To those of you who read my articles at Suite101, please note that
the address has changed to
http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/military_movies . So, change
your bookmarks.

Here is the newest article at Suite101 - Military Movies. Read.
Enjoy

Is it the Reel World or the Real World?


Currently, I am taking a seminar on screenwriting from an
accomplished screenwriter. A producer friend asked me, "As a
produced screenwriter, why would you need to take a course on
screenwriting?" My reply was that I am also an accomplished trap and
skeet shooter but I also take courses on how to improve my skills.
Every little bit helps.

One of the major discussions in this screenwriting class has been
about the difference between the reel world and the real world. One
thing this screenwriter keeps talking about is, "Don't let your moral
compass get in the way of the story." As a writer, I can agree with
that statement. As a consultant, I try to get the right "feel" to a
movie.

For me, the real world versus reel world dichotomy is one that I
struggle with every day. For example, a producer came to me and
asked me to bid on the use of tanks for the filming of a parade for a
movie. What period, I asked? They said, oh, we just want to film a
parade scene and need a tank. I persisted, what period I asked;
World War II, modern, what? They did not care, just a tank. So, I
bid out a working Korean War vintage M46. The discussion about the
uniforms and weapons all went about the same direction. Ultimately,
I bid out BDUs for the extras, M16s, the M46, and various vehicles
including a M3 Half-track. As my teenage daughter would say, "Am I
bad?"

Consider, movies are entertainment. While they should be as close to
existing historical knowledge as possible, sometimes getting
everything perfect is beyond the monetary capabilities of the movie
company. So should we, as viewers, just dismiss the movie out of
hand because the soldiers carried M1903A1 Springfields instead of
M1903A3 Springfields? My feeling is no, story will overcome the
difficulties. However, others take the opposite view.

In a discussion with a friend in the aerospace industry, he told me
that MISSION TO MARS was completely spoiled for him because of the
little robot explorer shown in the beginning of the film. He is
absolutely convinced that NASA would never build something that
looked like a tinker toy. I am not so sure about that, but the real
point is why did he let that incident ruin the rest of the movie for
him?

I have seen internet pages dedicated to the factual and historical
mistakes found in SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. Did these individuals find
the movie less enjoyable because of the mistakes? Well, they had to
have watched the film a healthy number of times to find all the
mistakes. So, I guess they enjoyed something about the movie.

To further complicate the argument, I have stated in the past and
continue to state that if the producer has the money to ensure his
favorite starlet's hair is just right he has the money to ensure the
basic factual and historical integrity of the film is right.
However, to paraphrase President Abraham Lincoln, you can't please
all the people all the time. Due to economics, politics, and a
number of other 'ics, no matter what you do as a producer, writer, or
military advisor, you cannot win all the battles. You just try to
win enough.

As far as the reel world and the real world argument goes, I can only
say that I pick my battles and hope to win some. For example, I
recently ended a project where I did additional military dialog such
as radio communications and background noise. The movie had already
finished filming (film lock in movie parlance), but needed help.
Since there was film lock, I could in no way go back and have re -
filmed the scenes where the supposed U.S. soldiers in incorrect
uniforms with incorrect weapons could be changed. At least in this
case, the producer was willing to listen to my comments and promised
to work with me next time.

John