• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Act of Valor: The Infantry's Top Gun?

Saw it last week and hated it. It glorifies killing and shows that Americans are also guilty of terrorism. Bad movie.
 
Saw it last week and hated it. It glorifies killing and shows that Americans are also guilty of terrorism. Bad movie.

I'm seeing it in about 30 minutes, so I'll report back, but FYI our special forces are basically terrorists in terms of tactics. The best damn terrorists in the world. Thankfully they're loyal to America and get more than enough ass, so they don't get tempted with 72 zombie virgins.
 
Saw it last week and hated it. It glorifies killing and shows that Americans are also guilty of terrorism. Bad movie.

Just got finished watching the movie. What scene(s) are you exactly commenting on that the Americans are guilty of terrorism?
 
Alright I'm back, it was good. I'd give it a 7.5/10 overall. Now just to be clear, this is getting a 25% from the critics because in terms of classical film-making there isn't much there. The plot is loose, the characters are only mildly developed. So what makes it good?

I think overall the best thing about it is the portrayal of the SEALs. Given that they're actually using real SEALs I also imagine much of the dialog was legit. The movie overall just feels very real, and the lack of theatricality actually adds to that. I've never been in the military so maybe I'm not the best judge, and I'm sure some of the scenes were pure Hollywood (there's one scene where one SEAL is on the deck of an aircraft carrier, at sunset, while a fighter takes off not 30 feet away, without hearing protection, so he can have a talk with his wife), but I know it got a few things right.

Example: In the climax the SEALs bust into a room and one of them ends up in hand-to-hand with a bad guy. The camera goes all over the place and everything's a blur right up until you see the SEAL draw his side-arm, shove it against bad guy's neck and bang. Then they snap immediately to "all clear" and move onto the next room. As professionals of SEAL caliber would.

There's no hollywood emphasis on the moment, no slow-mo/silent breathing picture of shock on the SEAL's face, no slow deaths, just "bad guy down, moving on". The shoot of the fight itself is also quite accurate as to how hand-to-hand combat feels from what martial arts experience I have. Especially under extreme stress in a strange environment, everything is instinct and it's all a blur at first glance right until the endstroke, which is typically violent and sudden.

The whole movie is stuffed full of scenes like that. You feel like you're watching professionals doing their jobs, not actors performing a scene. And the disjointness of the shooting, which would mess up typical movies, tends to add to the feeling of watching real combat. In an actual combat environment, you are only aware of your small part of the picture. There are few nice clean overhead shots like Black Hawk Down. Here most shots are close in, even first person at times.

Overall, not a great classical film, but a good movie IMO. There were a bunch of marines behind us who looked supremely satisfied and were praising the movie as we walked out. That's enough to assure me of its validity, and even without their endorsement, it was a highly entertaining action picture and I would have regretted not seeing it.
 
Alright I'm back, it was good. I'd give it a 7.5/10 overall. Now just to be clear, this is getting a 25% from the critics because in terms of classical film-making there isn't much there. The plot is loose, the characters are only mildly developed. So what makes it good?

I think overall the best thing about it is the portrayal of the SEALs. Given that they're actually using real SEALs I also imagine much of the dialog was legit. The movie overall just feels very real, and the lack of theatricality actually adds to that. I've never been in the military so maybe I'm not the best judge, and I'm sure some of the scenes were pure Hollywood (there's one scene where one SEAL is on the deck of an aircraft carrier, at sunset, while a fighter takes off not 30 feet away, without hearing protection, so he can have a talk with his wife), but I know it got a few things right.

Example: In the climax the SEALs bust into a room and one of them ends up in hand-to-hand with a bad guy. The camera goes all over the place and everything's a blur right up until you see the SEAL draw his side-arm, shove it against bad guy's neck and bang. Then they snap immediately to "all clear" and move onto the next room. As professionals of SEAL caliber would.

There's no hollywood emphasis on the moment, no slow-mo/silent breathing picture of shock on the SEAL's face, no slow deaths, just "bad guy down, moving on". The shoot of the fight itself is also quite accurate as to how hand-to-hand combat feels from what martial arts experience I have. Especially under extreme stress in a strange environment, everything is instinct and it's all a blur at first glance right until the endstroke, which is typically violent and sudden.

The whole movie is stuffed full of scenes like that. You feel like you're watching professionals doing their jobs, not actors performing a scene. And the disjointness of the shooting, which would mess up typical movies, tends to add to the feeling of watching real combat. In an actual combat environment, you are only aware of your small part of the picture. There are few nice clean overhead shots like Black Hawk Down. Here most shots are close in, even first person at times.

Overall, not a great classical film, but a good movie IMO. There were a bunch of marines behind us who looked supremely satisfied and were praising the movie as we walked out. That's enough to assure me of its validity, and even without their endorsement, it was a highly entertaining action picture and I would have regretted not seeing it.

I agree 100% with your statement. Overall the acting suffered because they where using real seals to portray the Seals. Sometimes the writing seemed a little off. However I sometimes wondered during the briefings if that is what is said. I remember one point the Chief briefing them told them that these guys also do this for a job and are not incompetent. The action scenes where very intense and you did sense a lot of realism to them. It was amazing to me to see the amount of semi-auto fire from the Seals because Hollywood has so much rock-roll when firing. The scene with the swift boats and the mini-guns was just awesome. Overall it was very gritty and brutal.
 
Just got finished watching the movie. What scene(s) are you exactly commenting on that the Americans are guilty of terrorism?

Bodyguards to folks getting slaughtered / sniped by our special forces. For no other crime than being in the wrong employment, at the wrong place, at the wrong time.

It's actually quite a fascinating look at what US terrorism looks like when we take our special forces and go vigilante on folks around the world. Don't get me wrong, some folks deserve it and choose the wrong employer... others however, surely not all of them merited cold blooded murder.

Movie itself was pretty good. Took the viewers along for the ride. I give it a lot of credit for a job well done.

It's just that I picked up on what he was talking about with the comparison to terrorism. When you're trained and equipped like we are, the Muslims and everybody else look like the amateurs that they truly are.
 
Last edited:
Bodyguards to folks getting slaughtered / sniped by our special forces. For no other crime than being in the wrong employment, at the wrong place, at the wrong time.

It's actually quite a fascinating look at what US terrorism looks like when we take our special forces and go vigilante on folks around the world. Don't get me wrong, some folks deserve it and choose the wrong employer... others however, surely not all of them merited cold blooded murder.

Movie itself was pretty good. Took the viewers along for the ride. I give it a lot of credit for a job well done.

It's just that I picked up on what he was talking about with the comparison to terrorism. When you're trained and equipped like we are, the Muslims and everybody else look like the amateurs that they truly are.

I take it you are talking about the yacht incident. If you are a bodyguard for a known drug running/smuggler that will be a high risk occupation and sucks to be you. If the US military comes knocking your best bet is to make sure that you set down your weapon. The one guy on the speed boat was a idiot. He is being chased down by a Mark V boat and he thinks to fire a UZI at them. Did you notice how the unarmed captain of the yacht wasn't shot? Let me guess us taking out Bin Laden in your opinion was a Vigilante act?
 
From what I understand, it is very much a pro military propaganda film.

Yeah it's pro-military and you could even say something of a recruitment poster, but the last scene is a funeral and they spend a lot of time on it. The movie actually ends on a very somber note, compared to confirmed "propaganda films" like Top Gun that end with victorious fly-bys and cheering sailors. Honestly, it doesn't really entice you to join the military, at least not blatantly. I think its origins might have been as a recruitment film, then the directors took it more seriously part-way in.

And it's about the SEALs. There's usually not much bad to say about those guys; depends on your point of view I guess.
 
Last edited:
I really enjoyed the movie. Yeah, the acting was crappy because the dialogue seemed very unnatural, but the action was great. I went with a group of other Army types, and we were all impressed\jealous. Night time HALO jumps? Chinook dropped swift boats?! Also the first person shots were very realistic compared to most movies, and their room clearing procedures were spot on. The only things we really picked on were: 1) If someone is firing a G3 through the wall at head level for an extended period of time, you should probably get down. 2) Where did their fancy zydeco boats go after they drove them up onto the back of the submarine? The sub dived so soon after.

But overall the cinemetography and shots were incredible. The sub diving was awesome, the HALO jumps were awesome.

And LOL at those saying JSOC are terrorists. When they rolled up on Christo's boat, I leaned over to my buddy and said, "We have the best pirates in the world."
 
Bodyguards to folks getting slaughtered / sniped by our special forces. For no other crime than being in the wrong employment, at the wrong place, at the wrong time.

It's actually quite a fascinating look at what US terrorism looks like when we take our special forces and go vigilante on folks around the world. Don't get me wrong, some folks deserve it and choose the wrong employer... others however, surely not all of them merited cold blooded murder.

Movie itself was pretty good. Took the viewers along for the ride. I give it a lot of credit for a job well done.

It's just that I picked up on what he was talking about with the comparison to terrorism. When you're trained and equipped like we are, the Muslims and everybody else look like the amateurs that they truly are.

Well in the beginning their crime was guarding an American prisoner who was being tortured with an electric drill among other things. You're saying they should have approached all those nice, misunderstood-with-sensitive-hearts-of-gold cartel guards and asked nicely if they'd let the prisoner go?
 
Back
Top