I mean I know this is Hollywood but come on. I was in the military for a long time and if you disobey a direct order you won't have your job for long let alone a pilot. I mean I did get in trouble while in the military but outright disobeying orders like the main character did will get you in a lot of trouble.
Agreed.
But also keep in mind that almost all Hollywood films depicting brash, young pilots with egos the size of the universe always cause problems. And, yes, are often rather insubordinate. Which leads me to believe that in the Hollywood universe the military functions on a completely different level then the one in any military organization that is known to ever exist in the real world.
in Hollywood's version:
- almost all military generals (et al) are raving lunatics
- the hero (or heroes) are usually young upstarts who, despite their clear inexperience, still manages to perform their duties as good or better than the veterans
- if there are 2 prominent heroes they must be (MUST BE) rivals fighting over the girl/ promotion/ control of the situation/ or any number of other things to quarrel about
- if there is a female lead involved expect some form of love triangle, soap opera drama, or other super silly nonsense to be thrown in for no good reason then just because..
I also didn't like the way they spoke so slowly during the combat scenes. This is very common in Hollywood. Real combat would involve much faster talking and precise use of terminology.
shareDisobeying an order happens sometimes, deppending on the orders.
share@ Life_Monkey - The key word being "sometimes."
As a whole, no one in the military will disobey an order. Because if they did they would face criminal prosecution under the UCMJ - The Uniform Code of Military Justice. And depending on the circumstances that person or persons will either get locked up in a military prison or will be dishonorably discharged from service.
The only times is where there are extenuating circumstances. Like when the person refused to carry out an unlawful order. Such as opening fire and killing unarmed and defenseless women and children.
Hollywood military persons, on the other hand, flagrantly disregard some of the most basic lawful orders and barely receive any type of punishment, if at all.
You see people in films who leave without permission (a crime), who take vehicles, weapons and other pieces of equipment without permission (a crime), who talk back or cop an attitude with their superiors (insubordination), and act in manner unbecoming of a professional military member (a crime).
The kind of military that Hollywood portrays wouldn't last very long if it was populated by these malcontents.
Yes, it was simply too flagrant. We get the idea that pilots are "type A" and tend to be "maverick". But the level of insubordination was over the top.
Richard Dean Anderson carried off insubordination better than anyone. He walked the line but always followed orders. I always thought the directors'(and writers') approach of the relationship of Col. O'Neil and General Hammond was so well done. This movie would have benefited from that type of approach.
Does anyone agree with me?