I liked them all. How ever Tom Berenger calling a Mosin a Mauser in Sniper 2 did kind of tic me off. Still not a bad movie. Of the three, I think the first one was the best.
__________________
Do it today, tomorrow it may be illegal. NRA MEMBER
One of Hathcock's most famous accomplishments was shooting an enemy sniper through his scope, hitting him in the eye and killing him. Hathcock and John Burke, his spotter, were stalking the enemy sniper in the jungle near Hill 55, the firebase where Hathcock was operating from. The sniper had already killed several Marines, and was believed to have been sent specifically to kill Hathcock. When Hathcock saw a flash of light (light reflecting off the enemy sniper's scope) in the bushes, he fired at it, shooting through the scope and killing the sniper. Surveying the situation, Hathcock concluded that the only feasible way he could have put the bullet straight down the enemy's scope and through his eye would have been if both snipers were zeroing in on each other at the same time, and Hathcock fired first, which gave him only a few seconds to act. In theory, the two snipers could have killed each other simultaneously.
I think the movie "The Shooter" starring Mark Wahlberg might be a tad better. Maybe tied for 1st? As far as sniper movies go that is. And not exactly labeled a sniper movie, but who could forget about the movie "The Jackal" starring Bruce Willis, either? All matter of opinions.
G-Meister
__________________ "My next door neighbors two dogs have created more shovel ready jobs then Obama has." - Gary Johnson
It didn't go through the scope from just a few yards away. They tried it a few times at 100 yards. When that failed, they did it from about five yards. The layers of glass and metal trapped the bullet.
Obviously, it was done. Scopes at that time were not made differently than today's scopes... not to mention, the steel core ammo or FMJ stuff Carlos Hathcock used in Vietnam.
See the above post, it did happen. For the movie "Sniper" it was taken from this real life account.
It didn't go through the scope from just a few yards away. They tried it a few times at 100 yards. When that failed, they did it from about five yards. The layers of glass and metal trapped the bullet.
They tried it again later on a follow up episode, and used the correct PU scope on the M91/30, and proved that it was at least plausible. I, for one, am not going to argue with the gunney... may he rest in peace... can i get an Amen....
They tried it again later on a follow up episode, and used the correct PU scope on the M91/30, and proved that it was at least plausible. I, for one, am not going to argue with the gunney... may he rest in peace... can i get an Amen....
Too bad they had to waste one of those scopes. The "Cobra Sniper" as he was called was sent by the NVA to kill "White Feather" (Carlos Hathcock) was more likely than not, armed with a Mosin with a PE or PU scope which has fewer layers of glass than a modern nitrogen purged rifle scope.
__________________ If there's nothing worth dying for, there's nothing worth living for.
Doesn't work with the modern scopes, but it would with the old scopes of that particular era.
There is also the case of Moshe Dayan. He lost his eye to a sniper while serving with the British Army. The sniper put a round into his binocular lens, which shattered and destroyed his eye. But binoculars use much heavier glass than rifle scopes do.
GlockMeister:
I also enjoyed the movie "Shooter" based on the book "Point of Impact" by Stephen Hunter and the follow up book "Time to Hunt", both books are very good, the main character Bob Lee Swagger aka Bob the Nailer is loosely comparible to Hathcock. Come on "Shooter 2" movie!!!
Another good book to read is "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross. That would be a great movie!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlockMeister
I think the movie "The Shooter" starring Mark Wahlberg might be a tad better. Maybe tied for 1st? As far as sniper movies go that is. And not exactly labeled a sniper movie, but who could forget about the movie "The Jackal" starring Bruce Willis, either? All matter of opinions.
G-Meister
One of Hathcock's most famous accomplishments was shooting an enemy sniper through his scope, hitting him in the eye and killing him. Hathcock and John Burke, his spotter, were stalking the enemy sniper in the jungle near Hill 55, the firebase where Hathcock was operating from. The sniper had already killed several Marines, and was believed to have been sent specifically to kill Hathcock. When Hathcock saw a flash of light (light reflecting off the enemy sniper's scope) in the bushes, he fired at it, shooting through the scope and killing the sniper. Surveying the situation, Hathcock concluded that the only feasible way he could have put the bullet straight down the enemy's scope and through his eye would have been if both snipers were zeroing in on each other at the same time, and Hathcock fired first, which gave him only a few seconds to act. In theory, the two snipers could have killed each other simultaneously.
they had that on the history channel not to long ago amazing!!!
larryo the part about that movie that didn't make sence to me was the interaction between the sniper and his spotter? the fight they had while being chased by the drug cartel I don't know?????
Last edited by mym1a; 02-05-2008 at 09:57 PM.
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
they had that on the history channel not to long ago amazing!!!
larryo the part about that movie that didn't make sence to me was the interaction between the sniper and his spotter? the fight they had while being chased by the drug cartel I don't know?????
I am not a sniper or psychiatrist by any means... but my guess is that the movie was attempting to portray the interaction between two ego's... a proved sniper who actually pulls the trigger on live targets vs. a new era shooter who just shoots holes in paper.
It didn't go through the scope from just a few yards away. They tried it a few times at 100 yards. When that failed, they did it from about five yards. The layers of glass and metal trapped the bullet.
yes, i also saw that apisode of mythbusters, but nobody has noted the fact that they did say the enemy sniper A.) would be quite pissed off about the ordeal B.) would probably be injured in the incident C.) no longer have a working weapon, and D.) probably be dazed and out of it long enough for you to finish him off with another round.
__________________
i am not trying to jam a round up a fly's butt @100 yds. --- billy
Obviously, it was done. Scopes at that time were not made differently than today's scopes... not to mention, the steel core ammo or FMJ stuff Carlos Hathcock used in Vietnam.
See the above post, it did happen. For the movie "Sniper" it was taken from this real life account.
The guys on Myth Busters are not gun guys. They do lots of tests that involve weapons but they never go into the specifics of what type of bullet they are shooting or if the bullet, caliber, setup are what the situation calls for. My younger brother and I discuss firearms and shooting all the time and any time that I see the Myth Busters using a gun in an episode we go into a couple hour long discussion of how they could have looked at a myth differently or what type of bullet could do what they are discussing. Comes down to they are just not gun guys and sometimes leave some stones unturned.
Last edited by NUshooter; 02-07-2008 at 12:06 AM.
Reason: didn't spell correctly
