Black Hawk Down Movie News

[Scaramanga]

It will be interesting to see how Ridley Scott adapts the book...

http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/details/blackhawkdown.html

and

http://filmforce.ign.com/news/2017.html

 

[George Hill]

I am not sure that this is a movie that really needs to be made.
This story is about real people in a real situation... Painful memories for the people that lived through this event.
Its discusting that Ridley Scott is going to get even richer of these people's suffering. Besides the fact that no movie is ever made accurate to the real event or the book.

 

[Jeff White]

I noticed Mark Bowden and Kieth Nolan as writers

I wonder if Bowden will become frustrated with the adaptation of his book like so many other writers? Nolan has written many good histories of Marine operations in Vietnam.

If they film it the way "The Longest Day" or a "A Bridge Too Far" was done it shouldn't be too bad. I wonder just how much DOD support they're getting? Not a lot of civilian Blackhawks to paint green for the troops to fast rope from.

Jeff

 

[George Hill]

They could borrow them from the LAPD...

 

[IanS]

I don't think it would necessarily be a bad thing to film the unfortunate raid in Mogadishu. It will really depend on if Ridley Scott can handle the material with the respect it deserves and I'll reserve my judgements until I see it.

Today, films are the only way to get people to be more aware of important issues. Even if Black Hawk Down turns out to be inaccurate there will be many turning up on CNN and the History Channel to set the record straight. I think most modern military films correctly have shown our armed forces to be flawed but have always respected the brave men and women who serve.


The whole book was an indictment of those career minded military leaders and an homage to our soldiers. As long it gets that straight it should be alright.

 

[Jeff White]

LAPD flys Blackhawks?

George,
How does LA afford this? I can't imagine what civilian use a police department would have for a large utility aircraft like the UH 60. The number of SAR missions they would use it for certainly wouldn't justify the cost, maybe the county fire department using them as tankers for firefighting??

I think the story would be good and compelling on film provided it was done right. To be done right you'd have to have a LOT of DOD support and that usually means giving the military some say so in the script. Given the current climate in the Army some minor actor will have to play some Spec 4 in some intel shop whose criminal negligence was responsible for the debacle.

If the story pins the blame on Gen Garrison, the State Department orLes Aspin, forget it, probably no DOD support.

Jeff

 

[Scaramanga]

Question

George: So there should be no more movies about history or past wars in which people suffered? I don't think Scott is attempting to make money on someone's suffering. I'm curious, do you feel the same way about The Perfect Storm?

 

[George Hill]

Guys - Black Hawk down is not a war of millions of people - but the story of a small handful of people and a very personal story about them. Maybe some people had been talked to about this - but did all of them?
I dont like movie makers taking a personal story and capatalizing on it and making millions with out cutting the soldiers a fair shake. They are the ones who were in the fight. They bleed, they died, they gave up a part of themselves...
Yes - I know thats what soldiers do - but in this age if intellectual property and copyrights etc... the story belongs to the soldiers. They earned it.
Yes - it needs to be told... Film may be a good way... But the film makers need to pay dues.

 

[Bogie]

I think that people need to realize what happened, and what role Washington bureaucrats had in the clusterbleep.

 

[Scaramanga]

I see your point George. Well put. Let's hope they do it justice.

 

[moa]

How many folks here have read the book, "Blackhawk Down"? It is an excellent read. Also, Public Television had a show about the event a couple of years ago.

Biggest problem with Somalia was "mission creep". The mission went from a humanitarian mission to a "nation building" mission. Then that got screwed up too. That was the fault of the Clinton Administration.

I wonder if Ridley Scott will point this out?

 

[buzz_knox]

Biggest problem was that Klinton ordered the warlord's capture, and then made a deal with him a day or so before the raid. Of course, no body ever bothered to tell the military about the deal. Makes one wonder if letting the Rangers get slaughtered was part of the deal.

 

[IanS]

George,

For you this may be the story of a "handful" of people but it is also the story of our military doing the will of our foreign policy, in OUR name. It is also the story of the people of Somalia. If you read the book, Mark Bowden the author, was also careful to include the horror stories from the perspective of the Somali people. (Of course here, one American life doesn't equal a thousand Africans.) The American people should know the kind of %$#@storm we cause when we send in guns without clear commitment, real determination, and adequate support from the top.

I hope DOD doesn't get too involved, it could become a flag waving snow job. And about "nation building" America has been manipulating the political leadership of foreign countries from the beginning; from Panama to Iran by our CIA. If we are to force our will on others we're morally obligated to protect and support its citizens from its transitional dangers or stay out of it completely.

Say what you will but a movie may be the only way people will be more aware.

[Edited by Ian11 on 02-15-2001 at 01:35 PM]

 

[Tamara]

It is also the story of the people of Somalia. If you read the book, Mark Bowden the author, was also careful to include the horror stories from the perspective of the Somali people. (Of course here, one American life doesn't equal a thousand Africans.) The American people should know the kind of %$#@storm we cause when we send in guns without clear commitment, real determination, and adequate support from the top.

That reminds me of a quote from George's favorite author, David Drake ():

"When you send out a man with a gun, you create a policymaker. When his ass is on the line, he will do whatever he needs to do.
And if the implications of that bother you, the time to do something about it is before you decide to send him out." -from the afterword to Counting The Cost

 

[George Hill]

Not meaning to sound insensitive, but when do I have to care about the enemy? And what do they care when they hide among innocent women and children to fire at US Army Rangers? SCREW THEM. I could not care any less.
No, wait a sec... let me check... No - I was right... I tried, but nope, I can't care any less about those jackholes.

 

[IanS]

I was talking about non-combatants; civilians who were caught in the cross fire. Sorry I didn't make that clear. I don't have any sympathy to spare for the enemy either, esp. when they shoot at us.

But in a place like Somalia who is and who isn't the enemy is constantly in flux. This is the result of constant betrayal by native and foreign governments that come and go. (Thus, the importance of a consistent foreign policy and building of trust.) Its their children and their children's children that are left to pick up the pieces. That's a conclusion I got from reading the book.



[Edited by Ian11 on 02-15-2001 at 05:48 PM]

 

[RWK]

Once again, I'm with George Hill

Blackhawk Down is a great book; I doubt if justice can be done to it in any movie.

This said, I have a question for Ian11: Sir, have you ever been in combat, particularly in non-conventional firefights as our Rangers and Delta Team folks were in Mogadishu? Based on your comments, I respectfully doubt it. During Vietnam, we faced a somewhat similar situation, fighting irregular VC units that were, in essence, identical to the indigenous population. Under such circumstances, I can assure you people are quickly sorted into only two categories: (1) fellow US service members and (2) all others. The "others" become targets whenever a comrade-in-arms is threatened.

Doubtless this appears cruel and/or inhuman to some. However, the overriding mission of every US service member is to bring himself and his colleagues home alive and uninjured. Any resulting suffering and long-term disruption to the local population thus caused is a political issue, not germane to war-fighters.

Amateurs including Bill Clinton and SecDef Aspin -- and his coterie of liberal Congressional staffers placed in senior National Security decision-making positions -- have much to answer for.

 

[Jeff Thomas]

George, with great respect, I have to disagree with you to an extent.

The way our society works, a movie producer has the right of free speech to produce movies as he / she chooses. Sometimes we like the result, and sometimes we don't ... the market helps weed them out a bit. I share the frustration when history is manipulated and distorted ... let's hope this is an honest work. If done well, I think such movies can help U.S. civilians better appreciate the gravity of such policy. Some of us, including me, have never seen combat. We rely upon reading history, and speaking with those men and women who have experienced war first hand ... the admittedly rare, but well done movie further aids our understanding. [Even with its inaccuracies, 'Saving Private Ryan' comes to mind.]


A more delicate subject ... the effects upon our 'enemies'. When our enemies are those who attack us, and we are defending ourselves, I share your feelings completely. And, I'm sure that when a serviceman is on the ground in a foreign country, the nuances of foreign policy are meaningless ... it is a matter of mutual survival with the unit. The situation becomes a bit murkier when our government gets our military involved where we have no business.

Again, I respect and appreciate the tremendous sacrifices our veterans have made. I would respect and appreciate them just as much if there had been fewer sacrifices in fewer foreign countries where we never had business in the first place.

I suppose I'll close simply by noting that many of us on this forum could someday become the 'enemy' of our military forces ... because they are then controlled by President 'Feinstein', President 'Hillary Clinton' or President 'Schumer', and we still cling to an 'archaic' Bill of Rights.

I remember an old quote I found once, while doing a term paper regarding the Viet Nam War. As I recall, it was from the U.S. Senate in 1897, and echoed a common 'right wing' sentiment from the Viet Nam War period ... but, with a twist:

'Our country right or wrong ... when right to be kept right, and when wrong to be put right'.

I'm thankful for our military, and our veterans. However, I'm not under any illusion that they have been or will always be used appropriately. As citizens, we owe it to our country, our history and our children to speak up when we feel the path is wrong.

I hope our veterans on TFL understand my meaning, and my respect.

Regards from AZ

 

[George Hill]

Jeff, as always, you make your point clearly with good logic.
I'll still see the movie...
But it will be a bootleg CD and i'll watch it on my PC.

 

[Jeff Thomas]

Thanks, George. If you can get down to Phoenix, I'll buy the tickets and the popcorn. And, if you still object to contributing to the production, we can sneak in from an adjacent theatre ...

Regards from AZ