Lone Survivor the Movie

  • Thread starter Thread starter Boondocksaint375
  • Start date Start date
I would venture that primarily it's not about the story itself, but more appropriately staying true to whatever the account the film is based on. There's going to be theatrical latitude taken, it's acting after all... but some things need to be more appropriately portrayed. Case in point, the amount of research and different specific events brought in on BHD that actually happened. The donkey in the middle of the firefight, and multiple other events were actual experiences from the guys on the ground. Washing out the HMMWV's of blood and gore is something recalled specifically by my platoon's weapons squad leader when I was a cherry at 3/75.

I think the acting was great, nothing came across as overly dramatic. It wasn't the small details that got wrong in this movie - they executed that aspect perfectly (or as perfect as possible). It was the story line. It was Pete Berg or whoever was in charge of giving the final ok of the storyline and script that made the deliberate errors.
 
I would venture that primarily it's not about the story itself, but more appropriately staying true to whatever the account the film is based on. There's going to be theatrical latitude taken, it's acting after all... but some things need to be more appropriately portrayed.

And this is a big issue for me and what drives my "unease" with the movie. I've seen challenges to Luttrell's narrative and while I can be classless I am not THAT classless. Not a SEAL, not a combat vet, not involved, not something I should even question. The thing is, if you're basing it on his book use the material in his book. If new material or facts came out, then make the movie but give it a new title or SOMETHING. As presented with all of the hype and everything, the average moviegoer will think Lone Survivor the movie is what happened and that isn't the case.

The story is compelling on its own, it stands on its own, so did it need a dramatic rewrite with whole sections of the movie fabricated? I don't think it did and I think the dead deserve better.
 
I thought Marcus Luttrell was going to jump off his chair and bitch slap Jake Tapper.


I think Marcus maybe over-reacted a little bit, but I can also see why he was upset. The main issue here, is that the interviewer and the interviewee speak two different languages and look at things through a completely different lens. One see's them as victims, the other see's himself and his buddies as men who were doing their job and had a bad day at work, doing a job they believed in. In situations like that, you aren't fighting for national policy or geo-political maneuvering, you are fighting to hopefully keep the guy next to you alive. So, from Marcus's view point, they did not die for no reason, they died for him and each other. Obviously, they interviewer doesn't look at it that way, and see's them more as noble victims of an act of random violence.
 
Saw it last night. I couldn't help finding the discrepancies throughout, but my other half looked as though she had been through it. She said she was so upset because, "It was real life, and those were real people." As someone who hasn't been in the military and has had a fairly sheltered life, I think the message got through. Mission accomplished Marcus.
 
I watched this last night (thanks to the local hajis and their pre-release "for award consideration only" copy), and I was on the verge of tears. While yes, the end of the movie was unappealing due to the ridiculous village vs TB firefight, the movie as a whole was extremely well done.

I was pleasantly surprised to see ML play as big a role in the movie as he did, as he appeared in several scenes and even had some lines.

I do think the film undersold the efforts of Dietz and Axe, and that was a bit off-putting. But overall, I loved this movie. On the echelon of war movies based on true stories, I'd slide this one somewhere between Black Hawk Down and We Were Soldiers.
 
Obviously, they interviewer doesn't look at it that way, and see's them more as noble victims of an act of random violence.

I was at a lunch with Jake a month or two ago in Chicago. He was pitching his book The Outpost and I can say that he comes across in speaking on subject matter as having researched a singular event in depth, and extrapolating that information on a broad spectrum, which is dangerous. I wonder if any green room conversation gave them the same feeling and setup a more hostile environment for the interview.
 
I thought the movie was done properly, really showed the character of Murph and the never ending fight in ALL of the SEALs on this OP. I understand some parts of the movie having to be added to attract a wider audience, but from the book to the movie i thought they nailed about 90% of it. I'd absolutely put this in one of the top 3 movies based on a true story.

Great cameo's by Marcus as well. I hope he feels "complete" after having his and his teammates story put into light. Hope he can rest easy knowing he showed the true characters of his fallen teammates.
 
Let's confine this thread to the movie/ story and not the texting gunplay. That can go in a different thread if you so desire.
 
I'm iffy with the movie - I enjoyed Act of Valor x10 more.
- lack of character development made it hard to be really emotionally impacted as a viewer outside the community.
- the ending sequence was so unnecessary that it took away from the movie.. the story is so extraordinary that it would have been completely fine to exclude the villagers vs taliban scenes.
- still good.. but didnt have an emotional impact on me that most other movies have
 
More from the "get it right" dept.

http://soldiersystems.net/2014/02/05/beretta-m9-show-lone-survivor/

At the time of Operation ‘Red Wings’ which is the subject of the hit movie ‘Lone Survivor’, SEALs were toting SIG P226s, not M9 Berettas. Hollywood prop houses have loads of different guns, including SIGs, and any recent action movie will attest to that. So how did it get there? Rumor has it that M9 manufacturer Beretta paid the movie’s producers an undisclosed sum of money (some say in the high 5 figures) to have their weapon included. In fact, Brand-in Entertainment has bragged about the Beretta’s insertion on their website. It’s just brand placement right? So much for insisting on accuracy.

http://brand-inentertainment.com/2013/08/644/
 
More from the "get it right" dept.

http://soldiersystems.net/2014/02/05/beretta-m9-show-lone-survivor/

At the time of Operation ‘Red Wings’ which is the subject of the hit movie ‘Lone Survivor’, SEALs were toting SIG P226s, not M9 Berettas. Hollywood prop houses have loads of different guns, including SIGs, and any recent action movie will attest to that. So how did it get there? Rumor has it that M9 manufacturer Beretta paid the movie’s producers an undisclosed sum of money (some say in the high 5 figures) to have their weapon included. In fact, Brand-in Entertainment has bragged about the Beretta’s insertion on their website. It’s just brand placement right? So much for insisting on accuracy.

http://brand-inentertainment.com/2013/08/644/
Wow, just wow.

I haven't seen it yet, still debating.
 
I overall enjoyed the movie. I think if Berg and Wahlberg weren't involved with Marcus and others advising obviously this movie would have turned out way worse. I understand the challenge of making a 2 hr movie out of a book that covered multiple days but I wish it would have been more accurate. I would have gladly sat through a 5 hr movie if they would have got the recovery accurate. I thought this movie would hit me a lil more emotionally than it did. The book did a great job of connecting you to Axe, Danny and Murph as I guess it should in my opinion so much that I remember exactly where I was and how I felt when I was reading the book when they passed. The tribute to everyone including everyone aboard Turbine 33 was nice at the end.

Never Forget
NSDQ!
 
Back
Top