For me, it was when they were clueless as to what a Flank is.
-
martin_66 — 15 years ago(March 27, 2011 09:29 AM)
But they weren't greatly outnumbered. They outnumbered, militarily at least, the locals. And if you want to keep order and prevent an armed rebellion what better way to do it than ensure you are the ones holding all the guns?
-
the_bamboo_spear — 15 years ago(March 27, 2011 03:36 PM)
In this country, it's a waste of time. For every registered gun there are 20 of them under beds, under pillows, stuck in gloveboxes, bought from a friend, or at a gunshow, or from a pawnshop, or stolen (or bought on Gunbroker.com these days). Why send valuable, English-speaking resources down to the local gunshop just to find out which guys have shotguns and sporting rifles? Who cares? Chances are, those guys were killed in the initial invasion because they were the guys out there in the street, shooting paratroopers.
The scene is just a ridiculous anti-gun control scare tactic. And I'm anti-gun control. -
s-pound — 14 years ago(September 17, 2011 07:50 PM)
When the boys sneak back into town and go into the drug store, the clerk says discreetly "they're looking for you", to Jed.
Jed responds, "who?"
Gee, I wonder Jed. Maybe it's the Denver Broncos looking for good strong safety or maybe, just possibly, remotely, it's the commies who have dropped in and laid waste to your entire realm of existence.
.but I could be wrong -
sascha-17 — 13 years ago(November 12, 2012 08:12 AM)
Why send valuable, English-speaking resources down to the local gunshop just to find out which guys have shotguns and sporting rifles?
Because John Milius is probably the biggest gun-nut in Hollywood? That whole premise could only have come from someone who believes/argues that the 2nd amendment is still a valid tool to keep the gouvernment in check. You know? The old "only dictatorships want to make owning a gun illegal"-argument.
Back on topic:
Gotta be "Aveeeeenge meeeeeeee!" for me as well. Classic 80s-cheese. Shows what a great actor Harry is.. To deliver that line without breaking into laughter? That's tough.
The whole idea of a bunch of regular kids being able to form a successful resistance group and kill Russian soldiers by the truckload. Yeah, I know not all soldiers are invincible fighting machines, and the Soviets did have a conscript army. But even conscripts get a lot more training than any of these kids ever had. And I seriously doubt the Soviets would have used green troops to spearhead such an invasion.
Also: Worst tankbattle ever. John Milius should know (and probably does know) that tanks never operate without heavy infantry support.
S. -
FourDeuce — 13 years ago(November 13, 2012 08:56 AM)
"Why send valuable, English-speaking resources down to the local gunshop just to find out which guys have shotguns and sporting rifles?"
First, because shotguns and sporting rifles can be used to kill people just as well as "military" weapons.
Second, because not ALL weapons registered by civilians are shotguns and sporting rifles. BTW, another name for one type of "sporting rifle" is SNIPER RIFLE. -
the_bamboo_spear — 11 years ago(October 06, 2014 07:04 PM)
Yes, a deer-hunting .30-06 with a scope is, in effect, a sniper rifle in capable hands. But my point is that, in the United States, for every rifle, shotgun or handgun registered down at Academy or the local sporting goods store, there are at least 10 more floating around, either handed down from dad or inherited from an uncle, or bought at a pawnshop, or bought at a gunshow, or swapped for another gun, or just stolen.
In that scene, the Soviets and Cubans are taking fire from an American helicopter. They obviously have their hands full. It's a war. They don't even have a solid foothold yet. And they're going to send valuable resources down to Oshman's to rummage through a file cabinet to see who has a shotgun, when the United States Army is straffing them with rockets and M-60's?
Maybe if the scene happened a few months after the invasion, and they were casually confiscating guns, it would be more believable. But 24 hours into the invasion? Doubtful. -
MercurialAquarian — 14 years ago(March 08, 2012 09:41 AM)
The scene where the sort of famous, but not really famous famous, young movie stars overact and make dramatic aspects corny. The scene, of course, being the entire movie. A lot of the corniness, not all of it, can be chalked-up to the propaganda and overly-patriotic sentiment of the author, as well as the political smoke & mirrors and flag-waving hyperbole of the era itself. With all of the acting in the White House taking place at that time, the bar for acting in the movie could be set kind of low.