I don't think that the filmgoing audience would watch a war movie that was completely accurate. It's the old adage of war being mostly boredom with moments of sheer terror. You have to slog through the mud to get to that sheer terror, and they don't want to do that. It's not the "adreneline rush" they spent their $$$ for. So we see Hollywood trying to "bridge the gaps," making major battles every day occurances, generals who look and act like George C. Scott in Patton, cargo airplanes (pre C-5) with second levels where people fight to the death, Panzers that loomed larger than a house, soldiers that are always put together like Arnold, and the quietest weapons and explosions that weapons could ever make so as not to interfere with the dialog.
But maybe in truth you just can't recreate war in a movie. Reenactors come closest, for sure...they know the smell of the gunpowder the heft of a sword. But what movie could ever capture the essence of war? It's like the smell of Vietnam. People who've been there during the war might know what I'm talking about. I can't describe it. You can't see it. But whenever I watch a movie about Vietnam, I smell it.
Can't put that on film.
Jake
|