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:American Sniper
Template Status
Would it be alright to update the page's header template from upcoming to now showing to reflect the Christmas debut, or wait for the full release in January? Orca1 9904 (talk) 18:03, 25 December 2014 (EST)
- I'd be inclined to wait 'til the full release, but ultimately the fact it's on a partial release is irrelevant - The 'Now Showing' template is still technically correct, while the 'unreleased' template is now technically incorrect. Plus it'd have be to be changed at some point anyway, so may as well do it now. It still otherwise notes it's unavailable for capping outside of official images and trailers/clips, which I think is the central point. StanTheMan (talk) 22:24, 25 December 2014 (EST)
- IMDB has it as 2014. --Funkychinaman (talk) 09:49, 26 December 2014 (EST)
Marine Uniform Authenticity
I noticed in some of the screenshots that the Marines were wearing desert MARPAT uniforms with woodland camo Interceptor vests. I was under the impression the USMC stopped using woodland-patterned vests at about the same time as they stopped using the 6-color DCU uniforms?
Orca1 9904 (talk) 21:13, 4 January 2015 (EST)
- The USMC used woodland-patterned vests all the way through to the Second Battle of Fallujah in November 2004, and you can see them in many of the photos taken of the battle. The coyote brown variant of the Interceptor wasn't produced until after the invasion of Afghanistan (and the Interceptor started mass production in 1999 in only woodland camo) so it is accurate for the Marines to be wearing a mix of coyote-brown and woodland vests during the rough time frame between 2003 and 2005. --Markit (talk) 23:56, 5 January 2015 (EST)
- Markit is right. The USMC used both coyote brown and M81-pattern IBAs during the Second Battle of Fallujah in 2004. During that time, there were Marines using both the coyote brown and the M81-pattern vests, as there weren't enough coyote brown ones to go around. The film is accurate (surprisingly so) in this regard. In later scenes, the Marines start wearing MTV vests. I was pleasantly surprised how accurate they got the gear for the time periods, even though there aren't any time cards to show dates and such. Even the U.S. Army used M81 vests until the ACU was issued around late-2005, early 2006. Desert DCU-patterned IBAs were extremely rare and were only used by higher-ranking rear echelon guys, interpreters, MPs and USAF security forces. Laqueesha (talk) 19:28, 20 January 2015 (EST)
M14s look like M1As
They lack the selector switches on the receiver. 05:27, 5 January 2015 (EST)
Kyle's sidearm
In a picture from an article about Bradley Cooper's experience with sniper rifles during preproduction, Cooper appears to be carrying a 1911 of some sort. It could possibly be a Springfield TRP like Chris Kyle said that he carried in his first deployment. In his later deployments Kyle carried a Sig p220 to replace the Springfield that was damaged by shrapnel.
- Can't tell by this picture, but having seen the movie, I can say that he uses a SIG 226, same as the rest of the SEALs. (And it's definitely a 226 and not a 220; I saw the wider grip/frame.) Kyle's sidearm is, unfortunately, one of the movie's gun-related inaccuracies. But I suppose it's a forgivable inaccuracy compared to Lone Survivor depicting the SEALs using Berettas - which was entirely due to a product placement deal. -MT2008 (talk) 00:24, 15 January 2015 (EST)
In this picture, as well as a scene from his first deployment, where he is discussing the identity of the butcher, there is a beavertail and grip angle that is uncharacteristic of a Sig. Also, in said scene, the stainless steel muzzle can be seen below the hip holster that Cooper is wearing, also uncharacteristic of a Sig. However, these traits are charactetistic of a TRP.
- Don't remember that scene, and you may be right. But I recall seeing other scenes where he had a SIG 226, and I remember thinking to myself (having read the book), "Wrong gun." I suppose we'll have to wait for the Blu Ray to confirm. -MT2008 (talk) 22:49, 16 January 2015 (EST)
- Just got back from watching this and I can confirm that he has some sort of 1911 pistol during the first half of the film. It looks to have the wider magwell of the TRP but without a screenshot I can't be certain. I also noticed at least one AK during the sandstorm sequence was a Zastava. --cool-breeze (talk) 18:53, 18 January 2015 (EST)
- Don't remember that scene, and you may be right. But I recall seeing other scenes where he had a SIG 226, and I remember thinking to myself (having read the book), "Wrong gun." I suppose we'll have to wait for the Blu Ray to confirm. -MT2008 (talk) 22:49, 16 January 2015 (EST)
I saw an Episode of NRA Gun Gurus (Episode 203), this past week dealing with Hollywood Guns. In the episode they visited ISS and on the table was several of the weapons used for American Sniper. While they did not talk about the firearms from this movie specifically, a passing camera shot provided a nice look at what appeared to be a Springfield TRP Operator Full Rail with a label beside it that said, "American Sniper, Bradley Cooper." I have been trying to find that episode in order to provide a screenshot, but am coming up empty thus far. ----CLambert (talk) 01:07, 21 January 2015 (EST)
I think Kyle is definitely using the TRP then a P220. He was definitely using a 1911 type pistol in the early scenes. With the scenes with the P220, I looked at his spare mags to try and see if the gun was a P220 or a P226. The mags appeared to be single stack stainless mags, characteristics of a P220. On another note, how about Kyle's other sidearm, the Colt Single Action Army he was carrying at home near the end of the film? --Charterarmsoffduty (talk) 10:12, 1 February 2015 (EST)
Another pic
Got this from an online article about Kyle and the SEALS. It shows his Mk.18 and his sniper rifle on racks on the left side, if anyone wants to add it to the article. --DeltaOne (talk) 22:44, 16 January 2015 (EST)
TAC-388/Mk.13
You sure they're not the same rifle?
I really don't see any difference between the two.--Mandolin (talk) 00:19, 21 January 2015 (EST)
Yeah, they're the same rifle. Both a TAC-338. Spartan198 (talk) 22:11, 22 January 2015 (EST)
These are not even close to the same rifle. The one on top is in a McMillan A5 stock. It has a McMillan boult shroud, and a McMillan bolt handle. The rifle in the second two images has a Remington 700 bolt handle, Remington 700 bolt shroud, and FFS it says "Remington" on the side of the action. It is also sitting in an A2 stock, which was used for the MK13 initially, but has NEVER been used for the TAC-338. Furthermore, it is wearing a KAC 30 caliber suppressor (note that KAC does not and has never made a 338 suppressor). How is he getting a 338 Lapua to shoot through a 30 caliber can? You kids might want to get some new glasses. Regality (talk) 12:06 AM, 9 February 2015 (MST)
I can't see the difference, and the only markings I saw were the Remmington ones. I'd be shocked if any of the rifles were really .338, there's no reason not to use a 7.62 NATO rifle there's lots off ammo for. As for the suppressor, there's no reason an armorer couldn't or wouldn't stick an existing .30 suppressor on a .338. Why buy a new one when you already have one that fits? Personally, I think they're all Mk.13s come to think of it.--Mandolin (talk) 10:42, 9 February 2015 (EST)
If you shoot a 338 through a 30 cal can, the can will explode, that's a reason an armorer wouldn't do that. At this point I'm not sure if your serious or just trolling. Regality (talk) 11:49 AM, 9 February 2015 (MST)
- I just want to remind everyone that no one is actually firing live ammo at any point here. And most Hollywood suppressors aren't really suppressors. --Funkychinaman (talk) 13:55, 9 February 2015 (EST)
- I know they're not using live ammo or real suppressors. Not sure about Regality though...--Mandolin (talk) 14:44, 9 February 2015 (EST)
- I'm aware that they aren't using live ammo, but we are trying to determine what the rifle is based off the images we have. Either we ignore the can and don't know what caliber it is, or we account for the can and conclude it's a 30 cal rifle. The KAC suppressor takes a significant amount of work to adapt to a different platform, they didn't just slap it on there because it "fit". Even if it is a fake can, they put a lot of effort into getting it onto that gun. And even if they did move the suppressor to a rifle it doesn't belong on, you still haven't accounted for the fact that one rifle has a Remington action, and the other has a McMillan action. Maybe come back with a shred of evidence more than "I can't see the difference". Regality (talk) 3:17 PM, 9 February 2015 (MST)
- Top one certainly doesn't have the same scope on it (there's an extra diagonal control, the top turret is taller and the side one flatter) and it doesn't look like the barrel is the same either (compare the last shot of the TAC-338 to the one with the suppressor here). I think these are two similar-but-different guns as the page currently says.
- Regality, lose the attitude, all this chest-thumping about how stupid everyone is for not agreeing with you is not in any way productive even if you're right. I'm not sure how you could possbly claim "I don't see the difference" isn't a rebuttal to a claim that something is different, and since you're the one asserting there are two weapons here you have the burden of proof, not them. And FYI movie suppressors generally could not possibly explode even if you shot the wrong round though them because they have no baffles or wipes in them. Evil Tim (talk) 18:56, 9 February 2015 (EST)
- I'm aware that they aren't using live ammo, but we are trying to determine what the rifle is based off the images we have. Either we ignore the can and don't know what caliber it is, or we account for the can and conclude it's a 30 cal rifle. The KAC suppressor takes a significant amount of work to adapt to a different platform, they didn't just slap it on there because it "fit". Even if it is a fake can, they put a lot of effort into getting it onto that gun. And even if they did move the suppressor to a rifle it doesn't belong on, you still haven't accounted for the fact that one rifle has a Remington action, and the other has a McMillan action. Maybe come back with a shred of evidence more than "I can't see the difference". Regality (talk) 3:17 PM, 9 February 2015 (MST)
- I know they're not using live ammo or real suppressors. Not sure about Regality though...--Mandolin (talk) 14:44, 9 February 2015 (EST)
Please help ID.
Please help ID this rifle. --Ben41 (talk) 13:57, 21 January 2015 (EST)
- Pretty certain that's the TAC-338A. Orca1 9904 (talk) 20:39, 21 January 2015 (EST)
GAP Gladius in .308--Gwhysow (talk) 00:00, 24 January 2015 (EST)
- Is the TAC_388 based on the Remington 700? Because the rifle is very clearly marked as such. Also, there's a SEAL with what looks like a Mk.14 EBR.--Mandolin (talk) 18:23, 27 January 2015 (EST)
BTS Images
- Was the faux Abrams not available? I'm pretty sure even the Marine Corps had phased out M60 tanks by whenever the movie is set. --Funkychinaman (talk) 14:08, 21 January 2015 (EST)
- The tank was probably used as reference and then an M1A1 Abrams was added in digitally. --Ben41 (talk) 15:18, 21 January 2015 (EST)
- Yeah, the final scene was an Abrams. Didn't even notice it was CG.Temp89 (talk)
- Yeah, IMCDB has the final shot and it looks like it's a digital composite with a completely reworked turret and the hull front changed, but they've left some parts like the running gear which is completely incorrect for an Abrams. Evil Tim (talk) 21:21, 29 January 2015 (EST)
- Yeah, the final scene was an Abrams. Didn't even notice it was CG.Temp89 (talk)
- The tank was probably used as reference and then an M1A1 Abrams was added in digitally. --Ben41 (talk) 15:18, 21 January 2015 (EST)