Realistic gun fight movies?

[IceFire 0]

I got this idea from that other thread here.

I was wondering if anyone knew of any good realistic tactical movies with good realistic gunfights.

I mean real tactics, and real gun physics. Something with the military, or maybe SWAT team.

I once heard of this one low budget move called "Renegade force" or something like that. I heard it is very realistic from people who are in SWAT or the military themselves.

It's about a SWAT team that decides to take the law into their own hands and start taking out the bad guys.

Eventually an FBI HRT team is deployed to stop them.

The movie was made to be a realistic tactical movie. It shows the teams setting up, clearing rooms, and realistic gun fights where tactics and team positioning is like in real life.

Although I can't seem to find this movie, does anyone happen to know about movies like this?

[edc 0]

Black Hawk Down is very realistic. Actually the insertion was done by real Rangers, and they had SOAR pilots flying the blackhawks/lil birds. Also I think the actors that were portraing the Rangers/Delta went through a two week training.

[foxer 0]

Renegade force was a cool hbo made movie(i think hbo).

[expendable 0]

Try Sniper or The Way of the gun for starters.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

Heat and Ronin.

[IceFire 0]

I did try "Sniper" with Tom Berringer just last week.

While the action seemed realistic. The drama, and the tension between the 2 snipers seemed so unrealstic.  It was too hokey, and cliche.

Yep, the one good ol down to earth simple bush smart Marine Gunnery sargeant sniper.  And the bad attitude NSA marksman corrupt beaurocrat who doesn't know anything about the jungle.  Pitted together to form an uneasy alliance while trying to not kill eachother.

I'm looking for realistic TACTICAL movies.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Nov. 28 2002,09:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Black Hawk Down is very realistic.  <span id='postcolor'>

Realistic? Hardly. Maybe from a technical viewpoint, when it comes to military equipment, but the friend/foe ratio is ludicrous. This is part from hurt pride and part from a very racist point of view. The Somalis are shown like dumb fucks whose only interest is killing the American heroes and don't mind to be mowed down in huge numbers not, caring about their own life. They are evil faceless villans but luckily for our heroes they perform worse then pointing a rifle in the wrong direction.

Even if you would for one would for one second believe that the Somalis are drugged zombies high on war and murder, anybody knowing anything about urban warfare can see that the ratio of good/bad guys is ridiculous and not to mention the ratio of dead good/bad guys.

The book by Bowden that it is "based on" is considerably better. The movie is racist shite propaganda aimed at the american market in the aftermath of the wtc attacks.

[Balschoiw 0]

Funny what people take for real only cause they´ve seen it in the movies

Same with Pearl Harbour.

Truth about Pearl Harbour:

Your president knew about the attack before it happened, but he let it happen to get US into war. He said so on his own very much later on, but I doubt history books in US have been changed yet. I liked the opposition of people actually having been in Pearl Harbour assault (US side) that did not take part in the premier of the movie, cause they pointed out it is not based on true fact, but fiction. Same with the brave black cook...that was just nonsense.

I dont know any actual movie that shows real firefights or real scenarios. If you want to have an example how a movie should look like take one that is ages old and called "Die Brücke" or "The bridge" in english. It´s about some teenagers that have to defend a bridge in the ending days of WW2. It´s more psychological than action driven, but still a very good movie in my opinion.

[-76-Chavez 0]

"Blackhawk down" is bxxxsxxx IMHO.

Its damed unrealitic.

The way they move is false...

Then tzhey do something right: They try to surpress enemy by firing when moving but where did they get that much ammo?

They have that lil equipement qith them, I wondered where the were hiding the magzines?

Maybe in their underwear...

[crassus 0]

Black Hawk Down? No comment--wasn't there. Do not know anyone who was.

Some things you should just keep your mouth shut about. Period.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Nov. 28 2002,16:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">He said so on his own very much later on, but I doubt history books in US have been changed yet.<span id='postcolor'>

Ha! Learned about it in high school history class! MWAAHAHA!

Anyway, about the movies. Are you looking for something more recent or a classic?

[Longinius 1]

"Same with the brave black cook...that was just nonsense."

I am quite sure that guy existed... Or maybe you meant his efforts were exagerated?

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq57-4.htm

"He returned to West Virginia and on 3 August, and was serving in that battleship when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941. Miller had arisen at 6 a.m., and was collecting laundry when the alarm for general quarters sounded. He headed for his battle station, the antiaircraft battery magazine amidship, only to discover that torpedo damage had wrecked it, so he went on deck. Because of his physical prowess, he was assigned to carry wounded fellow Sailors to places of greater safety. Then an officer ordered him to the bridge to aid the mortally wounded Captain of the ship. He subsequently manned a 50 caliber Browning anti-aircraft machine gun until he ran out of ammunition and was ordered to abandon ship.

Miller described firing the machine gun during the battle, a weapon which he had not been trained to operate: "It wasn't hard. I just pulled the trigger and she worked fine. I had watched the others with these guns. I guess I fired her for about fifteen minutes. I think I got one of those Jap planes. They were diving pretty close to us."

During the attack, Japanese aircraft dropped two armored piercing bombs through the deck of the battleship and launched five 18-inch aircraft torpedoes into her port side. Heavily damaged by the ensuing explosions, and suffering from severe flooding below decks, the crew abandoned ship while West Virginia slowly settled to the harbor bottom. Of the 1,541 men on West Virginia during the attack, 130 were killed and 52 wounded. Subsequently refloated, repaired, and modernized, the battleship served in the Pacific theater through to the end of the war in August 1945."

[advocatexxx 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 28 2002,05:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Realistic? Hardly. Maybe from a technical viewpoint, when it comes to military equipment, but the friend/foe ratio is ludicrous. This is part from hurt pride and part from a very racist point of view. The Somalis are shown like dumb fucks whose only interest is killing the American heroes and don't mind to be mowed down in huge numbers not, caring about their own life. They are evil faceless villans but luckily for our heroes they perform worse then pointing a rifle in the wrong direction.

Even if you would for one would for one second believe that the Somalis are drugged zombies high on war and murder, anybody knowing anything about urban warfare can see that the ratio of good/bad guys is ridiculous and not to mention the ratio of dead good/bad guys.

The book by Bowden that it is "based on" is considerably better. The movie is racist shite propaganda aimed at the american market in the aftermath of the wtc attacks.<span id='postcolor'>

Yep, over 1,000 Somalis died and only 19 US Rangers. Movie wasn't aimed at post WTC propaganda you ignoramus. It was finished before the WTC attacks even took place.

Besides those weren't your usual Army grunts but Rangers, highly trained. Somalis were nothing but a bunch of underfed maniacs who were handed an AK without being told how to fire it, of course their casualties were 100 times higher.

No one is saying they were murder-hungry zombies, but they did serve under the warlord and seeing how most lacked even the basic education it's safe to say they were driven by animal instincts rather than intellect.

Movie was quite an accurate representation, no need to hate us Americans

[Balschoiw 0]

What actually happened in Somalia in 1992-93?

On December 12, 1992, the U.S. sent 28,000 soldiers into Somalia under the cover of the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM) in what they said was a “humanitarian mission†to bring food to starving people. The invasion came when a several-year drought that had taken tens of thousands of lives was actually abating. At the time, the evening news showed images of thousands of starving Somalis. What people didn’t see was U.S. troops – not delivering food – but instead engaged in daily gun battles and bombing raids in heavily populated neighborhoods. In ten months, more than 10,000 Somalis died as the U.S. engaged in aggressive military action against those who resisted.

Resistance among Somali women, men and even children to the foreign troops became widespread. The Somali people have a long and proud history of resistance. They fought for the freedom of their country from Italian, French and British colonialism - and they resisted the U.S. attempts to recolonize their country.

In the beginning of the military intervention in 1992, Colin Powell, at the time the chairman of the Pentagon’s Join Chiefs of Staff, called the invasion a “paid political advertisement†for the Pentagon at a time (less than a year after the end of the so-called Cold War) when Congress was under growing pressure to cut the war budget. Powell opposed calls that that money be used instead for jobs, education, health care, housing and other social needs, and instead sought to maintain the $300-billion-plus military budget.

In reporting on the U.S./UN Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM), the human rights organization Africa Rights stated that troops “have engaged in abuses of human rights, including killing of civilians, physical abuse, theft … Many UNOSOM soldiers have also displayed unacceptable levels of racism toward Somalis …†These abuses included opening fire with machine guns against unarmed protesters, firing missiles into residential areas and outright murder civilians, including many youth. The report states “UNOSOM has become an army of occupation.â€

I can fully agree with that facts. I have seen it many times on my own.

The Blackhawk down facts:

Also in the actual mission there were nearly 20 aircraft in the air that day. In the movie they had 4 blackhawks and 4 "Little Birds". The unit could not afford to commit the actual number to the filming of the movie.

The Ranger blocking force that was inserted to provide air cover for grounded units consisted of 4 Blackhawks:

- Super 64 (CW3 Mike Durant, CW4 Ray Frank)

- Super 65 (Me, Cpt Richard Williams)

- Super 66 (CW3 Stan Wood, CW4 Gary Fuller)

- Super 67 (CW3 Jeff Niklaus, CW2 Sam Shamp)

Stan's left gunner fired 1600 rounds of minigun ammo in 30 seconds. He probably killed between 8 to 12 Somali militia men.

The final group of aircraft were the 4 MH6 gunships, and the command and control Blackhawk and the Search and Rescue 'Hawk'. They were:

- Barber 51 thru 54 MH6's

- Super 63 C&C

- Super 68 SAR

Each aircraft reloaded six times. It is estimated that they fired between 70 and 80,000 rounds of minigun ammo and fired a total 90 to 100 aerial rockets. They were the only thing that kept the Somalis from overrunning the objective area.

So it looks a bit different now, doesnt it ?

[FSPilot 0]

You want to give us a source for that? Or are we supposed to take your word for it.

[Balschoiw 0]

I give you my word that are the facts, but if you use google you can countercheck the informations. Maybe you will not find all the info in one piece but the sum of info is exactly what is written above.

[Gollum1 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ Nov. 28 2002,18:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">seeing how most lacked even the basic education it's safe to say they were driven by animal instincts rather than intellect.<span id='postcolor'>

It´s hard to describe in words how stupid and arrogant I think that remark was.

So in a nutshell, if you can´t read you´re an animal, like an enraged boar or lion? Stupid n*****s, right?

Maybe it was just a slip of your fingers, or at least I hope so.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Nov. 28 2002,23:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I give you my word that are the facts, but if you use google you can countercheck the informations.<span id='postcolor'>

I'm not calling you a liar or anything, but I find it very hard to believe that thousands of U.S. soldiers were sent on a peacekeeping mission and ended up comitting war crimes and not completing their mission, all while going completely unchecked.

If you ask me, your sources are biased. But I can't say for sure as I haven't seen them yet.

But lets stop arguing about what happened when and start listing good tactical movies.

[Assault (CAN) 1]

Here we go again.

A movie thread has evolved into more U.S. bashing. "Oh, those evil Americans, they go to wars to kill blacks and Asians because U.S. soldiers are nothing but a bunch of racist cowboys and red-necks".....blah blah blah, bling bling bling, blah.

I for one am getting sick and tired of this U.S. bashing, it never ends. If you hate the U.S. so much, then invade it.

Denoir, I thought as a moderator you would remind people to stay on topic and be civil and such, but you seem to be bashing as much as the next guy.

Tyler

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Nov. 28 2002,18:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I give you my word that are the facts, but if you use google you can countercheck the informations. Maybe you will not find all the info in one piece but the sum of info is exactly what is written above.<span id='postcolor'>

umm...yes, and if you do a google search you will come up with EVERY POSSIBLE point of view on the situation...

"Including those from America hating conspiracy theory nuts who put a spin like that on EVERY SINGLE EVENT"

I dont know about you...but I watched those events unfold on CNN and the likes as they happened.

The Marines had left,...and the Army went back in after Pakistani U.N. personell were slaughtered by Somalis.

Also,...if the US was engaged in an "invasion", they would have taken alot more hardware than they did,...including armor

[Jester983 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 27 2002,14:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Nov. 28 2002,09:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Black Hawk Down is very realistic.  <span id='postcolor'>

Realistic? Hardly. Maybe from a technical viewpoint, when it comes to military equipment, but the friend/foe ratio is ludicrous. This is part from hurt pride and part from a very racist point of view. The Somalis are shown like dumb fucks whose only interest is killing the American heroes and don't mind to be mowed down in huge numbers not, caring about their own life. They are evil faceless villans but luckily for our heroes they perform worse then pointing a rifle in the wrong direction.

Even if you would for one would for one second believe that the Somalis are drugged zombies high on war and murder, anybody knowing anything about urban warfare can see that the ratio of good/bad guys is ridiculous and not to mention the ratio of dead good/bad guys.

The book by Bowden that it is "based on" is considerably better. The movie is racist shite propaganda aimed at the american market in the aftermath of the wtc attacks.<span id='postcolor'>

Denoir I bet the guys that were there would have a way different view point then yours.

I read the book and have watched the movie tons of times. Theres only so much you can put into a movie. Audiences dont like sitting through stuff more than 2 hours at max. So they had to leave some parts out. Its nice that it didnt turn political and all that crap. It stuck to what it was out to do. I mean before it came out not a whole lot of people knew about it and if they did they had forgotten it.

Now I did read the somalians point of view in bowden's book and really I didnt even have any sympathy for the ones that decided to fight the rangers. Now i did have sympathy for the ones who hid and wanted nothing more than for it all to be over with.

But I believe that the rangers were only suppose to shoot unless they are being shot at. So the ones that decided to fight got killed. Thats there problem. They made the choice. You cant change that.

Now I never read or saw that the rangers killed any un armed somalians just for fun. They identified their targets well. Maybe a few civilians might have run into the bullets trying to escape from all the bloodsheld. Well thats just war.

Actually they were pretty drugged up on khat. In the afternoons they would chew it, making them more aggressive.

You also forgot denoir that there was wounded too. I believe some 60 odd.

Now really I dont think we should've been there but hey we were and theres no changing it.

And were you there denoir? Like i said before. The guys that were there have a much better opionion on it than any of us. If you ask me I think your just expressing your hate to americans.

Now we have totally sabotaged this thread because of this argument. Let us get back on track to the answer that the author was looking for.

Denoir, if you want to continue this discussion I would be more than happy too. Just Pm me.

[madmedic 0]

Oh,...and I forgot to add something.

My Captain at the Fire Dept. was in the Marines when that happened. He was NOT in Somalia,...but in the Persian Gulf serving as a helicopter mechanic on a Navy ship.

He said that after things went awry in Somalia, and the humanitarian efforts were abandoned...his particular ship, (and possibly more of them) ended up with a whole bunch of surplus food that said on it "A gift to the Somali people, from the U.S.A."

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Nov. 28 2002,10:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Heat and Ronin.<span id='postcolor'>

and your name is?

personally, i'd say HEAT was only good in term of representation in only one part. the part where they rob the bank and get caught, and start shoot out in middle of downtown LA.

the way they moved might be considered tactical, but the shooting itself was...ehh....Hollywoodish.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Nov. 28 2002,20:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Nov. 28 2002,10:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Heat and Ronin.<span id='postcolor'>

and your name is?  

personally, i'd say HEAT was only good in term of representation in only one part. the part where they rob the bank and get caught, and start shoot out in middle of downtown LA.

the way they moved might be considered tactical, but the shooting itself was...ehh....Hollywoodish. <span id='postcolor'>

I loved Heat, and the gunfight after the bank job was pretty cool.. but it was a little over the top. I did find it cool that so many of the main characters were killed and/or injured in the shootout. In that way it wasnt typically hollywoodish.

I really liked the D-Day episode of Band of Brothers, where Winters took a platoon and captured the 88s. From what Ambrose says in a footnote, that action is still used as a prime example of sound tactics and action. I found the gun battles in BoB to be a little less hollywoodish than normal. I guess Hanks and Spielburg wanted to keep away from the sterotypical WWII movie. I am going to get the DVD box set tomorrow I think

[Guest]

Housekeeping:

Advocatexx:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Somalis were nothing but a bunch of underfed maniacs <span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> it's safe to say they were driven by animal instincts rather than intellect.<span id='postcolor'>

Consider yourself permanently banned. Racism in any form will not be tolerated in these forums.

Tyler:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Denoir, I thought as a moderator you would remind people to stay on topic and be civil and such, but you seem to be bashing as much as the next guy<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, true. As a moderator I am now telling you to keep on topic. The topic was discussion of realistic movies. To judge if they are realistic we must discuss the events/weapons etc that they are trying to portray. Your post was however both inflamatory and offtopic.

Jester:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you ask me I think your just expressing your hate to americans.

<span id='postcolor'>

This is not just a trivialization, but it is a personal insult directed at me. I'll let it pass this time, but not the next.