Pic of the day...Hilltop Watch...

Spc. Richard Madrid (left) and Command Sgt. Maj. Samuel Murphy of 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, take in the view of the horizon at a check point near Daab Pass in Shinkay district, Afghanistan, Feb. 25.

SOFREP takes credit from the Marines of Fallujah.

Major Douglas Alexander Zembiec, probably the FINEST Officer and Commander of this generation...also known as "The Lion of Fallujah"

Sgt Maj Bradley Kasal...a SNCO that leads from the front...kicking in doors and bringing hell to the enemy....

James Blake Miller..a survivor that's broken inside...

First read this article over at SOFREP.

Then click on the captions of the Marines above.

Read the pages.  Drink it all in.

Know that SOCOM is SUPPOSE to be the home of the QUIET PROFESSIONALS.  

Think about that a bit more.

Now go back over as many pages of articles over at SOFREP as you can stomach.  Digest all the sales pitches.  Digest the chest thumping.

SOCOM in general and Navy SEALs in particular have broken the bargain.  Blowback has arrived and its going to be courtesy of my blog.

Why?

Because even in a pivotal battle...one that will shape the Marine Corps for the next generation, they seek to steal the glory won by those that gave so much.  Its not right and I'll make it my mission to call them on it every chance I get.

A look at the BAE/IVECO Super AV 8x8.

Super AV 8x8 with unknown cannon mount.  It is not listed on the OtoMelera website although it bears a similarity to the HitFist OWS 30mm

The Super AV 8x8.

The mystery vehicle in the Marine Personnel Carrier Program.  Thanks to go to Sarah with the BAE Public Affairs Office for forwarding my questions to the Team working on this vehicle and my sincere thanks to them for answering.  The written interview will be discussed but first a few personal observations and a bit of speculation.

click on image for larger size.

click on image for larger size.

First observation.  The Super AV 8x8 in my estimation has already been trialed to some extent by Iveco's work on the Brazilian VBTP.  This vehicle is amphibious (to a high degree), is capable of carrying 11 troops and is can carry a variety of weapon systems (its been seen with Elbit's 30mm RWS...same as the one trialed on the AAV by BAE).

Perhaps more importantly, this vehicle is derived from the Freccia which was itself derived from the Centaur.  In essence they have developed a series of vehicles that share common automotive components, drive trains etc...

This should enable BAE/Iveco to be extremely competitive if this comes down to a cost battle.  Additionally the Italians have a strong showing in the amphibious vehicle area.  Just a look at what's been done with the old M-113 by Aris shows that they are first rate in this department.

But back to the Super AV 8x8.

Compare the above photo with the one below.

Unfortunately I don't know the date that these photos were taken but the top one indicates that some type of modular armor is going to part of BAE/Iveco's bid.  But perhaps the best indication is this.  They're working with IBD-Deisenroth Engineering.  On their website they list the armor that's going into the Super AV 8x8 as being 4th generation.  They demonstrated an LMV that had STANAG 4569 Level 4 protection due to 'new ceramic' armor.  The Super AV 8x8 has undergone ballistics testing with the Italian Army so it should be competitive in this arena.

Last of my speculation goes to weapons mount.  I have absolutely no idea what they'll offer to the Marine Corps but that turret ring looks like you could mount anything short of the US Army's 105mm MGS on it.

But enough of my guessing.  Below are my questions to the BAE/Iveco team.  My questions are in black, the teams responses are in red and my commentary is in blue.

*** All responses other than Question 3 should be attributed to John Swift, BAE Systems, MPC Program Manger. The response to Question 3 should be attributed to Håkan Karlsson, BAE Systems Hägglunds AB, Director, Marketing Communications.***

     The USMC seems to be slow-walking the MPC effort.  As a matter of fact, only a week or so ago did the revised RFP come out. Do you see the same issues with the failed EFV program creeping into the MPC program?  To be specific, it appeared that for once the Marines seemed to have a lack of institutional focus on the program and did not apply the proper amount of urgency to its completion.

We stand ready to support the entire USMC portfolio of amphibious vehicles during the acquisition phase for each platform. The key to a successful vehicle acquisition program is rooted in quantifiable and discreet requirements that are ultimately validated to be achievable within the industry. We are confident that BAE Systems has a role in any such amphibious vehicle program and as we see them today, these include the AAV U, ACV and MPC. We support the USMC’s current efforts to fully vet and validate the requirements for each of these efforts before determining the appropriate acquisition approach each may need to support the overall portfolio.

OK, my bad!  Who do I think I am?  Bill Sweetman?  Just joking Bill, but seriously, I don't have the street cred, experience or evidently the common sense not to ask such a question to a contractor trying to win a contract from a customer.  I let my personal anger at the Marine Corps ground procurement system creep into my questions.  Big time mea culpa.

       BAE has an extremely strong design bureau.  The RG41 and RG35 are just two examples of vehicles built in house that surprised the industry and are tailored to market demand.  Why didn't BAE go with a clean-sheet, in-house design instead of teaming with IVECO?

IVECO possesses a sound amphibious engineering design that, once evaluated, proved easily adaptable to meet known MPC requirements. It only made sense to unite the two engineering efforts to a single effort in support of MPC. The requirements set by the Italian MoD were remarkably similar to what we understood the MPC requirements to be. The RG31 and 35 were not purpose built for an amphibious requirement.

If I had done my home work on Iveco before I sent in these questions this is another that would have been formulated differently.  Hmmm.  These guys are schooling me.

      Speaking of in-house designs, I'm a fan of the SEP, now renamed Alligator.  What metrics were performed to indicate that it did not meet Marine Corps specifications?

At the time of the initial USG MPC candidate vehicle assessment, the SEP was not yet fully mature to a level for which the Marine Corps wanted an amphibious off-the-shelf 8x8 solution.

    To the issue of the Iveco Super AV...  Many think that it’s simply an off-shoot of Freccia.  Is that true?

Although the Super AV shares several automotive assemblies with the Freccia, they are not the same vehicle. The Super AV incorporates a newly designed hull structure with added survivability considerations in addition to incorporation of features necessary to make it a vehicle fully capable of shore-to-shore and ship-to-shore transit in the open ocean.

       Little is known about the Super AV.  Articles are sparse and you're keeping it under wraps. Is this by design?  If so, why?  (BAE has been very forthcoming with other vehicles in its stable, and, as a matter of fact, the GCV has its own website.)

 Currently, the adaptation of the Super AV is for the singular MPC effort, and we haven’t socialized its capability beyond this audience. We will plan to do so when appropriate. 

 Performance characteristics for the Super AV are difficult to nail down.  What is the estimated speed in water and how high a surf can it withstand?  Projected land speed?  Has it undergone ballistics tests?  Ship board compatibility?

·      Up to 6 knots

·      Capable of sea state 2-3

·      Land speed of 65 mph

·      Has undergone a series of ballistic testing

·      Has completed shipboard compatibility evaluation with the Italian Navy

Absolutley brilliant Sol.  You asked a question that you KNOW they're not going to let out of the bag!  Detail performance specs!  And the response is the baseline performance characteristics outlined by the Marines.  I wish they were in the room with me.  The looks I would have gotten would reveal exactly how stupid I was for asking it.

Weapon systems are also a mystery.  In the few photos available on the web, it appears to be sporting a 25mm cannon along with a TOW launcher similar to what's seen on the Bradley.  Is this correct or just provisional?

Currently we have designed the vehicle to accept the interfaces necessary for RWS integration. A medium caliber cannon could just as easily be integrated, but we have not yet determined a valid requirement to do so.

Lockheed Martin's Team Havoc has had its vehicle out to Camp Pendleton for hands on sessions with Marines.  Does your team plan on doing the same?

The BAE Systems MPC Team will indeed do so as may be deemed appropriate by the USG. Internal BAE Systems demonstrations have been conducted before several USG audiences and we will be scheduling more in the future.

  Is there anything you would like to add?

BAE Systems and IVECO are well positioned to offer a world class amphibious wheeled 8x8 vehicle that is unique and capable in its proven balance of survivability and mobility, for which its amphibious performance is paramount.

Wow.

All in all I'm particularly thankful.  First BAE/Iveco took the time to answer my questions.  Second, they EDUCATED me on trade craft.  Lastly they gave a quick glimpse into the program.

But even better than all that is this.  I know who to go to inside that organization.  I know that they're knowledgeable, courteous and will give out as much info as they feel is possible to the general public.  I'll give it a month or so and I'll make another run at this design team with a much better set of questions....but in the meantime I'm going to research a lot more and I've gotta pack my bags too.  Marine West here I come.

So we're gonna upgrade the AAV...

Bad news Bat fans.

Looks like the Commandant was in error.  He stated that he would drive the replacement for the canceled EFV before he left office.  And since we now know that's unlikely then the best I can say is that he misspoke.  Be that as it may, what does that leave the Marine Corps with?

Upgrades to the tired AAV and the Marine Personnel Carrier Program (More on that tomorrow.  Thanks to Sarah at BAE public affairs office I've been able to get some information on the Super AV 8x8.  Interesting stuff).

But what's on my wish list for AAV upgrades?  Upgrades that I would like to see started within the next two years...

1.  More horsepower.  We should get a power plant that develops serious horsepower in a compact package.  MTU has some offerings that look like winners.

2.  Upgraded suspension.  On this I have no clue but we need to get a bit more ground clearnace and a smoother ride.

3.  Upgraded firepower.  On this I'm conflicted.  I like the above installation but I worry about the vehicle commander losing situational awareness.  Yes I know that remote weapon station make up for this with cameras and such but nothing beats sticking your head out and have a look with your mark 1 eyeballs.

4.  Upgraded armor.  In particular belly armor.  Upgraded applique armor would also be a winner but I'm not sure PLASAN has anything in development.

5.  Band tracks.  With additional belly armor you won't need the tracks for self righting. Band tracks would theoretically increase mobility. and road speed.

6.  Improved thrusters.  Getting better waterspeed shouldn't be that difficult with the offerings on the market today.  Even without improving the hull, with increased horsepower and thrusters we should improve water speed by at least  several knots.

7.  Improved troop seating.  Benches are out.  Time to install ballistic seating.

8.  Improved hydraulics.  Somehow, someway that ramp needs to come down faster.  A simple thing but important.

A short list but doable and hopefully doable within my two year time limit.  Confidence is not high though.  The AAV, ACV and MPC have all been combined into one program office.  With the failure that we saw with the EFV---a lack of institutional focus, a lack of institutional urgency and finally a lack of institutional supervision of the prime contractor all led to failure.

And now we have one office in charge of three very different programs.

Yep.  Confidence is not high that this will be done in an efficient, military manner.

Not so big after all....

When the photos of the F-35 with pylons attached first came out, I made the comment over at ARES blog that they looked HUGE!

Rookie action on my part and more proof that I didn't spend any time with the wing.  In an attempt to find out the reason behind the "why" of them being so large, I was directed to not let my eyes fool me and to look at other aircraft.

Good call.  If you compare the size of the pylons found on several other tactical aircraft you'll find not much difference.  My bad.  Mystery solved.  Apologies to the JSF team.  Keep plugging away guys.

Pic of the day---Low Level Sprint....

11th MEU live fire.

All photos by Sgt. Elyssa Quesada

Lance Cpl. Jeffrey Johnson sights in on an M240B medium machine gun aboard USS Makin Island here Feb. 22 during a live-fire exercise. Johnson serves with Weapons Company, Battalion Landing Team 3/1. The team serves as the ground combat element for the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit. The unit is deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship as part of the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group, which is a U.S. Central Command theater reserve force. The group is providing support for maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet area of responsibility.

Lance Cpl. Jeffrey Johnson and Lance Cpl. Andrew Baumgartner prepare an M240B medium machine gun aboard USS Makin Island here Feb. 22 during a live-fire exercise. Johnson and Baumgartner serve with Weapons Company, Battalion Landing Team 3/1. The team serves as the ground combat element for the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit. The unit is deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship as part of the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group, which is a U.S. Central Command theater reserve force. The group is providing support for maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet area of responsibility.

Lance Cpl. Patrick Donovan and Lance Cpl. Matt Behrens prepare an M240B medium machine gun aboard USS Makin Island here Feb. 22 during a live-fire exercise. Donovan and Behrens serve with Weapons Company, Battalion Landing Team 3/1. The team serves as the ground combat element for the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit. The unit is deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship as part of the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group, which is a U.S. Central Command theater reserve force. The group is providing support for maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet area of responsibility.

Lance Cpl. Kevin Curnutt fires an M240B medium machine gun aboard USS Makin Island here Feb. 22 during a live-fire exercise. Curnutt, 21, who hails from Pomeroy, Wash., serves with Weapons Company, Battalion Landing Team 3/1. The team serves as the ground combat element for the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit. The unit is deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship as part of the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group, which is a U.S. Central Command theater reserve force. The group is providing support for maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet area of responsibility.

Hospital Corpsman 3rd Class John Allen, 23, shoots from the rear gate of CH-53E Super Stallion during live fire exercise here Feb. 22. Allen, a Nampa, Idaho, native, serves with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit's maritime raid force. The CH-53E is with Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 268 (reinforced), which serves as the unit's aviation combat element. The unit is deployed as part of the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group, a U.S. Central Command theater reserve force. The group is providing support for maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet area of responsibility.

Snipers Sgt. Martin Lucero fires at a target from the rear gate of a CH-53E Super Stallion here Feb. 22. Lucero, a Denver native, serve with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit's maritime raid force. The Super Stallion is with Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 268 (reinforced), which serves as the unit's aviation combat element. The unit is deployed as part of the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group, a U.S. Central Command theater reserve force. The group is providing support for maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet area of responsibility.

USAF has a change of heart on UAVs.

via Aviation Week.  Read the whole thing but these are the juicy bits...

“Does more altitude buy you survivability, or does persistence provide a radical improvement in the ability to collect intelligence?” says Lt. Gen. Larry James, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff and former director of signals intelligence for the National Reconnaissance Office. “I don’t think we know the answer.”

and...

 “We may be able to penetrate, but not stay long,” James predicts. “There may be other systems that can stay on in the area [that include space and cyber tools]. Or maybe I improve my sensors so that I can standoff outside the threat. I don’t necessarily think all of those things need to be combined in one platform. I’d say we’re at the early stages of looking at new technologies like hypersonics for ISR platforms, [but] the technology is not there yet.”

Interesting.  The European Union and China are jumping on the UAV bandwagon in a big way.  It appears that the USAF is losing interest.

That's what happens when you pull your head out of COIN operations and start thinking about warfare against technologically capable foes.

When it comes to operations over long distances with the threat of enemy aircraft on the other end of the journey, common sense tells you that they just won't survive.  Additionally the loss rate for these aircraft in even non-hostile environments should be telling.  They won't cut it in the Pacific.

Hopefully our competitors will keep churning along on this dead end for a while longer.  It'll help us get even further ahead on tech that will work.  Besides, the truth of the matter is this.  UAVs are a tactical, not strategic tool and should be left to the ground forces.
 

Hot Chick (SEALs) vs. Ugly Chick (US Marines)

Courtesy of CDR Salamander...

In their upcoming war film, Act of Valor, Directors Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh deliver the must-see action film of the year. They succeed in leveraging the tactical dexterities of authentic Navy SEALs and stunning cinematography to produce a spectacular action movie that had me on the edge of my seat throughout.

Before I get into the film’s finer points – and many nuances struck me – I must establish the appropriate architecture for this review: the immutable paradigm of the hot chick versus the ugly chick.

The Hot Chick Paradigm and Why Harry Belafonte Was Right After All.

On my second deployment to Iraq we were conducting counter-insurgency operations west of Baghdad. One night a Navy SEAL task force attempted to enter our battle space without coordination. Our Company Commander quickly protested this attempt.

For one thing, it would be dangerous to introduce their presence that night without prior deconfliction of our current patrolling forces, indirect fires plan, and explanation of our existing operations and theirs. Deconfliction would take only minutes.

For another, the mission, he argued, would be more effective if we worked in support of them. It wasn’t that they couldn’t come into our battlespace (no doubt they worked for a senior authority)…it was that they shouldn’t come unannounced. And it wasn’t about ego. It was about safety of the Marines on the ground and overall mission effectiveness.

My CO’s argument won out that night; NSW relented and conducted the appropriate coordination measures. They now had our support, and we had theirs. They conducted their mission and, to the best of my knowledge, it all worked out.

When I asked my Company Commander about the event he told me his thought process in detail and later, anecdotally and over a nocturnal cigar in the arid Anbar summer, about the difference between the hot chick and the ugly chick…or, the difference between the Navy SEALs and the US Marine Corps.

The ugly chick is ugly. She does the dirty work. But she does it well. (Harry Belafonte’s “Get an Ugly Girl to Marry You” pretty much says it all). The ugly chick puts in the long hard, thankless, unsexy hours. The ugly chick is always there when you need her. She never complains. She never compromises. She just performs. And she treats you right. The Marine Corps is our nation’s ugly chick.

The hot chick is the hot chick. She is incredible at what she does. Everybody wants her. She can pass on opportunities when the conditions aren’t just right, and everyone gets it. When she decides to work her magic, she crushes it and she gets the headlines. She’s a sight to see, for sure, but boy is she high maintenance. Navy Special Warfare is our nation’s hot chick.

Don’t believe me? Ok, try this quick exercise in hot chick versus ugly chick mission assignment calculus:

Ugly Chick Task, example: Seize and hold Al Anbar after it was declared “unwinnable”.

Coordinating tasks:
-Take back Fallujah, Ramadi and Haditha from the hands of murderous Al Qaedists; next, create the conditions for successful constitutional elections
-Each day, hand out candy and start schools on one block, dodge an IED on the next block, and conduct an all out assault on the third.

Sex Appeal: Very, very low.

Duration: Years and years.

Hot Chick Task, example: Kill Bin Laden.

Coordinating Tasks:
-Kill anyone else who gets in your way
-Get back for breakfast the next day (it’s pigs in a blanket day!)

Sex Appeal: Prodigiously high.

Duration: Like we said, get back for breakfast.

See what I mean?

This isn’t a complaint. This isn’t a lament. This is just the way it is. The hot chick gets the prom king. The ugly chick sits at home in her pajamas and does the hot chick’s homework.

And it’s with that little bit of mil-culture architecture that frames my review of this film, in 5 parts.

1: Navy SEALs as Actors (or, Why the ‘Hot Chick’ Always Play Well)

Say what you will about the hot chicks - they’re hot; they don’t care what you think. All they know is they don’t have time to think about what you (ok, we the ugly chicks) think about them. Scoreboard baby. They get the sexy missions. The sexy gear. The sexy feature film. And, quite frankly, that’s the way it should be.

What made Act of Valor so powerful across the entirety of its story line was that it was utterly unapologetic about the use of the hot chicks exclusively (yes, all real live hot-chick-SEALs) to carry the action above the plot. Would the story have been better with Ryan Gosling playing the platoon commander? Hell no. Jason Statham? Perhaps. Clint Eastwood. Absolutely. But he’s already played an Ugly Chick (Heart Break Ridge) and pretty much incapable of playing a hot chick, so he’s out.

All that said, I have to admit, even with the acting being done by “non-actors”, they did a very good job. Much better than any Marine-ugly chicks would have done in their stead. And more importantly they didn’t need to “act” as the action commenced. As the violence unfolded in each sequence I found myself excited by the soundness of the tactics – door entries, room clearances, breaches, shot prosecution – all artfully unfolding on the screen as a tactical ballet of elegant violence. It’s what you would expect from real live gunfighters, but never get to see.

2: Cinematography (or, The Art of Hot Chick Photography)

The first rule of photography is that nothing matters more than the prettiest person in any frame. This rule was strictly adhered to in Act of Valor as every frame in every scene was full of Navy SEALs. Navy SEALs jumping out of airplanes. Navy SEALs diving out of submarines. Navy SEALs killing tons of bad guys. Navy SEALs talking about being Navy SEALs.

The second rule of photography is that the only thing that matters than the first rule (or any other rule) is that a picture, especially a moving picture, must never be boring. Here Cinematographer Shane Hurlbut uses his cameras to immerse the audience on one of the most stimulating adventure rides I’ve seen in a military film since the cockpit action of Top Gun. Using only a series of Canon EOS 5Ds and 18mm Zeiss ZF’s mounted on the SEALs helmets, we see close quarters battle and special operations exploits from the shooter’s perspective.

The cinematography in this film was a demonstrative undertaking that allowed the real live exploits of our nation’s elite frogmen to be consumed as they happened. And, for the record, I am not bothered that every mission specific detail was not adhered to – the action carried us forward and the story moved swiftly. Also, it should be said, this film does well to avoid the third rule of photography: avoid ugly chicks whenever possible in order to both preserve beauty and avoid dullness.

3: The Story (or, More Hot Chick Human Interest Perspective Needed)

Act of Valor follows one Navy SEAL platoon on a single deployment that carries them around the world on various missions that highlight their many mission capabilities, from a covert operation to rescue a kidnapped CIA officer, to Asia and the Pacific to interdict known terrorist masterminds, to Mexico for an action packed final sequence in which they attempt to take down lethal enemies who plan to launch attacks on America.

Beyond the above plot, which had all the requisite alarmists foundations necessary to require such constant op-tempo from a single SEAL platoon, I found myself wanting more narrative, more storyline about the characters. More about the Navy SEALs themselves. Their lives, their family. Something. Just a bit more. Maybe 10 more minutes just to highlight who these guys are or where they came from. What made them want to be a hot chick in the first place? And perhaps some narrative or perspective from the actual hot chicks that marry these guys.

4: Roselyn Sanchez (or, The Redemptiveness of an Actual Hot Chick)
Roselyn Sanchez plays a captured CIA agent rescued by the platoon in the early minutes of the film. She seemed to be a talented actress. Roselyn Sanchez is also excruciatingly hot. That’s all.

5: A Point of Order (or, Why the Hot Chick Needs the Ugly Chick)

During the invasion of Granada, a group of SEALs took up security in the Governor's mansion when they realized they had forgotten their SATCOM on the helicopter. Surrounded by Cuban and Grenadian troops, they called in fire support from an AC-130 using the mansion’s landline. Through the night the SEALs were holed up in their defensive position until extracted by a platoon of Force Recon Marines the next morning. You understand my point.

In the End (or, Why When this Hot Chick Wins, America Wins)
Act of Valor is a first rate high speed action that presents a story worth sharing delivered by a cadre of elite gunfighters who serve as unique custodians to the story’s ultimate point: a tribute to the sacrifice and commitment of the men who go down range. Damn few.

Wow.

SPOT ON!!!!

WHOA! Didn't see this coming. ACV anti-semitic???

I did not see this one coming.

A blogger is claiming that Act of Valor is anti-semitic.  I can't even begin to comment cause I haven't see the flick but this is a part of her spill...

By Debbie Schlussel
It’s official:  “Act of Valor” is anti-Semitic tripe wrapped in the American flag with a Navy SEAL cherry on top.  The movie, which debuts in theaters today, goes to great pains to tell you that the largest terrorist plot against America is perpetrated by  a Jew.  Did the Stormfront guys write this crap? In case there’s any doubt, “But you’re Jewish!” is shouted by a real-life Navy SEAL interrogator who heads SEAL Team 7 featured in the movie and goes by the nickname, “Senior.”  Apparently “Senior” forgot this, but the last time I checked, the guys behind 9/11 were not named Osama Bin Cohen and Khalid Sheikh Horowitz.  Ditto for the guys behind every major terrorist attack against Americans, whether on U.S. soil or abroad.  The Beirut bombing and murder of over 300 U.S. Marines and civilians?  Here’s a tip, Navy SEALS:  It wasn’t perpetrated by HezboLox&Bagels. And the guy just sentenced for trying to blow up a plane full of Americans with his underwear isn’t Umar Farouk AbdulEpstein.

I've been hard on this film but never would I believe that they would do this.

Time to watch the film I guess.  Afternoon showing here I come.

NOTE:
I am also aware that a good bit of controversy is always good to up movie sales.  I'm probably falling for a marketing scheme but oh well.