Lord of War

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Echo Tango

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
163
Location
I get the feeling theres gonna be a riot.
Ok I just went and bought the new Lord of War 2 disc DVD set. Its already apparent that this is in a oblique sense a anti gun movie, thats not a surprise I kind of expected that. What I didnt expect was just how much inncorrect information the bonus features would have. Example in the Tools of the trade section on the dvd one of the weapons listed is the M-16 thereis a history section and a specs section......Now correct me if i am wrong but I dont recall the M-16 being 7.62 mm and its magazine capacity being a 100 round belt. Most of the info is inconsistant in this manner. Its almost like they want to "shock you" as to how dangerous small arms trade is.
 
Stoner's original rifle was built for the 7.62 NATO round. A round he personally liked. Don't know about the belt feed, but it sounds like it could be plausible.
 
usp9 said:
Stoner's original rifle was built for the 7.62 NATO round. A round he personally liked. Don't know about the belt feed, but it sounds like it could be plausible.
Click to expand...

Correct. Gene Stoner brought out the M16, after first producing the AR10 rifle in 7.62X51 Nato. The Dutch Government produced it at Hembrug on a contract basis.

After Stoner left Armalite, that company produced a rifle they called the AR-16. That rifle was chambered in 7.62 Nato, and was very similar to the AR-18. It was not belt fed though, but with a magazine.

Stoner's Model 63 weapons system could be configured as belt fed, but it was only made in 5.56.
 
I was disappointed with that movie. Typical anti-gun BS. I won't waste my time renting, buying or recommending it again.
 
usp9 said:
Stoner's original rifle was built for the 7.62 NATO round. A round he personally liked. Don't know about the belt feed, but it sounds like it could be plausible.
Click to expand...

But Stoner's first rifle was not the AR-15! If the movie claimed the AR-15/M-16 was introduced in 7.62 NATO, the movie was WRONG.
 
Cosmoline said:
But Stoner's first rifle was not the AR-15! If the movie claimed the AR-15/M-16 was introduced in 7.62 NATO, the movie was WRONG.
Click to expand...

What was Stoner's first rifle, and what caliber then?
 
Stoner's original design was the AR-10 in 7.62x51. The government wanted a gun in 5.56x45 so he redesigned it as the AR-15.
 
I didn't really see the movie as anti-gun, and I quite liked it.

I saw it as a movie about a man who slowly bleeds his humanity via his business in illegal arms dealing.
 
I liked the movie also. I don’t think it was anti gun at all. If anything it shows the futility of gun control both domestically and internationally. Plus it had a happy ending.

Dan
 
i'm sure it was just someone who was uninformed accidentally turning m60 into m16. they sound similar and people often make "corrections" to things that don't sound right to them. it is more likely that the person in question has heard of an m16 than an m60. they hear one, they type the other and we spend three weeks being surprised that the leftists in hollywood are both uninformed and anti gun.

how many anti freedom folks have you ever known or heard of that are actually knowledgeable about weapons and gun safety. CS kids don't count.
 
chopinbloc said:
how many anti freedom folks have you ever known or heard of that are actually knowledgeable about weapons and gun safety.
Click to expand...


none, because folks with actual firearms knowledge are obviously psychotic militia-types who should be investigated by the ATF, FBI, CSI, and CBS (with dan rather's help).:p


AS for the movie, I liked it, it was entertaining. I didnt think it was that anti-gun, especially since it showed that atrocities will still be committed in Africa and elsewhere even without firearms. Machetes are cheaper I guess...
 
I didn't get that impression at all. Just me though, and that's the beauty of art, its open to interpretation
 
I watched that movie 2 days ago.

Not bad.

Frankly, i saw it as more Anti "Bad people" than anti-gun. Not that it wasnt anti-gun.

"We just give them the guns. They do what they will with them ,and if we dont give them someone else will".
 
I posted on this a few days ago...
The point I made then and want to make again is that the producers while inaccurate at best on the specifics of the weapons, were taking a shot at Illegal Arms Sales to the Third World. To some degree at gun ownership but more at illegal sales.
I found the main Character (played by Cage) to have few redeeming and or human qualities. The degenerates he dealt with were even less likable.
Questions? Do you think the Feds use Gun and Drug Runners to Distance themselves from Direct sales to 3rd world countires?
Do you think the Warlords, Dictators, and Scumbags involved in these Transactions deserve any form of sympathy?
 
Tequila_Sauer said:
I didn't really see the movie as anti-gun, and I quite liked it.

I saw it as a movie about a man who slowly bleeds his humanity via his business in illegal arms dealing.
Click to expand...

+1

I would call the movie more anti-arms trading then anything.
 
I thought it was a pretty good film about back door dealings and the whole 'lay down with dogs' mentality.

Yuri had no intention of killing anyone initially... nor did his wife have any intention of doing anything but looking the other way.

At some point they both realize they are crawling with fleas.

She realizes she's laid down with dogs, yuri realizes... well that he IS a dog (foreshadowed in the film, reinforced by the hyeanas) and returns to the life.

Metaphors reach farther than guns.

I didn't get a chance to watch the 'special features' but really, the film was pretty good.
 
This movie is pathetic.

Loosely based on some real stuff, however.

Do a search on "Viktor Bout".
 
chopinbloc said:
i'm sure it was just someone who was uninformed accidentally turning m60 into m16. they sound similar and people often make "corrections" to things that don't sound right to them. it is more likely that the person in question has heard of an m16 than an m60. they hear one, they type the other and we spend three weeks being surprised that the leftists in hollywood are both uninformed and anti gun.

how many anti freedom folks have you ever known or heard of that are actually knowledgeable about weapons and gun safety. CS kids don't count.
Click to expand...


heh nice try but the image is a flat out M-16 with 203 underslung
 
Hi,

I loved the flick... very well photographed... especially the opening sequences.

I did not see it as an anti-gun film.. but rather as an anti government film... for in the end the knock DID come at the door and the govenrment official DID release the gun-runner who was far more amoral than he was evil.

It is unfortunate that the depiction of the Liberian dictator was far more based on truth than fiction... Just multiply that evil F..ker by a Serb, a Croate etc. etc. etc.. and you get the point. It really isn't guns that kill people.:eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Lord of War
2 3
Replies
69
Views
4K
Warren
W
MrDig
  • Locked
Lord of War (Fascinating Movie)
Replies
23
Views
2K
Carl N. Brown
Carl N. Brown
D
  • Locked
"Lord of War" Getting Ugly Reviews
2 3
Replies
53
Views
5K
atek3
atek3
B
  • Locked
Lord of War Question
Replies
12
Views
2K
Lonestar
L
C
  • Locked
"The Winter War" (Talvisota)
Replies
15
Views
1K
SteveKompier
S
Back
Top