TexasCHLforum.com

Well...

I'm reading the book now...And I think its a pretty good read...I have another Stephen Hunter book thats waiting for me as well...

Not sure I'll be anything but entertained by the movie...I might be inclined to not nitpick the details, but the premise of the movie might be kinda fun to see how they work the issues...


Remember, Hollywood can be full of beans at times...But occasionally they come out with stuff that entertains...

They have been saying that what Tom Clancey did for the submarine, Stephen Hunter does for the gun...

stevie_d_64 wrote:Well...

I'm reading the book now...And I think its a pretty good read...I have another Stephen Hunter book thats waiting for me as well...

Not sure I'll be anything but entertained by the movie...I might be inclined to not nitpick the details, but the premise of the movie might be kinda fun to see how they work the issues...

The book was excellent. As usual, what Hollywood turns out will very likely not much resemble it.

As for Clancy, he's the author who speaking of Hollywood's version of "Sum Of All Fears" said "I wrote the book that they ignored when they made this movie..."

packina40 wrote:As for Clancy, he's the author who speaking of Hollywood's version of "Sum Of All Fears" said "I wrote the book that they ignored when they made this movie..."

I read the book and saw the movie... and that is SO TRUE

I find solice in the fact that when they deviate from the formula that worked so well in Clancey's books, that if they had actually used those formulas in the movies they made from his books that they might actually not done as well as they did...ITs just a gut feeling I have...

There is a line Hollywood will not cross when it comes to movie themes of this genre...

Rest assured that those who feel like they've ripped Clancey's formulas are correct in that analysis...

But Hollywood is going to do what they want...Ironically they'll still make $$$...

I'd always thought that I'd loved to see Clancy's "Debt of Honor" and "Executive Orders" made into a TV Mini-Series much akin to Herman Wouk's "Winds of War" and "War and Remberance."

Too much to ask for I guess.

Russ

In the book (Point of Impact), the shot was made with a 308 in New Orleans during summer, sea level High humidity. Six seconds may be reasonable figure for travel time. I seem to remember checking the ballistics figures given in book first time I read it and they were pretty accurate.

The Bob Lee Swagger books and the Earl Swagger books (his daddy) from Hunter are excellant in my opinion.

I only skimmed this thread until someone mentioned that Stephen Hunter was the author.

Puh-LEEZE!

I try not to be a pedant. Really, I do. I allow for artistic license when reading fiction, but sometimes my "willing suspension of disbelief" can only stretch so far when the piece in question involves subjects I know intimately.

With the "Bob Lee Swagger" series, I did my best to let Hunter tell an enjoyable tale. And he can weave a good tale, for the most part. The problem comes not when his fictional Polk County, Arkansas doesn't match the actual Polk County, Arkansas where I grew up, but rather where his endless recitation of "gun stuff" falls on its face when compared to reality. (FYI, there is a Blue Ball, Arkansas, but it's a place, not even a town, and it's not in Polk County. I drove through Blue Ball every time I made the trip from Polk Co., to my college dorm in Russellville.)

Some of Hunter's work reads like it was turned down by "Soldier of Fortune" magazine. The great "sniper duel" comes to mind, where the paraplegic antagonist is strapped upright on a 4-wheeler, and manages to drive himself cross-country into a sniper hide. You can't walk through most of that country; riding a good hunting mule is questionable, and 4-wheelers can't even get off the Forest Service roads.

And then there's the whole "rattlesnake/IR sniper light" incident, with Bob Lee Sr.'s duel... sheesh. That was really stretching.

Like I said, the story-weaving was good in the books that I tried reading. Character development was great. Technically, the novels worked. But the "just plain silly" stuff was too big to ignore.

I quit trying when "Dirty White Boys" was released, because I work in the prison where DWB was founded, and I was there when DWB grew from the name of a prison softball team, into a full-fledged white supremacist prison gang. I had already had enough of the "reality shift" in Hunter's novels, and I refused to even try that one.

So.... I hope I don't sound like someone griping about bayonet lugs being "wrong" on M1 carbines in a WWII movie. I just can't enjoy Stephen Hunter, because he tries to write with authority about things about which he obviously knows nothing.

Kevin

Well it might be an entertaining movie, but remember that reality has nothing to do with what comes out of Hollywood.

KBCraig wrote:I only skimmed this thread until someone mentioned that Stephen Hunter was the author.

Puh-LEEZE!

I try not to be a pedant.

Kevin

I think ewe meant "pundit"...

Pedant is one "n" short of something you wear around yer neck...

(Steve runs for effective cover, because he believes Kevin can shoot reel well, and meant to miss on that first shot... )

stevie_d_64 wrote:I think ewe meant "pundit"...

Pedant is one "n" short of something you wear around yer neck...

(Steve runs for effective cover, because he believes Kevin can shoot reel well, and meant to miss on that first shot... )

ped - ant:
1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to common sense.


Oh! Never mind.

hi-power wrote:

stevie_d_64 wrote:I think ewe meant "pundit"...

Pedant is one "n" short of something you wear around yer neck...

(Steve runs for effective cover, because he believes Kevin can shoot reel well, and meant to miss on that first shot... )

ped - ant:
1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to common sense.


Oh! Never mind.

There's a little bit of room back here...I can't guarantee a certain part of yer anatomy might not become a juicy, errr, target...

stevie_d_64 wrote:There's a little bit of room back here...I can't guarantee a certain part of yer anatomy might not become a juicy, errr, target...

I'm on my way! Cover me!!!

KBCraig wrote: I try not to be a pedant. Really, I do. I allow for artistic license when reading fiction, but sometimes my "willing suspension of disbelief" can only stretch so far when the piece in question involves subjects I know intimately.

I agree. When I was watching the chase scene at the end of Mission Imposable II and the tires on the Sport Bikes kept changing from dirt tires to street tires and back depending on where they where. Whats even better is when the movie itself contradicts itself. The scene in the movie Aliens where Vasquez is in the duct work shooting back at the Xenomorphs. You see casings bouncing all over the place. It was said earlier in the movie that the Pulse rifles shoots 10mm explosive tip case less standard light armor piercing rounds.

Some times you just have to let go and let Hollywood be Hollywood.

Wildscar wrote:The scene in the movie Aliens where Vasquez is in the duct work shooting back at the Xenomorphs. You see casings bouncing all over the place. It was said earlier in the movie that the Pulse rifles shoots 10mm explosive tip case less standard light armor piercing rounds.

Maybe they're like the casings ejecting from the Imperial Stormtroopers' laser guns.

uh oh...

Not everybody has the Sci-Fi channel guys...