Frank wrote on Dec 6^th, 2019 at 5:16pm:


Yeah, that was funny too   

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6^th, 2019 at 3:26pm:



Well... Harry Smith's* history for a start... then there are contradictions galore... much of the basic engagement is fairly right... but a lot of the secondary stuff is... absurd.  Way too many M-16's for 1966.... and a characterisation of the grunts and officers as pretty dumb... Brig Jackson, WWII and Korea, went on to some major command postings, but is shown as a weak and ineffectual leader scared of his own shadow...every tactical move was wrong.... every move was caught with both feet off the ground and basic rules were not followed at halts etc... including the furphy that 'there is only one company left to defend 300 support personnel' - 1 ATF was 5RAR and 6RAR.. not just 6RAR...

Who wrote this?

*ex British Army, Malaya, and took Australian citizenship because he was so impressed by the performance of D Coy... how is it that a company trained by a Commando officer is so lax and has no idea of basic self-protection in the field .. Harry Smith is shown standing up to a Brigadier and saying that D Coy was so good because he trained it, and then they stuff up every tactical basic move in the field, standing like figures four on a shooting range waiting for it all to happen... when you halt, you spread out and go to cover... and never cross a blue feature without a firm base of fire, or anything else for that matter ..  you don't just walk through the donga waiting to be shot at or stand still waiting for a fusillade ... and Gordon Sharp's characterisation??  Nasho officers were better than that.. and in a unit with the character shown as Harry Smith? NFH!



Oh -and "NVA"?  VC local farm dogs and Main Force VC... not NVA... and so very many AKs...

BTW - I compared the kill ratio to the 3rd Battle of the Hook 1953, Korea.. an all night bombardment by massed artillery killed 250 Chinese... and 245 VC died at Long Tan, 50% by small arms fire in 3.5 hours.... now there are questions being raised about 'body count' and inflated figures, though the official story was that counting stoped at sunset the following day - at 245 ...... and David Sabben's 10 platoon caught a heap lining up in lanes and hit them with MGs... not a few rounds from M-16s...  then an hour+ for M-113s to cover 5km?

Need I go on?  Yes - the grunts I know hate 'I was Only Nineteen'... it makes them look like victims.... so does this movie..... and they don't see themselves that way...

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Dec 8^th, 2019 at 1:29am:


Interesting observations.  However, what you are mistaking for "mistakes" were actually done for dramatisation and because the camera has only a limited field of view.  It is something that has annoyed me for a long time about Hollywood war movies - the small unit that bunches up, is always talking, can't do tactical movement, etc.   You see it time and time again in every war movie, Graps.  It is 'cause the directors only have one understanding of how to make a movie - everybody bunches up to be in shot, they always talk to get their messages across, they don't do tactical movement 'cause it isn't what the director likes.

The only movie I've seen which attempted to overcome those limitations was "Odd Angry Shot."   I first saw that movie with a mate who was ex-SAS.  He knew the technical advisor on the movie production and said it was done properly 'cause that was the only way the technical advisor knew how to do it.  Even so, occasionally the actors would whisper to one another when in the field, when in reality the SASR would go days/weeks without talking at all, just using hand signals and pushes and shoves to get their message across to one another.

Now, "Danger Close" was close but not 100% accurate to what really happened at Long Tan.   I was actually rather impressed when you first see Delta Company moving into the rubber plantation.  They had obviously taught the actors how to do tactical formations 'cause they had an accurate Y formation in the open stubble outside it, although as I remarked to my brother who had also served that it was a bit close (in order to get into the camera's field of view no doubt).  There were obvious departures for dramatisation - the "hut" in the rubber plantation, the use of a large "dip" where the Coy HQ sheltered from the fire when in reality it was quite flat ground with minor dips/rises.  The conversations/arguments between the officers back at Nui Dat, the rebellion by the helicopter pilots, the lightning strike were all bullshit IIRC.   They were there to allow the audience to feel the tension of the battle as it occurred.

Unfortunately, you have to accept that.   It was good to see Kiwi artillerymen manning the L5 105mm howitzers at Nui Dat.  It was good to see the M113s without T150 turrets.  It was good to see the use of Owens and M16s (IIRC there were fewer M16s than you appear to believe).

Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker

I liked it.

Received a Gold Class experience Christmas gift from the kids.

Some of the critics didn't rate this one too highly but for me it was very good.

While the First Order continues to ravage the galaxy, Rey finalizes her training as a Jedi. But danger suddenly rises from the ashes as the evil Emperor Palpatine mysteriously returns from the dead. While working with Finn and Poe Dameron to fulfill a new mission, Rey will not only face Kylo Ren once more, but she will also finally discover the truth about her parents as well as a deadly secret that could determine her future and the fate of the ultimate final showdown that is to come.


Carrie Fisher ... Leia Organa (archive footage)
Mark Hamill ... Luke Skywalker
Adam Driver ... Kylo Ren
Daisy Ridley ... Rey
John Boyega ... Finn
Oscar Isaac ... Poe Dameron
Anthony Daniels ... C-3PO
Naomi Ackie ... Jannah
Domhnall Gleeson ... General Hux
Richard E. Grant ... General Pryde
Lupita Nyong'o ... Maz Kanata
Joonas Suotamo ... Chewbacca
Kelly Marie Tran ... Rose Tico
Ian McDiarmid ... Emperor Palpatine

Loving Vincent  Watched this last night. Completely blown away. Mesmerised.

Also, watched Heidi over Christmas. Twice.

Do you ever get gripped by an irresistible nostalgia for a time BEFORE you were born?

I saw Little Women with my wife last weekend. Very much a movie of our times:  I don't think Meryl Streep would have participated if not for the strong pro-woman script. I felt that at times the movie was a response to the misogyny that Trump has reawakened.

The Invisible Man

A decent horror flick. I sat through the movie without feeling too uncomfortable. The attack scenes by the invisible man were quite haunting. But the ending got a little too redeeming for the harassed character.

One reviewer gave the film a "B+". I thought that was somewhat generous. "B-" would be a better rating. I felt that the movie was a high budget tv movie. The special effects were good enough to pass for a decent theatre movie.

"Miss Fisher and the Crypt of Tears" Just went to see this my mother and wife. Enjoyable movie of the "Miss Fisher Investigates" TV series. Worth watching. Miss Fisher finally gets to kiss her boyfriend Detective Inspector Jack. Set in Melbourne, the UK and Palestine it is a good romp. Even the comment from Beatrice, her secretary and companion is worth the price of admission.