Band of brothers: The pacific
04-27-2010, 11:47 AM
#35
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 3,150
Car Info: GT35R, Meth
This series is starting to get good. IMHO it's as good as BoB, but different. If you compare it against BoB on BoB's terms than BoB will be better. It's like comparing Lawrence of Arabia with the original Spartacus - they are different.
What I mean is, with both BoB and Pacific, Spielberg and Hanks are trying to show us the extent of the sacrifice made by this "Greatest Generation", and both series show different aspects of it not just in terms of the theater of war, but the soldier's lives. BoB is more about how much war sucks and how brave the men are (mind you it takes place over a year) and Pacific is about how a long campaign, being in war for 4 years affects people, affects their humanity and attitudes (takes place from Pearl Harbor to Japanese surrender)
What I mean is, with both BoB and Pacific, Spielberg and Hanks are trying to show us the extent of the sacrifice made by this "Greatest Generation", and both series show different aspects of it not just in terms of the theater of war, but the soldier's lives. BoB is more about how much war sucks and how brave the men are (mind you it takes place over a year) and Pacific is about how a long campaign, being in war for 4 years affects people, affects their humanity and attitudes (takes place from Pearl Harbor to Japanese surrender)
04-28-2010, 11:04 AM
#40
Not as good as orig BOB, but still a great series.
I've seen a lot of gore that isn't focused on in this.
For example, in the 2nd or 3rd episode I believe, the first time they see 2 dead bodies that have been brutalized. One guys dick is cut off and stuck in his mouth, that **** was pretty nasty. Also tossing rocks in the top of the skull was narly.
Doesn't seem to be as much dialogue that keeps the brothers tight........more like some loan wolf stuff, and pure heinousness going on. Relationships between the solidiers just aren't as good as in orig BOB>
I've seen a lot of gore that isn't focused on in this.
For example, in the 2nd or 3rd episode I believe, the first time they see 2 dead bodies that have been brutalized. One guys dick is cut off and stuck in his mouth, that **** was pretty nasty. Also tossing rocks in the top of the skull was narly.
Doesn't seem to be as much dialogue that keeps the brothers tight........more like some loan wolf stuff, and pure heinousness going on. Relationships between the solidiers just aren't as good as in orig BOB>
04-28-2010, 12:57 PM
#41
Registered User
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 3,143
Car Info: '02 WRX wagon
i dont remember seeing the dick 'n mouth scene, but I agree the rocks in skull thing was pretty ****in gross.
though the title of the story is "band of brothers", their goal in the pacific wasnt so much to show the bonding of the brothers as they were depicting the harsh conditions the US soldiers faced in the pacific. the relentlessness of the japanese soldiers and the horrible conditions of the terrain and weather of those islands. IMO the pacific theatre was probably the most challenging battle the US has ever faced, and thats what tom Hanks and Spielberg are trying to depict.
though the title of the story is "band of brothers", their goal in the pacific wasnt so much to show the bonding of the brothers as they were depicting the harsh conditions the US soldiers faced in the pacific. the relentlessness of the japanese soldiers and the horrible conditions of the terrain and weather of those islands. IMO the pacific theatre was probably the most challenging battle the US has ever faced, and thats what tom Hanks and Spielberg are trying to depict.
