: Dark of the Moon]], [[A Man Apart]], Superman 2 and R.I.P.D. We pride ourselves on having a higher quality and a lower failure rates than ISS on our M134 weapon system.--[[User:Phoenixent|Steve]] 19:37, 12 December 2011 (CST)
:::Thank you Tracy, and I gotta pipe in here too.  ISS claims they do all the movies (and they do a TON of movies) but others have mini guns as well (Cinema Weaponry for example) and I don't think everyone elses' miniguns are just sitting around all year long. ;)  But it is nice to hear from a firearms industry rep.  I welcome contributors from various companies to help us get better and more accurate information. :)  [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:37, 4 February 2012 (CST)
== HK 416 in the third trailer ==
In the german [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO4CScx0HwA&feature=g-all-u&context=G274acbdFAAAAAAAAAAA trailer] for Battleship  at 1:30 you can see in a short flashing sequence a HK AR15 style gun. In my opinion it may be an HK 416. The HK markings are good to identify. I took a screenshot which you can see [http://www.dragonwolves.de/files/HK416-battleship3.jpg here].
==Weapons==
I saw some behind the scenes footage before the Avengers movie, there was an FN MAG/ M240 (M240G?) and a 25mm Bushmaster. Anyone scene the movie yet?--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 18:18, 6 May 2012 (CDT)
==HK416 used by the Navy?==
Ok correct me if I am wrong but I'm pretty sure the Navy were never issued HK416s. -[[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]]
::You'll have to see the movie for the answers to a lot of your 'gotchas' ;) [[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]].  The HK416 is used by the Hawaii County Sheriff's department in the movie, not the Navy. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 16:16, 22 May 2012 (CDT)
Yeah, you'll find that for a lot of movies with military portrayals. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes, meh. Also this is a sci fi movie. I think we can forgo worrying about if the weapons they got the Navy using were actually issued. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:42, 9 May 2012 (CDT)
Regular Navy, no. My brother does search and seizure and is generally armed with a Mk.18. I can see DEVGRU (SEAL Team Six or whatever they call themselves these days) using the 416 and I'm pretty sure they have, but normal Navy personnel would most likely be armed with an M4/M16 or an M14. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 06:07, 10 May 2012 (CDT)
:There's really no need to think too much about it. This is a movie. The HK416 is being used in ''Battleship'' because it's currently a trendy weapon in Hollywood, not because it would be issued to Naval personnel in real life. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 11:07, 10 May 2012 (CDT)
Oh I was just asking because I knew some parts of the US Military used them but I wasn't sure. Thanks for the answer. :) -[[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]]
Just an aside to the description, but the Army's Asymmetric Warfare Group was forced by the Army to turn in their 416s back in 2008, so they no longer use it. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 04:26, 11 May 2012 (CDT)
Irrelevant as this is a movie, but the SEALs do use the HK416. It was widely reported that when SEAL Team Six killed Osama Bin Laden in 2011 they were armed with HK416 carbines.  --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:09, 11 May 2012 (CDT)
You know what else the Navy doesn't use? Battleships. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:23, 11 May 2012 (CDT)
::I also recently saw the movie.  I actually REALLY LIKED it.  The US Navy uses their latest missile frigates and destroyers during RIMPAC.  the only time we see "Big Mo" is when the survivors of the destroyed USS JOHN PAUL JONES use it for one suicide mission against an alien ship off the coast of Oahu.  I liked the fact that in the beginning of the movie, the NAVY has a ceremony and honors the largest surviving group of the former retired Sailors from the decommissioned Missouri, all old men.  The battleship is sitting in Pearl Harbor as a museum (kinda like the Galactica was in Battlestar Galactica)  Thus they had a group of experienced 'old men' who volunteered to show all the young navy guys  how to work the old battleship.  The only plot hole that was too big to ignore was why they would still have live munitions for the 16 inch guns on the ship when in the movie, the USS Missouri is a museum and tourist attraction (as it is in real life).  [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 16:12, 22 May 2012 (CDT)
At least the Navy is actually '''in a movie'''. Usually in movies with the military in them usually focuses on the  SEALs, Marines, or even Army Rangers (not that there is anything wrong with that). -[[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]]
-Saw the Movie and the H&K 416 is not used by the navy. It was found in a Hawaii Sheriff Dept vehicle. the Navy individuals used M4s with Acogs(not that made much sense, since they were CQB inside the ship) and a shotgun that I didn't get a good look at. The 416 had no attachments just BUIS that were not H&K Diopter sites. Kinda nice to see an AR platform not loaded with accessories -insertjjs
Hate to break it but, A Monopoly film is in the works, and a remake of Clue. Whatever next? Parcheesi? Sorry? Candlyland?-[[User:The Gunslinger 3|The Gunslinger 3]] 20:17, 31 May 2012 (CDT)
:This movie has tanked at the box office, which may kill off any future board game movies. But before you condemn them as a whole, remember, ''[[Clue]]'' was GREAT. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 20:24, 31 May 2012 (CDT)
== There's an AUG in there, too ==
During the news report on the RIMPAC exercises at the beginning of the movie, there's a brief shot of an Australian soldier with an AUG. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 00:24, 5 March 2016 (EST)

Latest revision as of 05:24, 5 March 2016

...Really? So, how long until that Minesweeper movie comes out? Evil Tim 01:24, 18 August 2011 (CDT)

Wow. Just wow. I realize Hollywood is running out of original ideas, but have they run out of movies to remake and video games to base on so quick that they're basing movies on board games? What's next? Chutes & Ladders? Sorry? Scrabble? Spartan198 16:07, 22 August 2011 (CDT)

Are you talking about the same people who made a four movie, billion dollar franchise from an amusement park ride? (Pirates of the Caribbean.) --Funkychinaman 16:14, 22 August 2011 (CDT)
At least the PotC ride had some personality. Battleship is a two-sided tray where you try to "sink" tiny plastic ships by guessing grid numbers. And they're making an alien invasion flick of it! Battleship had zilch whatsoever to do with aliens. It's like making an Iraq War movie and calling it Xbox: The Movie. Spartan198 17:09, 23 August 2011 (CDT)
Mind you, PotC is still around because it worked. Disney also tried Country Bears and Haunted Mansion movies, and they didn't. I'm with you, when I heard that they wanted to make a movie out of the game Battleship, I thought it was ludicrous, but if you just think of it as an alien attack movie that just happens to involve a battleship, it's not as silly anymore. --Funkychinaman 17:55, 23 August 2011 (CDT)
Wait, wait, wait... A thought just stuck me here about this upcoming film, folks. Usually when a movie gets made about a children's board game, it is rushed out on a direct-to-video/DVD release, and a majority of the time, it's all cartoony, campy, silly, and targeted at the children that are under 7 years old, very much like how the Candy Land films from the 90s during that board game's popularity peak were all campy, cartoony, and for the kids under 7. But from what I got when seeing this trailer, is that this film is an updated version of the board game, and it's appealing to the grownups who played and were fans of this board game when they were kids (like me for instance). It doesn't look like a film that's appealing to the 7 year old audience, but rather, to the grownups who want to take a trip down memory lane and see a more 'modernized' and 'cooler' version of their favorite board game when they were children. --ThatoneguyJosh 09:18, 26 August 2011 (CDT)
Here's the thing though: I don't see any connection to the actual game itself other than the fact that they went out of their way to put a battleship in it. They probably could've gotten away with calling Under Siege "Battleship" if they really wanted to. Unless there's actually a scene where someone fires the battleship's guns by sticking a little peg in a hole, I don't see how it's related to the game. (And I think this has cartoony down pat.) --Funkychinaman 09:53, 26 August 2011 (CDT)

Well, we now know what's next. I assume that the bad pilot who just spins in circles in the middle will die and leave it all up to a young maverick who knows his advanced space fighter has a boost button and that if you hit the edge of space you come out on the other side. In the end he enters "DIK" on the high score table and is remembered forever because he saved an area of empty space from vector graphics and annoying noises. Evil Tim 07:34, 11 May 2012 (CDT)

Hate to break it but, A Monopoly film is in the works, and a remake of Clue. Whatever next? Parcheesi? Sorry? Candlyland?-The Gunslinger 3 20:17, 31 May 2012 (CDT)

This is what I'm hoping

(a) There is some sort of explanation why the US Navy UN-retires one or more battleships for a military exercise. (b) Based on the trailer, the alien device creates a force field bubble that encompasses a huge portion of the Pacific (including the entire state of Hawaii if I'm not mistaken) (c) The aliens force the US Navy into some sort of 'duel to the death' under gladiator type restrictions (why I don't know). (d) Ultimately after conventional battle, some sort of event occurs where the ships are blinded from seeing each other and each ship has to launch a salvo based on where they 'think' the enemy is. (e) The film ends when the hero ship ultimately sinks the last Alien war machine ... but then this assumes that we've lost thousands of Naval and Marine Corp personnel from all the other ships that were destroyed, which would SUCK. Just some musing that's all. In all probability, knowing Hollywood, NONE of the obvious explanations will be offered and fans will be annoyed by the lack of logic in the script, but what else is new? MoviePropMaster2008 13:22, 26 August 2011 (CDT)

Well MPM, you are correct on the part where the trailer showcased the forcefield encompassing a huge portion of the Pacific including Hawaii. And I guess as far as everything else is concerned with this film, chances are it will be in the same vein as the Transformers films (since both Transformers and Battleship are owned by Hasbro); a 2 hour toy commercial. However, instead of it being about giant robots fighting, it'll be about naval warships blowing the shit out of each other. I just hope they include the classic line that the boardgame is known for ("Aargh! You sunk my Battleship!"). Also, if my assumptions serve me right, this movie is gonna be a giant advertisement tool that the U.S. Navy might use to get more and more people to enlist in that branch of the United States military. Just wait and see, there will probably be a huge increase in enlistment for the U.S. Navy after the debut of this film ;) --ThatoneguyJosh 10:49, 16 September 2011 (CDT)
Exactly! --ThatoneguyJosh 21:42, 16 September 2011 (CDT)
Didn't Battle: Los Angeles also cause an influx in recruit numbers for the Marine Corps? I vaguely remember reading something about this, but I don't recall where or when. Spartan198 08:48, 19 September 2011 (CDT)
Nope, I believe it was in your overactive imagination! LOL! jk But in the case of Top Gun, the U.S. navy did have a huge spike in recruitment. What I found funny was that there were guys I knew who enlisted in the Navy to become 'Top Gun' pilots, without realizing that (a) you have to get into the Naval Aviator program, which is damned hard to do, (b) you have to be really good, in fact, tops in your field and (c) it's a total crapshoot whether or not you get picked to be sent to Top Gun in the first place, even if you fulfill the first two requirements. A lot of guys with 'stars in their eyes' ended up being either logistical support in the bowels of an aircraft carrier or a minor logistical job at a land based Naval Air Station. ;) Doh!!!!!! MoviePropMaster2008 15:04, 19 September 2011 (CDT)

I'm just watching it in case Liam Neeson says, "You sank my battleship." - Scattergun

Apparently, from those who have supposedly seen it, that phrase IS UTTERED in the film. :D MoviePropMaster2008 02:11, 7 May 2012 (CDT)
"It's on J-10." "But nobody ever puts anything on J-10!" "THAT'S WHY IT'LL BE THERE!" Evil Tim 01:42, 7 May 2012 (CDT)

Just saw this movie for myself, and well... it's a good film as far as the visuals, effects and battle sequences go, especially the U.S.S. Missouri scenes, now that was an EPIC battle, and it was a nice tribute/salute to all the retired vets who served on that ship. But the story? Well, a little lacking... but then again, that didn't surprise anyone. Also, it's really disappointing that there's NO submarines featured AT ALL in this film, cause then they could have been a real help against the alien threat through underwater combat... oh well. In closing, this is yet another "popcorn entertainment" film that yes, is a glorified, over-the-top toy commercial/subtle Navy recruitment ad/tribute to the United States Navy and to all it's active and retired servicemen. And I liked it. --ThatoneguyJosh 02:30, 26 May 2012 (CDT)

So now we got a Navy SEALs movie (Act of Valor), an MC movie (Battle: Los Angeles), a Navy movie (Battleship), and an AF movie (Top Gun). Hmm, I wonder what's next. - Kenny99 13:12, 30 May 2012 (CDT)

Top Gun was naval aviation, not AF. The AF has... Transformers? Basically, the Navy gets around. --Funkychinaman 13:45, 30 May 2012 (CDT)

And Army: Black Hawk Down?

Hmm... well, I guess there could be a movie that focuses solely on the National Guard branch of the U.S. Armed Forces? --ThatoneguyJosh 00:39, 2 June 2012 (CDT)
Southern Comfort --commando552 03:11, 2 June 2012 (CDT)
And First Blood. --Funkychinaman 09:47, 2 June 2012 (CDT)

Minigun

I don't think the minigun is a Dillon, as it has the wrong berrel set-up. I think it might be an earlier Garwood Industries M134G. The earlier versions had the triple barrel clamp with solid flash hider unlike the Dillon which I have only ever seen with the single barrel clamp. Or does anyone know if the earlier Dillon barrel clamps were the same design as the Garwoods?

Error creating thumbnail: File missing
Garwood Industries M134G - 7.62x51mm NATO
According to Navweapons, the Navy uses M134Ds. It may be the first one on this page. --Funkychinaman 18:05, 18 November 2011 (CST)
The first one on that page is a regular Dillon M134D. Note how the barrels on a DIllon have 1 thick ring in the middle and a flash hider on the end, as opposed to the movie gun which has the thick ring, two thinner rings and then the flash hider, like the M134G pic above. I have never seen anything apart from a single clamp Dillon or a GAU-17A being used by the real US Navy, so this gun caught my eye. Could be a standard GE M134 barrel clamp with a fake (and by fake I mean armourer made, will serve the same purpose as it is just a cylinder) flash hider attached. --commando552 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)
Also, just checked the Garwood website, and it isn't the early models that have the 4 flanged barrel clamp but it is a standard option for better heat dissipation. --commando552 18:37, 18 November 2011 (CST)
The Miniguns used in this film were old GE's upgraded by Garwood Industries. --phoenixent 19:55, 18 November 2011 (CST)

Movie miniguns

You have a good eye, all of the latest movies which incorporate minigun's are either live M-134G weapons manufactured at Garwood Industries of Display minigun's manufactured specifically for the movie industry. The vast majority of movie weapons are supplied by Independent Studio Services (ISS) based in California. ISS has purchased several live minigun's and Display minigun's from G.I. for their support of the latest movies. Battle Ship 2012, Transformers, Green Hornet, Green Lantern, and the latest Predator (Backpack included) movie was supported by Garwood Industries and utilize the G.I. M-134G exclusively. The Garwood Industries M-134G has been US Military proven to be superior in performance and reliability and is used in the movie industries primarily for the fact that our system handles the blanks used in the filming without jams or failures. Garwood Industries components are being integrated into the US DOD minigun program to upgrade the old Dillon/GE style weapons. And yes, the version pictured is one of our earlier versions from 2004. Regards, Tracy Garwood President Garwood Industries


Thanks for the response but not all of the Miniguns used in the latest films are Garwood Industries. Independent Studio Services gives that line that they supply all the movies. The company I do work for an developed parts for the Miniguns to work at perfectly on blanks has four times as many M134's than ISS. We supplied the M134's for We Were Soldiers,Death Race, Mr. & Mrs. Smith,Terminator Salvation, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, A Man Apart, Superman 2 and R.I.P.D. We pride ourselves on having a higher quality and a lower failure rates than ISS on our M134 weapon system.--Steve 19:37, 12 December 2011 (CST)
Thank you Tracy, and I gotta pipe in here too. ISS claims they do all the movies (and they do a TON of movies) but others have mini guns as well (Cinema Weaponry for example) and I don't think everyone elses' miniguns are just sitting around all year long. ;) But it is nice to hear from a firearms industry rep. I welcome contributors from various companies to help us get better and more accurate information. :) MoviePropMaster2008 21:37, 4 February 2012 (CST)

HK 416 in the third trailer

In the german trailer for Battleship at 1:30 you can see in a short flashing sequence a HK AR15 style gun. In my opinion it may be an HK 416. The HK markings are good to identify. I took a screenshot which you can see here.

Weapons

I saw some behind the scenes footage before the Avengers movie, there was an FN MAG/ M240 (M240G?) and a 25mm Bushmaster. Anyone scene the movie yet?--Mandolin 18:18, 6 May 2012 (CDT)

HK416 used by the Navy?

Ok correct me if I am wrong but I'm pretty sure the Navy were never issued HK416s. -Mr.Ice

You'll have to see the movie for the answers to a lot of your 'gotchas' ;) Mr.Ice. The HK416 is used by the Hawaii County Sheriff's department in the movie, not the Navy. MoviePropMaster2008 16:16, 22 May 2012 (CDT)

Yeah, you'll find that for a lot of movies with military portrayals. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes, meh. Also this is a sci fi movie. I think we can forgo worrying about if the weapons they got the Navy using were actually issued. Excalibur01 22:42, 9 May 2012 (CDT)

Regular Navy, no. My brother does search and seizure and is generally armed with a Mk.18. I can see DEVGRU (SEAL Team Six or whatever they call themselves these days) using the 416 and I'm pretty sure they have, but normal Navy personnel would most likely be armed with an M4/M16 or an M14. --DeltaOne 06:07, 10 May 2012 (CDT)

There's really no need to think too much about it. This is a movie. The HK416 is being used in Battleship because it's currently a trendy weapon in Hollywood, not because it would be issued to Naval personnel in real life. -MT2008 11:07, 10 May 2012 (CDT)

Oh I was just asking because I knew some parts of the US Military used them but I wasn't sure. Thanks for the answer. :) -Mr.Ice

Just an aside to the description, but the Army's Asymmetric Warfare Group was forced by the Army to turn in their 416s back in 2008, so they no longer use it. --DeltaOne 04:26, 11 May 2012 (CDT)

Irrelevant as this is a movie, but the SEALs do use the HK416. It was widely reported that when SEAL Team Six killed Osama Bin Laden in 2011 they were armed with HK416 carbines. --commando552 05:09, 11 May 2012 (CDT)

You know what else the Navy doesn't use? Battleships. Evil Tim 05:23, 11 May 2012 (CDT)

I also recently saw the movie. I actually REALLY LIKED it. The US Navy uses their latest missile frigates and destroyers during RIMPAC. the only time we see "Big Mo" is when the survivors of the destroyed USS JOHN PAUL JONES use it for one suicide mission against an alien ship off the coast of Oahu. I liked the fact that in the beginning of the movie, the NAVY has a ceremony and honors the largest surviving group of the former retired Sailors from the decommissioned Missouri, all old men. The battleship is sitting in Pearl Harbor as a museum (kinda like the Galactica was in Battlestar Galactica) Thus they had a group of experienced 'old men' who volunteered to show all the young navy guys how to work the old battleship. The only plot hole that was too big to ignore was why they would still have live munitions for the 16 inch guns on the ship when in the movie, the USS Missouri is a museum and tourist attraction (as it is in real life). MoviePropMaster2008 16:12, 22 May 2012 (CDT)

At least the Navy is actually in a movie. Usually in movies with the military in them usually focuses on the SEALs, Marines, or even Army Rangers (not that there is anything wrong with that). -Mr.Ice

-Saw the Movie and the H&K 416 is not used by the navy. It was found in a Hawaii Sheriff Dept vehicle. the Navy individuals used M4s with Acogs(not that made much sense, since they were CQB inside the ship) and a shotgun that I didn't get a good look at. The 416 had no attachments just BUIS that were not H&K Diopter sites. Kinda nice to see an AR platform not loaded with accessories -insertjjs

Hate to break it but, A Monopoly film is in the works, and a remake of Clue. Whatever next? Parcheesi? Sorry? Candlyland?-The Gunslinger 3 20:17, 31 May 2012 (CDT)

This movie has tanked at the box office, which may kill off any future board game movies. But before you condemn them as a whole, remember, Clue was GREAT. --Funkychinaman 20:24, 31 May 2012 (CDT)

There's an AUG in there, too

During the news report on the RIMPAC exercises at the beginning of the movie, there's a brief shot of an Australian soldier with an AUG. Spartan198 (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2016 (EST)

Retrieved from "https://www.buildlogs.org/index.php?title=Talk:Battleship_(2012)&oldid=1008189"