you all are ruining me

[kungfuhippie]

I watched Behind Enemy Lines last night. I use to like the movie as a good modern, post vietnam, war movie. It isn't perfect, it even references things that haden't happened yet (like britney spears, and tom hanks in Lost) but overall it was a fun movie with alot of action.

So first thing I notice is that the Sebrian sniper has a rediculous rifle for his job IMHO it was chosen because it was big and scarey looking. He can't keep his darn finger off the trigger:banghead: yeah, a real scarey sniper, cause of all the NDs he's had:banghead:
Next, everyone had an AK, I mean everyone. I know in the conflict that SKS rifles with scopes were used by snipers, Zastava still makes an SKS with a scope rail. And old mausers. So of course after listening to all the finger police, caliber nazi's etc. the movie is ruined to me.

Oh and the last scene where the main character slides along a frozen lake shooting multiple serbs with his beretta but none of them with their AKs, machine guns, or tanks can get one guy:banghead: :banghead:

Will this happen when I watch Indiana Jones next time? How about the great escape?

 

[doubleg]

"hollywood" has that effect on true stories.

 

[GreenFurniture]

In "The Good Shepard" they show AK47s in 1945.

 

[SoCalShooter]

Glad we could be of service to you.

 

[lathedog]

Not to be contrary...but...

I'm pretty sure that I read about AK-47's being field tested at the end of WWII. Mikhail did his design work while recovering from wounds suffered in combat. The basic design was finalized after being used in a limited and carefully controlled manner in 1945.

The SKS-45 is attributed as being a 1945 design, but there is speculation that it was a less "risky" (in terms of a new technology introduced rapidly) alternative to the AK. Both use the M43 cartridge, which sounds like it came out in 1943 with no matching weapon available.

The Soviets had a wierd habit about using model numbers not precisely matching the actual year of introduction, but rather a year of "standardization".

Check out Ezell's "Firearms of the World" or the earlier Smith & Smith "Book of the Rifle". Of course there may be newer information to supercede what I read years ago. I think I'll log off in a sec and go to the Izhmash website and see what they say.

The movie may have been wrong about the common usage or the location, etc, and I am sure no one on the film did any proper research in any event.

 

[Justin]

Dickering over technical gaffes in movies is like criticizing the ingredients in a Milky Way bar for being unhealthy.