• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

S

SeanRT

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Apr 28, 2008
344
1
Tulsa, Oklahoma
So, I just bought the miniseries The Pacific the other day and started to watch it. And I couldn't help but to compare it to the original miniseries Band of Brothers. While The Paicifc is a good miniseries overall (historically, realistic battle sequences, etc.), I think that Steven Speilberg and Tom Hanks went a little too far in their "gritty and realistic" portrayal of the Marines that fought in the South Pacific.

Will anyone else who has seen this miniseries (and also knows of these matters) please enlighten me as to the realism that is portrayed concerning the men of the Marines Corp that fought in the South Pacific?

Much thanks!
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I think Band of Brothers gets a lot more into the people and story because it follows one group through the entire war, which lets you connect more with the characters; while the Pacific follows multiple groups through different parts of the war and it's somewhat disjointed so you never get a true understanding of who they are.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I can't help, my father faught in the pacific in the army. He didn't talk much except to tell me what to do and not to do when I was in route to Vietnam.

Lots of talke about Marines in the SP, but not much about the army but I think there were more army divisions the marine divisions.

Being a paratrooper my self, I've studied the subject a bit, BofB seems close to how paratroopers act.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I thought The Pacific was a real let down after watching Band of Brothers. JMO...
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

Preferred watching BoB. More continuity to it. And Ambrose had a knack for telling a story.

But the books on which The Pacific miniseries was based were phenomenal. After watching the series, I read all the books and a few more... What the Pacific theater Marines accomplished (under horrid conditions) was unreal.

Both series' get my thumbs-up, but for different reasons.

Cheers,

Sirhr
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I see where you are coming from, but the Japanese were infinitely more ruthless than the Germans when it comes to battlefield conduct (not taking the Holocaust into account). It is a fairly accurate depiction from all historical accounts.

Josh
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

BofB is still one of my favorite watches. I've studied WW2 history for years and have been to numerous battlefields in Europe. I find the Euopean theatre more interesting for some reason. I've read many books about it and still do today. BofB writing and acting gave me more sense of connection to the characters than the pacific. I was disappointed with it after being excited to see it for so long. Still good but not as good as BofB.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MinorDamage</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I see where you are coming from, but the Japanese were infinitely more ruthless than the Germans when it comes to battlefield conduct (not taking the Holocaust into account). It is a fairly accurate depiction from all historical accounts.

Josh </div></div>

No, no, no...I didn't mean who had the tougher time of the war; war is hell and everyone thinks that they had the toughest time during their wartime experiences. I'm not trying to compare the different military services. I'm talking about accuracy in the fields of language (it was very rough in The Pacific when compared to Band of Brothers), conduct, and general accuracy depicting the South Pacific theatre of war. My general line of thinking is that Tom Hanks, the other producers, and the director used quite a bit of "artistic license" to write The Pacific. But I'm no expert in these matters.

However, I completely agree that the Japanese were infinitely more ruthless than the Nazis on nearly all counts.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

When it came to war atrocities the Germans had nothing on the Japanese.. and that is including the holocaust.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mr300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MinorDamage</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I see where you are coming from, but the Japanese were infinitely more ruthless than the Germans when it comes to battlefield conduct (not taking the Holocaust into account). It is a fairly accurate depiction from all historical accounts.

Josh </div></div>

...I'm talking about accuracy in the fields of language (it was very rough in The Pacific when compared to Band of Brothers), conduct, and general accuracy depicting the South Pacific theatre of war. </div></div>

That's exactly what I addressed with the exception of language. The series is quite a bit more raw that BoB and I strongly believe that is because of it being relatively accurate historically when it comes to conduct on the battlefield and the conditions and ferocity of fighting.

I think you could also surmise that language may have been reduced from its actual color in BoB.

All that aside, I thought BoB was a better series because it told a tighter and more refined story. I believe they were trying to hit more at drawing the audience in with epic large scale naval and amphibious battles and the continuity was lost.

As a Navy guy I can appreciate the directors showing the Navy and Marine Corps side of WWII. Either way, no one should ever feel like their time was slighted by watching either series.

Josh
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 18Echo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When it came to war atrocities the Germans had nothing on the Japanese.. and that is including the holocaust. </div></div>

Strangely though, The Japanese have largely been given a near total pass on thier atrocious track record - in drastic contrast to the Germans :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I don't think any movie studio can portray the realism of having countless 2000lb shells bombard you night after night or being abandoned on an island filled with Japs with only the gear on your back or the savagery of the firefights or having some fucker jump in your hole trying to knife you. That stuff just didn't happen in the European theatre.

The Germans still fought with respect to their opponents such as each side would cease fire to allow casualties to be collected from the field. The Japs would either starve you to death in a work camp or just torture you on the spot it they captured you wounded or not. Not just the Marines but all of the soldiers that participated in fighting on the front had to become savages just to survive.

So I don't think they went far enough to show the realism of fighting or the conduct of U.S. personnel just because the public nowadays doesn't want to see that stuff or they would freak. I was surprised they put the scene in where the Marines kill one of their own with the E-tool because he was screaming in dream out in an OP.

On a personal note I've had 120 mm mortars land on roofs of building's I've been in and I can tell you it is not a good feeling. So I can't imagine having naval gunfire impacting around me and only being in a trench. Some guys break some don't but you wont know how you will react until you are in that situation. I don't judge any of these guys on what they did to the Japs because if you weren't there you don't know shit.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Germans still fought with respect to their opponents such as each side would cease fire to allow casualties to be collected from the field.</div></div>

Except on the Eastern front.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

BoB is more about Easy company as a whole, sometimes focusing on one or two men in a episode; The Pacific was about Sledge, Leckie & Basilone with the others little more than passing supporting characters.

I do like how The Pacific shows the evolution of Eugene Sledge over the second half of the series...the portrayal of growth there is almost unparalleled in modern military cinema.

BoB also didn't seem to have the long shots that made you just gasp that The Pacific had...with the exception of 'Why We Fight' with the violinist playing amid the rubble.

Both are VERY powerful miniseries...
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

The weapons and uniforms in "The Pacific" were amazingly accurate for each period filmed. They switched from the Water Cooled 1917 Browning MG to the aircooled 1919 at the right time, switched from 1903's to M1's at the right time, and changed uniforms correctly. the vehicles were right on, including the jap tanks and wrecked aircraft, as well as the amtracks. Marines have always been a different breed, and the age of most Marines in WW II was very young, 17 or 18 in battles. I recall a 16 year old got the Medal of Honor at Iwo I think. (The Navy had a 12 year old on a Battleship at Guadalcanal who got the Bronze Star and Purple Heart, then they found out his age, took back his decorations, put him in the redLine brig, and kicked him out). Marines were very profane of speech. It is a hard habit to break in polite society.
The tactics for most marine battles was push right up the front and kill everything. No room to manuever much on little islands.
What was hard about watching "The Pacific" was that they condensed months at a time into a single episode, or two. Chronology got kinda confusing by jumping characters and groups too.
I liked BOB better, and I am a former marine.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

The South Pacific was no picknick but compaired to the European theather..........I don't know. More US troops were lost in the Battle of the Bulge the the whole SP theather.

The marine in the SP spent 100 days in combat in 4 years , compared to 270 days in Vietnam in one year, The WWII European theather was much worse.

 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kraigWY</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The South Pacific was no picknick but compaired to the European theather..........I don't know. More US troops were lost in the Battle of the Bulge the the whole SP theather.

The marine in the SP spent 100 days in combat in 4 years , compared to 270 days in Vietnam in one year, The WWII European theather was much worse.

</div></div>
The Marine units in the Pacific were so beat up after each battle that they had to replace the dead and wounded, get issued new weapons, and go out again. From Normandy to VE day was 11 months. most units in Northern Europe didn't even come ashore until after July 44, and got pulled off the line when the situation allowed. Until the Italy landings the Army in the Med had short time in actual fighting combat too. Italy was a sideshow with minimal troops.
It took 6 Divisions of Marines to get to Okinawa. If you think the marines had it easy, ask the ones about Tarawa, which was 3 days, or Iwo Jima, which was a month.
And the marines were fighting mostly right around the Equator, with 100+ degree heat year round, torrential downpours, and the nasiest bugs and diseases in the world. The SouWest Pacific is a festering, miserable pusbucket.It isn't like Hawaii. No Congac, Champagne, or Cheese for the Marines, not even Australia or New Zealand after 42. Just tents, training, and getting shot at.
Most German soldiers sureendered. They weren't killed in close action. Artillery was the big killer, not direct fire.
The Japs had to be dug out, or sealed up, or burned. they didn't surrender. Some Korean laborers did, but only a few hundred japs were captured the whole war in the Pacific. After the Goette patrol on Guadalcanal, and the Lunga Sandbar, the Marines knew who they were dealing with, and acted accordingly. Two in the head, you know he's dead.
The Pacific War was totally different than Europe. Huge distances, awful terrain, and a merciless enemy. Most marines who fought in the PTO hated everything Japanese until the day they died.
look at the 101st history. never saw combat until D Day. One month later (just enough to get a CIB) back in England for over 2 months until Market Garden(Sept 17). Mid November in barracks and on leave in France until the Battle of the Bulge (Middle of Dec, or they would have been in the rear longer). off the line at the end of January until the German collapse in April of 44.
So the 101st had about 5 months in Combat the whole war, part of it rounding up prisoners and drinking schnapps.
Between wounds and diseases few marines who fought at Guadalcanal, Tarawa, or Indonesia in 42/43 were around any Division by 1945.
It took 3 overstrength marine divisions a month to take Iwo Jima (Suribachi was taken in 3 days). casualties in all the Rifle Companies was approaching 200%. Over 22,000 casualties, in a month. More Marine casualties than there were japanese on the whole Island.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">From Normandy to VE day was 11 months</div></div>

OH, what happened to Italy????? Did they move it?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Italy was a sideshow with minimal troops.</div></div>

You're kidding, Right???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you think the marines had it easy</div></div>

No where did I say or imply that.

But from what I've read, and paratroopers I've talk to, Bastogne wasn't a Christmas Party. One light infantry division holding off three Armor divisions. I also heard it was a bit nippy.

I've faught in jungles, I'll that that over being froze any time.





\
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

Not knowing much about either part of the war :(, Band of Brothers was A LOT easier for me to follow than than The Pacific. The Pacific jumped around a lot, you didnt get to "know" the characters, their was a lot of stuff (to me) that they didnt need to include, like so much spent on being in Australia for one instance. I never could really follow it. Where as Band of Brothers, I did watch it twice, but the second time it all came together and all made sense. The Pacific, only watched it once, and just didnt hold my interest like the original did. That being said, I wish they would have just followed the story of one company, or one person through the battles of the SP, and did along the same lines as they did with Band of Brothers, not get lost in so much of the "noise".
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I liked BoB a bit better. The Pacific's battle scenes are definitely more brutal. It looked like someone was just standing off set with a bucket of prop limbs and throwing them into view whenever a bomb exploded.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fritz24</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 18Echo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When it came to war atrocities the Germans had nothing on the Japanese.. and that is including the holocaust. </div></div>

Strangely though, The Japanese have largely been given a near total pass on thier atrocious track record - in drastic contrast to the Germans :





</div></div>

Probably because they committed them against the Chinese, Koreans and other Orientals. Nobody cares about the Chinese, not even the Chinese, they killed more of their own than the Japs.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Prairie Wolf</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fritz24</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 18Echo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When it came to war atrocities the Germans had nothing on the Japanese.. and that is including the holocaust. </div></div>

Strangely though, The Japanese have largely been given a near total pass on thier atrocious track record - in drastic contrast to the Germans :





</div></div>

Probably because they committed them against the Chinese, Koreans and other Orientals. Nobody cares about the Chinese, not even the Chinese, they killed more of their own than the Japs. </div></div>

The Bataan Death March, and the treatment of Alied prisoners, both military and civilian, is largely overlooked for some reason. The Imperial Japanes Army slaughtered 65 Austalian nurses and wounded British and Australian service men in a most horrific fashion. This is also "forgotten".

But, on the topic of the 2 series, I liked the "set up" of BoB better. It just seemed to flow better. "THe Pacific" was very powerful and really eye opening to folks who are not well versed in WWII history in general, and particularly in the history of Marine Corps.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

My Grandpa was a Marine during WWII and was in most of the battles they cover in the series.

Him and I have watched several war movie together and I love hearing him call out the bullshit. We watched "The Thin Red Line" and he said thought it was unrealistic. Quote "Running through Jap villages like that... fucking stupid."

Now when we watched the Pacific he was quite for alot of it. But when the goofy parts of the Marines cutting up and joking around came on. He'd talk about how "Oh yea, we'd do shit like that! These guys act like real Marines"

Band of Brothers and The Pacific are both great. I totally think the PTO was worse than the EtO.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Imperial Japanes Army slaughtered 65 Austalian nurses and wounded British and Australian service men in a most horrific fashion. This is also "forgotten".</div></div>

The Germans did the same thing to a "cut off" unit of the 82nd after D-day. They captured a village, and slaughtered wounded paratroopers and villagers who were housing them. The exicuteed the whole village and the troopers if I remember right.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Donttrytorun</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Italy was a sideshow with minimal troops.</div></div>

audie-murphy.jpg


A LOT of people will disagree with you on that.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kraigWY</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">From Normandy to VE day was 11 months</div></div>

OH, what happened to Italy????? Did they move it?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Italy was a sideshow with minimal troops.</div></div>

You're kidding, Right???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you think the marines had it easy</div></div>

No where did I say or imply that.

But from what I've read, and paratroopers I've talk to, Bastogne wasn't a Christmas Party. One light infantry division holding off three Armor divisions. I also heard it was a bit nippy.

I've faught in jungles, I'll that that over being froze any time.



Sir, you nailed it on the head!




\ </div></div>
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kraigWY</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Imperial Japanes Army slaughtered 65 Austalian nurses and wounded British and Australian service men in a most horrific fashion. This is also "forgotten".</div></div>

The Germans did the same thing to a "cut off" unit of the 82nd after D-day. They captured a village, and slaughtered wounded paratroopers and villagers who were housing them. The exicuteed the whole village and the troopers if I remember right.
</div></div>

Oh I was in no way trying to minimize Nazi Germany's attrocities to Alied personnel. I was just pointing out an incident that has always been pushed out of the history books and looked over.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

You are correct about Lemays firebombing.....
he killed more japs in Kobe and Tokyo then we killed with both atomic bombs. The cabinet was right we had only 2 bombs. When they saw the Russians comming down from the north they knew the jig was up and surrendered. Funny how it was OK for them to surrender but the guys who surrendered on Wake Island got their heads cut off cause anyone who surrenders is a coward and doesnt deserve to live.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TUMs</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'll take BoB. Just never bonded with Pacific.

Regarding war crimes...

The Japanese have never fessed up for what they did. The Jap. government has protected/hidden criminals since WW2. Any royalty was immune from prosecution- Rape of Nanking leader was never prosecuted for those 300,000 Chinese killed/raped because he was Hirohito's uncle. Even modern Japanese textbooks have been written to project Japan as the innocent defender of Asia while the US as the bad guy. Might suggest reading "Rape of Nanking" for this fact. Modern day Japan is still resistant to the truth.

The whole "Bushido" thing is wrong too. Up to WW1 Japan fought fair, took prisoners, surrendered like everyone else. Japan changed during the 20-30's and invented the Bushido way. Draconian training/teaching changed them. Most think Bushido was some ancient way of Japan but it wasn't. It was kinda like Naziism and the anti-semite belief that Germany adopted. Japan based their military on US/European standards after we forced the Japanese to open trade with the world in 1853- Perry and his Black Ships.

We gave the Japanese a pass for their transgressions for many reasons. Big one was the Cold War and keeping Russia/Stalin away from Japan. Stalin had plans for invading N. Japan and dividing the country like Germany. Imagine that messed up situation. The majority of Japan's undefeated army was in China and Stalin was looking forward to defeating that army and taking big chunks of China and Korea. That would have changed things a bit in Asia- no Korean War, no Mao revolution.

Recent findings have revealed that Operation Olympic/Coronet would not have happened in late 45/46. Japan did an amazing job of building up her home defenses in 1945. They would have had about a 1/1 ratio of troops with our troops on their most southern island, the target of our 1st landing- not good. They had also stockpiled 10,000 aircraft/fuel for suicide attacks. MacArthur still wanted an invasion but Ad. King and Nimitz were against it. Our casualties would have been terrible. Pretty good chance the invasion would have failed and we would have settled for a less than satisfactory peace.

If the atom bomb hadn't been used then an all out air war against rail/coastal shipping was to start in the fall of 45. Japan is unique- coastal shipping/transport to move food and essentials. This uncontested war would have killed MILLIONS of Japanese due to starvation. Most history books seem to forget how successful Lemay's firebombing was on the homeland. Imagine a few thousand B29s leveling every train on the island and every port with a boat.

Recent finds in radio traffic from 45 has revealed that Japan was NOT willing to surrender. As late as 7/22/45 Japan was refusing to give it up. They were willing to negotiate but...wanted to be allowed to keep China, Korea, and rule herself...talk about delusional! Even after bombs were dropped most of the cabinet refused to believe it was an atomic weapon and thought that we had no further bombs to drop. They wanted to keep on fighting.

So, dropping the bomb killed approx. 200,000 Japanese but it probably saved 1-4 million Japanese lives, 700,000 US lives, and countless Russians, Chinese, Brits, Koreans, etc.

Getting Japan up/running again was a priority to prevent communism. War crimes against China was overlooked. Very few were ever prosecuted for what they did to US/British. Sad but true fact.

My father was in the Pacific, 44-47, and made it to Japan. He never forgave the Japanese. He always said the Emperor was a crook but protected by the US- no bombing of palace, no trials,etc. He was right. History has revealed that Hirohito was guilty of quite a bit of the evil that went down. He knew what happened and even promoted the war. He was a prick that got away with it. Amazing how royalty seems to get a free pass.</div></div>

Agreed. In my medical ethics class we're discussing the atrocities of the japanese and Germans during WWII. When doing some research on Japan, Unit 731, Shiro Ishii, and the entire situation, it's horrifying at the thought of what evil human beings are capable of. Reading about Unit 731 is honestly a real life "hostel" on a genocidal scale though. The one fact i don't want to believe but can't ignore is i keep reading that Gen. Douglas MacArthur along with the U.S. gave Shiro Ishii and the like immunity in exchange for their information on "human biological studies". Is this true? If so it's sickening, the thought of the U.S. government giving a pass to someone so sadistic as Shiro Ishii is downright evil in itself. Sources say he died unacquitted in 1959.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

Any one here ever read or study,
War plan Orange, as the topic seemed to drift a liitle?

How or why was the US planning this for so long before hand?
how did they know?
The 2 movies series do not compare ...
The history written on here is more intersting....

Where could we buy the documentaries of some of these battles like what was shown on pbs of the 6th div on Okinawa?
Dayum ,that was really something.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I would like to say that in the Kerrville VA hospital there is a map showing every campaign of the South Pacific. It showed which branch of service that was involved. The US Army was involved with 17 campaigns. The US Marine Corps 7 campaigns. Joint campaigns was 6.
Now I am not trying to start anything but that map was interesting.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

That gunny starting to sing the Hymn and take a shower in the middle of the road when the rain started falling was priceless
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

Both series are great, but different.

I enjoyed re-watching both series' after reading the following books:

Ambrose: Band of Brothers
Ambrose: Citizen Soldiers.
Ryan: The Longest Day
Ryan: A Bridge Too Far
Brotherton: Shiftys War

Leckie: Helmet for my Pillow
Sledge: With the Old Breed
Tatum: Basilone on Iwo
Philips: You'll be sorry
Manchester: Goodbye Darkness
Wukowits: One Square Mile of Hell

I thought the miniseries' added some great visuals to some amazing books. But the books were way better.

Sorry if I got some titles/authors names wrong, that was from memory. But I read them all shortly after watching each series for the first time. Then re-watched the DVD's and there was a lot more meaning, especially to 'The Pacific' series.

The deprivations of both Pacific and ETO soldiers was beyond imagination and arguing whether Tarawa or Bastogne was worse is akin to whether angels can dance on the head of a pin. Both theaters or operation were awful, especially for the actual footsoldiers.

Brinkley called it the greatest generation... well, the ones who put on uniforms sure were great! But I think the same can be said of the individuals in all generations who put on uniforms.

Cheers,

Sirhr
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I prefer Band of Brothers between the two.. but the Basilone story arc in The Pacific is incredible, was tough to watch when his wife interacted with the family for the first time.. Both are fantastic series though.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArmaHeavy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Donttrytorun</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Italy was a sideshow with minimal troops.</div></div>

audie-murphy.jpg


A LOT of people will disagree with you on that. </div></div>
Got his medal of honor in France.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

There were many artistic liberties and detail inaccuracies in BOB,but the story following a small group of regular characters and some who come and go allowed for Character development. The multiple stories in The Pacific didn't allow that. It was a disjointed script, and in many ways not flattering.
BOB was pretty much based on interviews with the characters. The Pacific was based on a couple books.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I liked them both, but found them to be completely different. I think if they tried the BofB style on Pacific it wouldn't have worked well. Since I have read virtually all of the books that the stories were based on (plus many related others), it was fun to see a visual interpretation of the events. Somestimes they were right on and other times I thought they were a little too hollywood. Bottom line though, both series are amoungst my favorites.

BTW, I just read another great WWII book this week, Fateful Rendezvous by Steve Ewing and John B Lundstrom. It is the story of Navy pilot Butch O'Hare becoming the 1st WWII ace, his Medal of Honor and his eventual loss in the Pacific. I know some of his family, so it was particularly resonate for me.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I was with the 101st in Vietnam,

Need you ask??
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

I'm actually watching Band Of Brothers again right now. On youtube actually.
smile.gif


http://www.youtube.com/user/kejoryob#p/u/6/mywClQiBy7g

But I've seen both BoB and The Pacific before, and while I enjoyed both, I think BoB was much better in just about every aspect. Actors were picked better, story was better etc etc...

Just my two cents.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

My father was blinded in his right eye years before WW2 started. He served his time at the Technical Library at Ft. Hood. But I know several of his friends that were in both the Pacific or the European Theatre. I'm sure they all saw a lot of bad things. I like both B of B and the Pacific. Both have episodes that are a little off kilter. But they also have their good points.
 
Re: Band of Brothers vs The Pacific

Audie Lynn Murphy's MoH was due to action in Southern France. But his rise in rank was in the Italian campaigns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Maggot
Si Speigel
Replies
3
Views
1K
lonegunman762x51
lonegunman762x51
Blue Sky Country
Maggie’s You are listening to Black Cove 107.1 FM. WHERE OUTLAW COUNTRY LIVES. All day and every day
Replies
20
Views
2K
fpgt72
fpgt72
ArmyJerry
Happy Birthday U.S. ARMY 242 Years Old
Replies
17
Views
1K
gunsnjeeps
gunsnjeeps
KillShot
‘Band of Brothers’ vet ‘Buck’ Compton dead at 90
Replies
16
Views
2K
noahmercy
N
L
Good read
Replies
9
Views
1K
akmike
A
Top Bottom
Back