MovieChat Forums > 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi (2016) Discussion > Is this better/similar/worse than Lone S...

Is this better/similar/worse than Lone Survivor? Is it 3D IMAX worthy?


Havent seen it yet and I'd need your opinion please!

reply

I thought it was better than Lone Survivor. Less of a story, but better captured on film.

 Entropy ain't what it used to be.

reply

Definitely better than Lone Survivor.
13 Hours is an amazing experience and a real count of the terrible Benghazi attack.

reply

Different movie. Marcus Luttrell and op. Redwings seals knew they walked into a gunfight with knives...
This one is cluster fck contractors didn't knkw they didn't have their ass covered.

reply

Extremely similar to Lone Survivor. I liked them about the same, although I give 13 Hours a little credit for not having a ridiculous third act like LS.

I notice your English gets better when you want something.

reply

I like lone survivor but I prefer 13 hours . Less cheesy

reply

This edges out Lone Survivor as much as I liked it.

“I love the smell of napalm in the morning.”

reply

Lone Survivor is better but this is a really good film none the less and worth a watch in my opinion 7/10 is my rating and Lone Survivor 9/10 and Im not an American.

~If the realistic details fails, the movie fails~

reply

Different movie. Marcus Luttrell and op. Redwings seals knew they walked into a gunfight with knives...


They were on an Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance mission to stealthy sent up an Observation Post to get eyes on whether Ahmad Shah was in the village and roughly how many fighters were with him. They were not there on a direct action mission to take out Shah (that would have been done by a large force of US Army Rangers later) nor were they there to call in an Airstrike. In was get in and get out mission!

Lone Survivor is better but this is a really good film none the less and worth a watch in my opinion 7/10 is my rating and Lone Survivor 9/10 and Im not an American.


There were too many Historical inaccuracies in Lone Survivor to make it a better movie that 13 Hours. Peter Berg is a sh.t Director and I can't believe that Luttrell who was on set the whole time let all these slide in a true story.

The number of enemy fighters according to various sources varies massively from 20 all the way up to 200.

The film shows Luttrell (Wahlberg) being able to walk after the Taliban’s ambush on the four-man SEAL team. In reality, Luttrell explained that his legs were numb immediately after the ambush, and when feeling did return to them, the pain from the shrapnel in his legs made it too painful to walk; he had to crawl seven miles looking for water and sanctuary.

Luttrell also expressed that he did not witness the MH-47 Chinook helicopter being shot down, as seen in the film. At the end of the film, the Pashtun villagers fight off a Taliban attack in a firefight that never actually happened. There were no AH-64 Apache gunships on strafing runs taking out Taliban fighters, it was US Army Rangers without firing a shot! In reality, the Taliban fighters were outnumbered by the villagers and had no intentions of attacking the village. They did, however, try to sneak in and capture Luttrell in secret. Luttrell also did not go into cardiac arrest after he was rescued, nor was he near death, as seen in the film!

Lastly Rattlesnakes are only found in almost every mainland country of the Americas, from Canada to Argentina, excluding Panama, Ecuador and Chile, but they do not occur outside the Americas like the mountains of Afghanistan!


If you are not willing to give up everything, you have already lost

reply

13 hrs is way better directed

_______
"if seagal was thinner this could have been a theatrical product."

reply

Yes, I would say that if you like Lone Survivor you would probably like 13 Hours. They are overall pretty similar.

reply