• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

The Pacific [Band of Brothers II]

While I do agree with some of your points which I think I mentioned in my original post. I have to respectfully stay true to my original thought.

Of course historical accuracy is important, lets just call it human error. I just feel very strongly about the story. I don't understand how one could not connect to the emotions of a scene and gain a little insight to the thoughts and feelings of both the man being shot and the one shooting because it wasn't the right weapon of the era.

Similarily, the scene where he got the nickname peaches, What if someone said well, it was actually banana's. Does that mean the scene doesn't get the point across now and we can't understand how they connected with each other?

with respect

I get your point but for many of us, we like to believe we're actually peering into 1942 or whatever the year to come may be. We get entranced in what we're seeing and expect everything to be accurate to what we know should have been there. When you see something out of place, blatant or otherwise, it jars you out of that experience. I think if you start making excuses or drop your expectations for a film it loses its value. Many of us are going into this with certain expectations having read the books, studied the subject material, etc. It's harder to make excuses when you're expecting accuracy.

Also, as I said, one of the points of The Pacific is to show what truly happened. In the same way that the History channel makes sure the details are correct for their programs, The Pacific is also striving to do the same. To do otherwise would, as already said, show lack of attention to detail which would bring down the quality of the film, and it would be a disregard to the educational aspect. Of course, if we were discussing Windtalkers, then it'd be completely different. The purpose of that movie was mostly to show cool action. The Pacific is about showing cool action but its also about showing people what that Greatest Generation went through, and about how the war actually played out, hence historical accuracy plays an important role.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Ep2 was much better. When the guy lifted the MG with his bare hands to go save his buddies on the other line, it was awesome . . kekekekekekekek 5ft high pile of squinty eyed folk!!

american NCO runs out to the 5ft pile and starts throwing bodies off the pile......runs back to the trench

"what the hell were you doing?!"

"clearing the line of fire."


fire the machine gunpshshshshshshshshshshshsh :D
 
Upvote 0
I get your point but for many of us, we like to believe we're actually peering into 1942 or whatever the year to come may be. We get entranced in what we're seeing and expect everything to be accurate to what we know should have been there. When you see something out of place, blatant or otherwise, it jars you out of that experience. I think if you start making excuses or drop your expectations for a film it loses its value. Many of us are going into this with certain expectations having read the books, studied the subject material, etc. It's harder to make excuses when you're expecting accuracy.

Also, as I said, one of the points of The Pacific is to show what truly happened. In the same way that the History channel makes sure the details are correct for their programs, The Pacific is also striving to do the same. To do otherwise would, as already said, show lack of attention to detail which would bring down the quality of the film, and it would be a disregard to the educational aspect. Of course, if we were discussing Windtalkers, then it'd be completely different. The purpose of that movie was mostly to show cool action. The Pacific is about showing cool action but its also about showing people what that Greatest Generation went through, and about how the war actually played out, hence historical accuracy plays an important role.

Fair enough sir, nuff said and if I may say, it's a refreshing change to disagree and discuss while respecting the opposing view.

BEST COMMUNITY EVER !
 
Upvote 0
I thought this scene went a bit overboard on the Rambo factor :D

pacific.gif

YAAA GET SOME!

Otherwise a great series, 'cept maybe at the end the guys look a bit too well-groomed, well-nourished and ruggedly handsome to have fought several months of jungle warfare...
 
Upvote 0
episode 2 makes one step forward, episode 3 takes four steps back. :rolleyes:

thanks HBO for yet again ruining something that had potential by forcing crappy "drama" episodes. sure sex sells, but blood, guts and war sells better. enough with the cheap grade C porn and go back to having people killing each other :p

BlackLabel said:
Emo episode...i write this off as intermidate episode till the series picks up pace again...

This wasn't a forced episode for ratings. The idea of The Pacific was to show more than just combat and on that front it did a good job of showing another aspect of the war and the soldier's experiences. The sets and constumes were great. Nice change of pace before we get into the deep combat.

Only thing is the actor who plays Leckie. He looks real cool but I can't help feeling awkward every time he shows up on screen.
 
Upvote 0
Only thing is the actor who plays Leckie. He looks real cool but I can't help feeling awkward every time he shows up on screen.


I agree, he looks too "nice guyish" or naive. I'm reading his book right now and the guy was a trouble maker, in and out of the brig, dodging MPs on liberty and drinking and screwing every chance he gets. Not saying that's a bad thing, but the actor just doesn't give him that image in my opinion.
 
Upvote 0
I agree, he looks too "nice guyish" or naive. I'm reading his book right now and the guy was a trouble maker, in and out of the brig, dodging MPs on liberty and drinking and screwing every chance he gets. Not saying that's a bad thing, but the actor just doesn't give him that image in my opinion.

Yeah agreed. The delivery of his lines are just so damn awkward. He comes off as trying to be so broody but just looks like a tool.
 
Upvote 0
I liked this weeks episode, though I still feel that the series is lacking due to the absence of a 'Currahee' esq episode to really build the characters up.

I've not exactly been watching it with my eyes strapped towards the screen but something not quite right when three episodes in I only really know one of the characters name. I've just been recognising them as the curly haired guy, the other curly haired guy, the one who suspiciously looks like the guy who played Stifler and so on.
 
Upvote 0
I liked this weeks episode, though I still feel that the series is lacking due to the absence of a 'Currahee' esq episode to really build the characters up.

Well the problem is this isn't like BoB where they're all in the same company from the beginning to the end. Leckie and Basilone (who's a USMC hero btw, I had to run Basilone's Hill like 10 times in boot camp and it was a b*tch) were on Guadalcanal at the same time, they were both in the same 1st MarDiv but I don't believe they were ever together. At least Leckie doesn't say anything about Basilone in his book, and he would if he knew him, the guy's a legend. Sledge fought in two battles, Peleliu and Oki. Leckie was wounded on Peleliu so they might have run into each other.


Very long winded, and I appologize, but what I'm saying is don't expect a "Band of Brothers" type progression from one episode to another, because this story is about 3 separate Marines who fought the same war, just not together.
 
Upvote 0
episode 2 makes one step forward, episode 3 takes four steps back. :rolleyes:

thanks HBO for yet again ruining something that had potential by forcing crappy "drama" episodes. sure sex sells, but blood, guts and war sells better. enough with the cheap grade C porn and go back to having people killing each other :p

Emo episode...i write this off as intermidate episode till the series picks up pace again...

So what you guys want, apparently, is this: battle, violence, blood and guts, banter. Then some more battle, Japs getting killed, banter. And at the end, an even bigger battle with big explosions. That wouldn't be a very respectful way of portraying the men, would it? Like Kaner wrote, with The Pacific the producers intended to give the characters more depth, and that includes showing homefront scenes. Watch the videos on HBO's YouTube channel, they explain it all. If I'm correct, The Pacific revolves around the life of three men; Leckie, Basilone and Sledge. What this episode portrayed is historically accurate.

This series keeps getting better and better.
 
Upvote 0