/tv/ needs your judgement on these. realistic or not?

No, they aren't. The production quality of the Pacific was fantastic. The only real issues with it is that it includes a lot of useless shit in the episodes I mentioned.

No, it isn't realistic at those engagement ranges with those rifle rounds, but if the nips were maybe 150-200m from him or using sidearms instead, then yes, but he still wouldn't be able to hipfire except for suppression. I understand why they would compress space and make him land shots for cinematic purposes, and in context the sequence doesn't seem that ridiculous.

The second webm is realistic and the reason why you always let your grenades cook off.

He did get rekt. That injury is what sent him home.

So pretty much just like Band of Brothers?

That's fine with me, I loved that series.

It's Band of Brothers, but with only 1-2 good episodes

>grenade goes off 1 meter away from you with nothing between you and the grenade
>injury

That shit would have killed him and possible the two guys on either side of him.

Nah, every episode in BoB was relevant except the vast majority of the first one. Pavuvu, Melbourne and the vast majority of Iwo are fucking useless.

Spoilers following to explain what I mean.

Melbourne
>Literally just going around fucking aussie women and flashing money
>Aussies getting mad because cucked
>Basically the Battle of Brisbane except takes place in Melbourne
>Get run out of Australia

Pavuvu/Gloucester/Banika
>Rains a fuck ton
>People start offing themselves from depression
>Leckie develops a pissing problem

Iwo
>MoH recipient Basilone goes from fucking celebs to getting a wife, absolutely nothing important happens until the last 10 minutes of the episode where he gets killed

Only three out of 10 are not good.

We have sources stating it happened multiple times on the Western Front. It's rare, but not as rare as you would imagine. German and Japanese grenades had a tendency to not fragment properly relatively often, so being in an open space is far more of a life saver than being in an enclosed one.

Indeed. Another example of spatial compression for cinematic purposes. On the big screen it looked fine. You'll also notice that things don't really move that slowly in real life. Temporal decompression for cinematic effect, which should be just as offensive to our sense of reality.

Also keep in mind that at that point in the movie they could have shown him turn the grenade into wine and I would have believed it lol.

Truly a HACKsaw ridge. wtf I've been told movie is good

Whoever told you that is probably the kind of person who calls 90% or more of the movies they watch "good."

What movie is this?

...

Hacksaw Ridge, directed by Mel Gibson. DVD Screener leaked yesterday.

It's so over the top it's pretty much a comedy.Also has some of the worst acting I've ever seen.

webm.land/media/4MYE.webm

One more with sound this time.

That's a pity. It got good reviews (at least from the normie sources I checked) and I was really looking forward to a good Pacific War movie.

desu, this seems like crazy shit that actually happens in war, but was never put in a movie because producers thought audiences wouldnt believe it, so the public becomes accustomed to a hollywood portrayal of the war so that by the time someone makes a movie that actually shows it, people laugh at it for being unrealistic because it break the hollywood idea of war that the public thinks is the authentic thing. Kind of like how people think "silencers" (they are called suppressors) reduce guns to a quiet "pew" sound. But if you put something like this into a movie

youtube.com/watch?v=qZU5TGljAmw

people might laugh at it

for example, Too Hell and Back cut out a bunch of shit Audie Murphy did because the producers thought no one would believe it really happened. War is fucking crazy, so someone using a dead body as a shield, or someone kicking a grenade back at the enemy doesnt really seem that unrealistic to me.

not even saying this as some battlefield expert, just throwing out ideas.

> realistic or not?
Technically no, but you'd be amazed at the batshit insane things that happen in war sometimes. The exploits of Audie Murphy, Mad Jack Churchill, Douglas Bader, Adrian Carton de Wiart, etc, etc aren't very realistic, but they still happened.

The people pointing out that a corpse wouldn't make very good shield against rifle calibre bullets are completely right, but with a bit of luck you could still get away with it, if the bullets impacted bones or simply missed altogether. When someone is charging at you holding a torso its not that unbelievable that in the second or two you had to react you'd end up missing. And at that range hitting by spraying from the hip isn't implausible.

Kicking grenades away happens (with varying degrees of success). You'd usually expect to see people standing as close as they are getting shredded by shrapnel, but as pointed out with a lot of explosives you get an uneven distribution of shrapnel, so if you get lucky you can get away with a few minor scratches while the guy standing next to you gets pulped.

holy shit, is that the same movie?

Why is the acting bad?

Did you watch Thin Red Line?

...

Not him, but Thin Red Line is shit, definitely one of the worst Pacific War movies out there.

This. It might be a technically good movie, but in terms of history, its pure shit.

I wouldn't even call it a good movie. It's slow and barely moves a long at a trot. At least it's not as bad as fucking Code Talkers or whatever the fuck that Cage film was called.

that's a grass movie

According to wikipedia, the average north American male weighs 177lbs today. So, assuming it was a bit less in the 40's and these guys are a little malnourished, lets say they weighed on average 140lbs.

According to Human Body Dynamics: Classical Mechanics and Human Movement the amount of torso left in that shot would make up roughly 68% of the mans mass. we'll say a little less(maybe 50%) since he's drained of fluids/organs.So, super roughly, he's carrying about 70lbs in his off hand which is NOT easy for your average person but possible.

However, in the other hand he's holding an M1918A2 BAR. A rifle historically famous for how heavy it was(about 19lbs empty) with a 20 round magazine chambered in .30-06. Not only is it front heavy(therefore hard to balance with one hand) but firing .30-06 one handed is not something anyone could do accurately and most people would be done after one shot let alone some of the full auto shit he's pulling.

Final kicker is that he shoots more than 20 rounds.

Awesome, I'm getting stoned as fucj

>but if the nips were maybe 150-200m from him
Rifle rounds would still go through pretty consistently.
>or using sidearms instead
even the utterly anemic 8mm Nambu would still have a chance of going through.

>/tv/ thinks these could be realistic

It's like a real version of the film they were trying to make in Tropic Thunder. Gibson has gone full retard.

Fuck sake i was going to watch this tonight but it just looks shit.

>tfw The Pacific is actually pretty great in the second half
>tfw people shit on it for a lackluster first half

The Peleliu and Okinawa episodes are fuckign GOAT, I don't care what anyone else says.

>/tv/

Fuck off

People wanted it to be Band of Brothers 2: Pacific Boogaloo, when they were really trying for something rather different.

No

Yes

I would not expect a dead body to protect me from rifles