MovieChat Forums > Battle for Haditha (2008) Discussion > Many inaccuracies.

Many inaccuracies.

posted 16 years ago by roostermeat
16 replies | jump to latest

I noticed some inaccuracies/ goofs in the film which makes the soldiers look like they skipped a few weeks of training.

1. They drive through the same road every time. Are they inviting an IED?

2. They did not take cover after the IED attack. They kneeled at the side of the road. A guy with an AK with semi-competent aiming could pick them off very easily.

3. Full auto spraying indoors with a buddy in front of you. They fired blindly in the rooms on full auto mode with people in front of them. A big no-no because it makes the guy in front of you deaf after awhile, and if your rifle dips down or you slip, you're going to put a round in the guy in front of you.

4. Once again they were constantly firing in full auto at no targets, what were they expecting to hit? Do they like to waste ammo? Only the guy on the roof fired in semi-auto.

5. The apache or whatever does not count down in the manner of 5 4 3 2 1. You take the shot as soon as you can. You do not jam the comms with *beep* like that.

6. Shell casings which landed on the floor at the boots scene was clearly blanks. Grenade fuses went off in 2 seconds, they throw grenades into random rooms and waste them, they don't take cover properly when they throw them.

7. Gear looks inaccurate. Their webbings looks like they are not wearing flak vests, and they have too few pouches attached. At night they don't use NFEs.

[–] georgeptrs-1 16 years ago

You must be a right laugh to be with (tongue in cheek)Films like this are not made for pedantic people like yourself.
It's a film.they have Hollywood magazines with endless ammo.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jsenright 16 years ago

Relax.. It's just another political agenda movie.. of course there will be inaccuracies in the movie.. that's what agenda movies are all about..

[–] helge-20 16 years ago

So every movie that is based on a true story as in this case has a political agenda? Or is it just this movie? I don't think the world gets any worse with movies like this. After all, people like yourself needs to get their act together and start to see what is really going on in the world. The world is bigger and involves much more than what is going on in some isolated hick community down in the southern states, where I guess we could find people with the same opinions like yours.

[–] hundredreasons 15 years ago

lol, I like the way you claim the world is so very, very big, and yet your comment sounds as though you have ignorant American syndrome.

There's more going on in the world than in the northern states as well. Like in other countries for example? lolio.

You know in school, there's a rumour that they don't teach you where countries are in the world. Is this really true? And also that you don't learn any history but your own country's?

[–] heitmann1989 16 years ago

I noticed that the .50 cals in the Humvees don't have ammo belts in them. What the...?

Another thing is the vests they wear, Marines used Interceptor body armor vests at this period in the Iraq war, not the *beep* they use in the movie.

Anyways, people don't care, I just have an eagle eye for such things. Hah.

[–] the_cyberpunk 16 years ago

I agree with Superrjon, this looks very low budget, the least they could have done was hire some good technical advisors.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] overninethousand 16 years ago

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870211/goofs
is for you.

[–] Billygoat 15 years ago

Superjohn makes valid observations, especially as part of the selling point of this movie is the "hyper realism" brought about by using actual Iraq war vets playing the Marines.

Having said that, I wasn't aware of these errors myself, and so I could enjoy the film. But I used to be in the military years ago, and I could see that these types of mistakes would blow it for anyone who's currently or recently been in the service. And that's important, because a film like this could be very important for some of these guys. I think that the director's heart is in the right place - really making an effort to show all sides, and not to over simplify people - so he wasn't trying to be disrespectful. But yes, they could have spent a few more dollars to get an advisor and get some of those things right. (The strange thing is some of the actors are Iraq war vets - wouldn't they have pointed these things out to the director?)

[–] kino_vamp 15 years ago

I agree, Billygoat. There are some technical inaccuracies in the film, but they don't devalue the overall film. I hope people aren't getting so caught up in little things that they miss the debate the film provokes.

[–] ztpt 14 years ago

I think hollywood has an obligation to get it right down to the last detail when making films about the military..cause thats ultimately whats this war is gonna be defined by...

[–] Ginnn 14 years ago

OP you watch tooo many movies.

[–] thomashennessy 14 years ago

You are right, there were many technical inaccuracies in this film. That said, it shouldn't take away from the story itself.

I was one of the actors who had the opportunity to take part in this film, and being a Iraq Vet. I remember being a bit frustrated during the shooting of this film, because of many of the technical aspects that previous posters have brought up.

Having perspective now to look back and view the film and realize why we had to do things the way we did, I understand a lot better.

The film was shot a a small budget (roughly 5 million) which is low compared to most feature length films, most of the budget went to flying 13 of us from LA to Jordan, and the massive amount of money it costs to secure the locations and machinery needed to try and make an authentic looking film. With that in mind, not being able to procure the most authentic gear and uniforms available seems like a good sacrifice, in order to tell the story in the environment it was told in.

Had this been a Hollywood blockbuster with a huge budget, I could understand complaints about some of the technical inaccuracies, but being what was accomplished with the small cast and crew available, I think Nick did a fantastic job of bringing his vision to the screen.

[–] ziltoid83 12 years ago

Can also understand why some find the details in accuracy annoying watching the movie. I have same thing with all the WWII movies/series where they have mockup Tigers made out of T-34s or more modern tanks with fake armor put on top to make it look genuine, but WWII geeks like me will still notice difference easily.

But in the end this wasn't movie with the fighting scenes and every small military detail about gear and tactics having to be 100% accurate, but as already stated earlier, about the story itself and showing the tragedy of war from multiple sides and point of views.

Movies with Hollywood/military ties backing get actual military support to make it look all authentic and specialists there to make every detail in gear and equipment look good and up-to-date. But sadly movies like these which criticize and show military in somewhat questionable light, don't pass those plot qualifications for them as after all those movies are partly also propaganda and to make the military look good.

Either way i found the movie intresting and thought provoking even if not 100% accurate in every detail or how it actually went down (only those know who were there themselves).

[–] ktowny 11 years ago

You better stay away from old war movies. Guys would get shot up and not even bleed.

Love's turned to lust and blood's turned to dust in my heart.