Comments for "Over There" Report, by Ry.

"Over There" Report, by Ry.

2005-07-28T11:23:19Z

[Update - unexpected Instalanche for my birthday, whee! Welcome visitors, do feel free to poke around. If you would rather get the abbreviated version (synopsis) of all the opinion here, consider this post, where I wrap it up into a tidier package. And please, feel free to add your own comments. If you are concerned about email privacy, just put in a bogus email, or a bogus website (which will trump the email). Passion is fine. Disagreement is not discouraged. Just be polite, is all I ask! ]

I *was* gonna do this, but what the heck, I'm running short on time, and Ry already sent this in.

Any dissenting opinions?

Okay, 'Over There' report: It's pretty bad. Has just about all the old war movie cliches and ALL the lefty anti-war chliches(everyone's there because they're screw ups or poor, or the one guy who is dumb and actually wants to be there).
War Movie Cliches:
*It has the hard bitten sergeant who yells, but really cares.
*The philospher.
*The brotha' who just wants to get along, and sings gospel.
*The O-G brotha' who's rather racist.
*The officers are stupid and do things to get the men killed because they're stupid.
*THe officers face no danger and live rather high on the hog.(A captain drives up in a humvee with gangsta rap playing real loud, and his utilities aren't even dusty).

Anti-war cliches:
*War reveals Man to be the Beast that he is. (Oooooh. Deep.).
*Everyone who is there, except for the one gung-ho fool from Texas (Texas! Get it?), doesn't want to be there and joined because of misfortune.
*The openly religious character is rather cruel (she crushes the hand of dead Iraqi).
*Almost all the soldiers come from poor families.
*Ah, and the song. 'Where someone has to die.' Deep.

Then there's all the errors in the stupid thing.
*They have a transport squad holding the perimeter on a mosque for three
days, where the transport just happened to be shot up.
*An Abrams tank is on hand, but isn't used in the assault on the mosque AT ALL.
*During a night movement all the soldiers move line abreast standing
more or less straight up, and don't even attempt to utilize any cover at
all as they move.
*While digging foxholes a female soldier(who happens to be the religious one) starts to whine, get in a shouting match with one of her squad mates, and of course draws all hell down on the squad.
*A squad member goes wandering off on their own to go #2, and of course
gets ambushed and nearly killed. Having to be rescued by the rest of the squad.

They tried to play this off as neutral in the press. It's anything but. It's hackneyed. It's poorly written(if I can point out technical flaws you know it's got a lot of problems). It's the typical backdrop for doing other issues(like race, like gender, the role of mankind, etc).Don't waste your time. Hopefully this will go down in flames like Cop Rock.

I'll observe that the hackneyed part *was* noted by Ms. Stanley in her review. Got to give her credit there - but I'll leave my opinion out of this for a bit. She still liked it because it gave, she feels, an authentic view of the war. And, if you accept the anti's spin to the war, she's correct.

As for going down in flames... if the combat scenes and characters can suck you in, I suspect people will watch it. It plays to the low expectations people set for stuff like that. The more interesting part will be... does this set the Zeitgeist for the war... as M*A*S*H kind of did for Korea (and Vietnam, too)? The characters of M*A*S*H were generally likeable, and we military types all knew Burn's and Houlihan's... but did the show represent Korea? Not really. Does it in the communal mind... arguably.

Interesting question - and I suspect this audience isn't going to be diverse enough in outlook and opinion (no slam guys, but on things military and the war, we're pretty much a cluster, it's on things social where we have our spread) to answer this question well... but how many people's perceptions of Vietnam are shaped by Platoon... or by We Were Soldiers?

Sounds like we'll need to get the milbloggers working on it - how about you guys that have time to do it go visit the milblog world, see who commented on the show (preferably by watching it) and send me the links? We can put together a consolidated milblogger 'review' center. Let's see if we can find stuff from guys who have been in the box (or are, if it's available over there) as opposed to old farts like me (though those are good too, but let's face it, as commentary on the show, guys who are the models for the show are gonna have the cred!

Update: The milblog reviews are rolling in:

Charmaine Yoest of Reasoned Audacity Live-blogged it.
Blackfive.
Air Force Pundit.
Commander Salamander.

I could have gone on for 3,000 words, but the show wasn't worth it to me, so
I kept it uncharacteristically short and not-so-sweet.

ES: Lost opportunity. Good concept smothered by bad writing and a bad-hollywood-vietnam-movie template they just could totally get rid of.

Honestly John, who in the military of 2005 can get away with smoking a joint in the open on base in front of the "motor pool" with other soldiers watching/down wind.....and no one does anything? They started out with this, and from a crediblity standpoint lost me from there.

Oh, one more things....they had more callsigns than a looped CD of "Top Gun." Lost chance.

I am still waiting for the movie of the 2001 mounted attack in AF promised
in 2002...

Cheers,
Phibian

The Word Unheard.
A Healthy Alternative To Work.

Interesting the positive views, like Freakychylde or Brandon's Mom:

I watched Steven Boccho's Over There. Being a Mom of an Iraqi Vet I at first was very apprehensive. I found in watching the show it was entertaining and believable. Not having been to Iraq or in any war I do not know if this hold true for the ones that were actually there.
I do feel it will help bring awareness to what our boots on the ground face and that is a good thing.

I think thus far, the concern amongst the milbloggers (a surprising number of whom couldn't/didn't/wouldn't watch the show) disagree that it truly shows what the 'Boots on the Ground' face, much less behave.

Castle Philosophtrix Kat spent *mucho* effort on this.
Liveblog1
Liveblog2
Liveblog3
Liveblog4
Final Review.

Comment from ry on 2005-08-01

2005-08-01T05:58:06Z

And Murdoc get's my back: http://www.murdoconline.net/cgi-bin/NewTrackbacksMurdoc1.cgi?__mode=view&entry_id=2612 RElevant bit: Scenes from planet MSNBC Wow: From last evening�s �Hardball w/ Chris Matthews� comes this bizarre bit: Shortly after New York Times columnist Bob Herbert condemned the US for forcing democracy on Iraqis �at the point of a gun,� Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen had this to say: �There�s another word for �insurgents� in Iraq, and that�s �residents.�� Not to be outdone, Matthews himself (channeling Brian Williams) then added: ��Insurgents� are what the British called us in the Revolutionary War. It�s true��an observation which, if I didn�t know better, might lead me to conclude Chris was trying to draw some sort of parallel or something. Sounds alot like the dialogue and images from 'Over There', doesn't it? Why keep comming back to this? I'm not a rank ideologue. Calling me 'silly' is code for that. (Hey, is John giving me the fuzzy eyeball? Yipe!)

Comment from Greg on 2005-08-01

2005-08-01T05:25:35Z

After watching part of it I sent an email to FX that 'After 5 min I was disappointed, after 10 min I was disgusted, and after 20 min I turned it off. As was advertised, it was to be a reflection of what truly goes on in Iraq with our soldiers. Not even close. These 'actors' didn't reflect any professionalism with their jobs. I would guess they had 1 week basic, if it were true. I decided to watch the entire show tonight just to see if it got better. Not. What I could tell of the previews of the next episode was really troubling and disgusting. It appears we're going to have some atrocities by the troops. I wouldn't only call this anti-war food, but more importantly anti-military. But that's typical Hollywood.

Comment from TallDave on 2005-07-31

2005-07-31T22:26:54Z

To all the military guys: interesting reviews. Thanks for sharing (and for serving). Sounds like the entertainment world is showing its usual anti-war, anti-military stripes. It's so pervasive, I think they honestly don't even realize they're doing it sometimes.

Comment from ry on 2005-07-30

2005-07-30T23:00:55Z

Have I earned my way outta lawn duty yet? Review that saves you the time of doing it. Going to DU and Kos(ick). C'mon, what more do I need to do to get out of the dog house around here(and where's Sanger? One of his patented rants would be welcome right about now.)?

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-07-30

2005-07-30T14:56:51Z

McMorris - you nailed explicitly what people are hinting to about all the stereotyping. I think the fact that the KosKids are split on it is indicative that overall, the thing blows. It just wasn't time. Fox took a gamble, and right now (one episode isn't much of a baseline) it looks like they "boch'd" it. Ry - yeah, A Midnight Clear is pretty decent.

Comment from ry on 2005-07-30

2005-07-30T07:48:33Z

Further evidence I'm not being silly. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/tv/233932_over26.html This show is trying to be edgy, but in all the wrong ways. 'A Midnight Clear' w/Ethan Hawk is far superior.

Comment from mcmorris on 2005-07-29

2005-07-30T02:39:12Z

I am a civilian and, in fact, have never been in the military. My comments on "Over There" may not amount to much, but then again it's only a TV show which, like all TV shows, will not mean much about anything in the long run anyways. I'll tell you this, though: That was an insult, an insult not to me or even the military, but an insult to the individuals who are soldiers. Are you all stupid, racist draftees who hate the military, are slovenly, poorly trained (loved the bit when the platoon charged in a line across open ground), despise the officers, hate the food, and are contemptuous of the Iraqi's because you're so provincial? That is the impression it left this viewer, and i don't buy it. It is, of course, the stereotype of Viet Nam, but in particular the Viet Nam under a Republican administration. The news media, Hollywooders and politicians (Democrats) refuse to report or acknowledge anything good being done by you guys, even though when they return from a visit they are clearly overwhelmed by your professionalism, intelligence and good spirits. Believe me, if Kerry had won, Iraq would have been magically transformed into a glowing and successful example of America and you soldiers building a civil and free society. Frankly speaking, the deception is offensive and costs lives, all for the sake of serving their "higher values" (that they are "liberals") Bochco may say that his show is not political, that he takes no stand and that it's not anti-military. The thing is, it's anti-YOU.

Comment from ry on 2005-07-29

2005-07-30T01:20:12Z

Sorry for the dialup echo. I did go to Kos, John. It's on the other thread. Does this get me out of having to mow lawns this summer?

Comment from ry on 2005-07-29

2005-07-30T01:14:52Z

I may have messed up about the Mrs. B character being overtly religious(I was going off of her sayin, "oh god, I can't do this." But that, in retrospect seems kinda weak as evidence.). I stand by most of what I said though. This was billed by the commercials as an expose of what things are really like over there. It wasn't billed just as a war drama, but an accurate portrayal. Having looked at what the anti-war crowd over at DU and Kos are glomming onto I think it's fair criticism that the show is anti-Iraq war by virtue of the cross section it brought forth. Smoke--'I grew up in a war zone.' Yeah, his family are freakin' millionaires. Dim--college drop out, 22 year old college drop out who is still a buck private. Bo-- 19 year old podunk Texas boy--that sounds rural and that sounds poor. Angel--couldn't get a singing career so he joins the Army--that sounds like he doesn't have a job or money to fall back on. That's half the cast(if you count Sgt. Scream and the guy that's supposed to replace Bo in the squad, otherwise 2/3s). Seems alot like asking 'why do they always send the poor?' to me. Call it inductive reasoning on the poor and anti-war. Realism? Hell, when you claim in your ads that that's what you're doing, you better deliver. That's a fair criticism. If they weren't claiming that this was a fair portrayal then it would be off the mark. But they did claim it was the 'untold' story. That means a high bar for accuracy and fairness--which they didn't do. Then the speech by the IRaqi? That isn't proselytizing by the writers that what we're doing is wrong(freedom pushed on people at the point of a gun)? I avoided reading anything about this or Bochco until after the show came out--then I read what John had here and other places(note my review came out after midnight, look in the comments section where John yanked it out of, when the show came on at 10 where I live). This is anything but an apolitical show. YOu can show the gore and terror of war without commenting on the right/wrong of the war(Pvt. Ryan, We Were Soldiers which both say nothing about the correctness of the war. Just an expose of what happened. I'd even say that WWS wasn't pro-war in the slightest. Listen to what Col. Moore says at the end. Words to the effect that this will be spun as a victory, but it was waste.) I note that nobody has said anything about Dim's monologue. 10 lines about the depravity of war and two about it's nobility, with the nobility comming from his being part of it. Yeah, that's real frickin' nuetral in outlook in it. The parts about how he's changing, that he doesn't know how killing a man is affecting him, that's fair game. That's honest. The rest though? I may not have been an English major, but come on. That's a modern Falstaff monologue. Of course I realize parrallax is a problem here. Where you start effects how you see things. But these cliches are there. I'm not the only one to see them and comment on them. I stand by what I said(except the Mrs. B religion thing. I was 100% wrong there). This is not an unbiased show and accurate portrayal of war(as claimed by Bochco in his interviews), and it does give short shrift to the troops it portrays.

Comment from ry on 2005-07-29

2005-07-30T01:14:49Z

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T20:26:59Z

Like I observed elsewhere... the baggage you bring to the show tends to inform your view of it.

Comment from Brian Carnell on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T19:57:54Z

I liked it. I thought most of the criticism in the review was a bit absurd (especially that the show is anti-war). The realism claim is a bit silly. I mean, I don't know much about how real cops operate, but I doubt The Shield is all that accurate either, even though its a kickass television show.

Comment from triticale on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T19:35:06Z

"Sorry, but the black guy was smoking a joint. I know one when I see one." Hand-rolled "prison tobacco" looks like a joint, but if that was what they meant it to be they should have shown him building it out of a Drum pouch. Speaking as someone who enjoys a wee toke now and again, I know that showing anyone not being secretive about it while on active duty more recently than the late '70s is bogus.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T19:33:30Z

Good, some more diversity of opinion. Now someone go troll Kos and crowd and see what they're saying! No, I won't. I don't have to. It's my birthday!

Comment from Kevin Murphy on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T19:08:29Z

It's too bad some of the reviewers didn't stay to the end where the rabidly anti-western al Jazeera crw has their staged interview with the cant-spouting "insurgent" leader cut off as the troops toss hime roughly into a transport with a few others and drive him off. THe reporter is told to go screw himself. No, the show won't do what some want -- it won't be a clean portrayal of the "other side of the story." But if it is even partly fair, that's far better than the crap that the NY Times publishes. And yes, there is a stupid green soldier who does stupid things. I think it's pretty dlear everyone else thinks she's stupid, so why diss the show for it? I found the intellectual "Dim" aptly named and far more annoying.

Comment from kat on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T19:00:17Z

Sorry, but the black guy was smoking a joint. I know one when I see one.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T18:24:51Z

You aren't the first to ask about the "overly religious" part of Ryan's review. There are also people who didn't see the "joint in the motorpool" as a joint - but just a guy smoking in front of the 'no smoking' sign...

Comment from Ryan on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T17:48:56Z

What is RY talking about in regards to the "openly religious" fenale character. I watched it twice and I didn't get any of that. She seems top be the stupid one who thinks she's gonna die and likely will based on the 1st episode. The most openly religious person in the squad is the man from the choir who joined the army out of anger and happens to be the best shot of the group. And "almost all come from poor families"...we were given insight to two soldiers having possbily come from poor backgrounds. Bo who can't afford to go to college even with a partial scholarship. And even then considering he's got a wife and child it would be tough to afford college anyway. And the character Smoke who remarks that he grew up in a war zone. Other than that this hasn;t been explored yet. The military technical stuff I will leave to more informed commentators.

Comment from johnb on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T08:44:00Z

I want to see this show if only for laughs, but as I am currently "over there" that's not really an option. But I've been reading about it with interest. If this is really about a tranportation platoon, than they would spend about half the show driving up and down the highways between the major FOBs (Forward Operating Bases) and the other half playing X-box in their CHU (container housing unit - sort of like a small trailer that houses about a squad). Maybe once in a month or two their convoy would hit an IED and even more seldom than that IED would injure or kill someone. Even though logistic convoys are easier targets to hit (though not necessaryily), IED bombers usually target combat patrols because it looks better on Al Jeezra. It wouldn't be a very exciting show unless it had some great characters or dialog like MASH did, which apparently it doesn't. Oh, and they certainly wouldn't be going any where near a mosque. I sure hope they had 3-star approval to assault that mosque; if not, they're in deep do-do with UCMJ.

Comment from ruth on 2005-07-29

2005-07-29T06:05:56Z

The music is good, there's action, the actors are atractive, parents of higschool age kids won't want them to watch it(making it attractive), it has Americans doing brace things that one never sees in current movies (maybe video games). Good for recruitment.

Comment from Mordrach on 2005-07-28

2005-07-29T04:07:23Z

You know, until I joined the Army on 8AUG2000, I had never watched a single war movie in my entire life. When I reached Fort Jackson, I was placed in FTC because I couldn't do enough push-ups to enter basic. To get the unit motivated, the First Sergeant of the company herded us into an auditorium to watch a war movie I had never heard of, called "The Trumpets Fade." At first, I was disinterested, because I just didn't get into that sort of thing(yet I joined the Army, right?). Anyway, the film takes place in World War II and covers a little-known battle that took place days before the Battle of the Bulge. The majority of recruits shared my lack of interest, but I watched anyway(most of the soldiers decided to try to nap it out. That didn't really work for them, as the drills were quite attentive.). That film changed my outlook on the service. I had always held the armed forces in a positive light, but this film made me see what my grandfather, who was a machinegunner in the European theater, possibly went through for four long years. He rarely spoke of his experiences over there, and I was, I hate to say, rather ignorant of history. "The Trumpets Fade" actually made me cry, which was somewhat embarrassing in front of the fellow recruits and cadre, though the cadre seemed to understand. After seeing that film, I truly understood why I had joined the service: I had an obligation to fulfill to the country that I was fortunate enough to be born into. That's all I have to say, other than if you haven't seen this film, look for it. It may have Dwight Yoakam as a main character, but even he does a good job. ;)

Comment from Patrick Chester on 2005-07-28

2005-07-29T03:17:49Z

My question is why make a war series about a war currently happening instead of, say, picking one from the past like Desert Storm or something?

Comment from JSAllison on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T17:43:36Z

The introductory commercials blew it for me from the outset, Hey guys, you reversed the closeup of the rifle firing. Should've caught that way early. I was going to give em a pass on the UH1 medevac and the 35 yr old english FV432 apc since I figured they used what they could get, but having an M1 in the background shot that down. And like an earlier commenter mentioned, that firefight should've been finis in a matter of seconds. Nope, not going back for this one. On the subject of shooting one's subordinates, do it, don't talk about it. Dumb.

Comment from Czechsix on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T16:48:04Z

Well, I forced myself to sit through it. Figured I'd at least give it a chance. But this is the only time I'm going to bother with it, unless they get their act together. I'll actually predict that, even though this is a "mini-series" slated for 10 or so episodes, it'll get pulled around episode 6. Place your bets. Even though I spent very little time in the military, I've more or less kept up to date on happenings. This yawner has so many things wrong with it that it should be used as a guide for screenwriters on what not to do. (as an aside - how many M35A2's can one see at once - c'mon no A3's? No M9xx stuff? FMTV's?...ah, never mind) Yet another show that's insulting to the intelligence.

Comment from RxDocNC on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T16:10:00Z

IMHO, it sucked. Anti- war/troops BS. Even had to get Jodi in the show (scene where vid email is on screen while wife/girlfriend with Jodi). I won't be back to watch.

Comment from kat on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T15:57:41Z

I live blogged it and then gave a final review. By the first commercial I was thinking "how many bad stereotypes can you squeeze into five minutes?" And it went down hill from there. I thought the only realistic part was the firing from a mosque, the AJ reporter and PR concerns. Maybe the uniforms and the weapons individuals were carrying. that's it. I think this guy was trying to put each characters motivation out there in the first episode. Very bad move. Second episode looks just as bad. Already looking like one bad a$$ abusing prisoner while the rest of the platoon stands around and implicates themselves in war crimes. Uuuuggghhh!

Comment from Sgt. B. on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T15:16:47Z

Nope, not impressed... At all...

Comment from freakchylde on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T14:47:48Z

And here I thought it was hilarious that Sgt Scream was ranting about the MSM PR stuff. That was the part that really hit me. I know full well that some of the stuff that went on is BS and wouldn't happen, but it was good to see a mix. You had one person who was deadset against going, one (and a female) who was of the "Mommy has a job to do" mindset, one who was gung-ho and the one I'm quite sure will manage to get herself killed. As I've heard time and time again, good things in war don't make good drama, and this show is a drama, they're going to have to flub up things somehow to get there. If anything, I think it'll round out the wide views held by those actually over there. On theme songs, can't say Mash's theme song was terribly up-beat, either.

Comment from Tom on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T14:44:50Z

The show stinks - and this is no political opinion.For the purpose of adding credibility to my comments I was active duty in the Army for 9 years and 17 in the Reserves. I am a retired Lieutenant Colonel. I commanded an aviation unit in Desert Storm (MEDEVAC). The show is anything but realistic. A sergeant threatening to shoot his own man for rescuing a wounded soldier? What NCO in the Army would do that? - never happens period. An old UH-1 Medevac helicopter in the IED attack scene? - surprise folks we're flying Blackhawks as MEDEVAC in Iraq. I suppose the directors/producers figured the ignorant public wouldn't notice? This was complete nonsense!! Use of ranks on the tactical command radio net? -Never happens. "Where are you located Sergeant?" Please! There is a strict use of radio hraseology when making calls on a tactical radio net and referral to ranks or names id strictly rohibited! Give me a break! This show was complete garbage when it comes to realism. Oh yeah and the insurgency conducts a frontal assault against a dug in infantry platoon with automatic weapons capability? The insurgents are a LOT smarter than that as we have come to discover. If for the purposes of argument they did that the shooting would be over in about ten seconds! Any professional soldier with a modicum of familiarity about US Army doctrine and tactics must have been throwing things at the TV set. Does this show have a military advisor? you would NEVER know it. Save yourself the pain- watch MASH reruns they are more realistic than this lemon!

Comment from Mike Lehnherr on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T14:23:57Z

Agree with Ry's assessment, except for the overtly religious part - I didn't pick up on anything terribly "religious". I watched because I figured I needed to so I could comment. I won't watch again - for all the reasons Ry stated. I think the program is unusually cruel, in that it mis-represents how we *do war*. War is dangerous enough w/out throwing in the Hollywood cavalier approach to fighting. I predict a boat-load of mothers and other loved-ones rising up in arms in protest of the blatant danger our guys are exposed to; no use of cover and supporting fires, non-use of crew or heavier weapons, "where are the god-da*n .50's", etc. This is Hollywood CRAP!! Our soldiers and their families deserve better. ML

Comment from Fersboo on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T14:11:28Z

I DVR'd it and hope to get to it this weekend. I'm not expecting Band of Brothers here, so I will give it the benefit of the doubt. But I've been guessing all along that this would blow chuncks.

Comment from elgato on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T13:51:53Z

I watched it and DVR'd it. My thoughts are here: http://www.swankyconservative.com/2005/07/27/over-there/ I answered your email and summed my thoughts on the show as not really bad, but having not yet been deployed, I can only draw on second-hand accounts of what life's like "over there."

Comment from freakchylde on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T13:01:33Z

I liked it, but then again, I don't analyze from an anti or pro war position, much less a military one. I'm willing to see where they take it.

Comment from BloodSpite\ on 2005-07-28

2005-07-28T11:48:29Z

Blacfives commentary is pretty good. I made the mistake of watching it while here at the office, and I thought it humdrum Its more or less Tour of Duty in the 21st century. Thats my take anyway. If your a TV Fanatatic and just have to sit down to watch 4 hours of TV everyday you'll probably get in to it. if you actually in to the service you'll probably find it lacking in the usual areas Hollywood lacks for military films and shows.