WWI-The forgotten war in feature films
February 8th, 2013 at 8:00:40 PM permalink | |
Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 | Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) is going to star in a remake of the dramatic film "All Quiet on the Western Front". I was watching it on television, and I was struck at how dramatically anti-war the story was. It could have been made in the 1960's with banner programming "War is Dangerous for Children and other Living things". It is no wonder that Nazi's ordered the books burned. I read that there had been very few films made about WWI. Doing extensive research in Wikipedia, I discovered roughly 19 US films made after 1940, with 2 being musicals, and a handful being so obscure that I would be shocked if anyone had seen them.
|
February 8th, 2013 at 8:41:29 PM permalink | |
Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
Because it was a blunder of a pointless war with confusing, banal causes and little moral clarity on either side. Whereas on WWII you had Liberty fighting for its life against Tyranny, and in the USCW there was Freedom fighting against Slavery. What was Imperial Germany fighting for? A place in the Sun or some other such nonsense? Besides, ignorance of that war is high. Hell who was fighting? Most people have never heard of Austria-Hungary, much less that it was the country with the casus belli. speak of the Triple Entente, and most people will figure it's something found at a Parisian McDonald's. Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
February 8th, 2013 at 10:55:50 PM permalink | |
Fleastiff Member since: Oct 27, 2012 Threads: 62 Posts: 7831 | > I was struck at how dramatically anti-war the story was. It often is. Some war/anti-war movies focus on small group interactions and some even focus on peacetime or reservist duty, such as Events While Guarding The Bofors Gun. A Vietnam allegory shot in Texas and Louisianna focused on a errant fragment of a National Guard platoon. >I read that there had been very few films made about WWI. That is odd. So many films focusing on the social upheavals resulting in the Lost Generation were really films about the war's effect on society, women's liberation, etc. > This is really a WWtwo film churned out by Warner Brothers to get the USA entangled in a European war. See Senator Nye's threat to hold hearings on its pro war propaganda. See Celluloid Soldiers for all the pro-war, anti foreigner movies whipping America into a pro war hysteria. The folly of the Guns of August makes WW One look as bad as the War of Jenkins Ear, an example I use to prove that when politicians and generals want a war they will go get themselves one. Europe and the UK lost their best and brightest in Flanders Fields, there being no programs to divert the rich or the educated from the muck of the trenches. Even America's "rainbow division" was an attempt to limit protests geographically by diluting the effect. The post war pandemic made ww one even more difficult and the world was war weary and forever changed. |
February 9th, 2013 at 6:42:28 AM permalink | |
odiousgambit Member since: Oct 28, 2012 Threads: 154 Posts: 5052 | Sergeant York The story of York is so patently ridiculous I can't stand to be anywhere near it. That's not to say York doesnt deserve recognition, perhaps he was very brave. But the story goes, he was a turkey hunter. He gobbled at the Germans and they would stick their heads up out of the trenches, since they too were turkeys, and he would shoot them then. I distinctly remember seeing this played out in the movie, seeing it as a kid. Even then it turned me off, and I liked war movies a lot back then. I'm Still Standing, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah [it's an old guy chant for me] |
February 9th, 2013 at 8:26:32 AM permalink | |
AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18136 |
" A few reasons, and some to do with movies and some to do with war. WWII can rightly be described as "WWI Part II." The same actors lined up on the same sides and the Germans even used much of the same plans. In the end we got mostly the same results the whole way. The big difference in the USA is that WWII was far more glamorous. WWII is the only time we had a unanimous declaration of war (agains Germany, not Japan!) and it was the only war where there was no signifigant anti-war faction in the USA. Even the Civil War left large parts of the USA untouched. WWI had more anti-war sentiment in the USA, and we really got into it very late. This was by plan, but in WWII we were involved in Lend-Lease and supplying one side all the way. In WWI we nearly went to war *on the side of* the Germans due to the Brits' North Sea Blockade. Now the "movie" reason. In WWI we still were 10 years from real movies with sound. In WWII not only did we have modern movies, it was the Golden Age of Hollywood. It was when actors actually worked under contract. We had WWII movies come out during the war. There is more historical footage that we all saw, making it more real to us. Finally, WWI was more "dirty" with most of the soldiers hanging out in trenches for much of the time. WWII had the Army Air Corps and War of the Paciffic. There is just so much more to put a storyline around. The President is a fink. |
February 9th, 2013 at 10:50:17 AM permalink | |
Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
The telegram from Germany to Mexico inviting them to attack the USA was the deciding factor. Germany was hoping to distract the USA, and in return it promised Mexico that they would give back the land that they had lost in the Mexican-American war. The Mexican president rejected the offer because they thought that Germany did not have the capability to force the USA to give up it's territory. He correctly reasoned that the Mexican people would be pawns. The telegram was intercepted and decoded by the British which knew that it could be used to sway the American public. The civil war remains a very popular movie theme despite having no visual data, just books and photos. I suppose in many ways WWI was not that big an event in American history. The casualties from the influenza outbreak were roughly 5 times as high as from the war. At least WWI did inspire some great films like African Queen, and Lawrence of Arabia. I can't think of a film about the revolutionary war that is a "great film" or even ranked higher than "above average". |
February 9th, 2013 at 12:31:48 PM permalink | |
rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 188 Posts: 18629 |
If like most scripts, there's some truth, but truth often gives way to entertainment values. I believe part of the bin Laden takedown involved calling out the name of one of the son's in a darkened room on the chance it might be him (it was) causing him to poke his head out, then they shot him. (that may be fiction, but I remember hearing it somewhere, heh) Less off the wall than a turkey gobble, but you can't always guess every odd thing that may cause you to screw up and make a fatal mistake. I seem to remember something about American GIs in Vietnam warned not to use aftershave -- as you could be smelled, if not seen. Also, I'd guess good ace fighter pilots discovered unique tricks to fool other pilots. Doens't matter if it seems stupid, as long as it works. You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
February 9th, 2013 at 2:08:11 PM permalink | |
Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
In WWII the TULLIBEE, and the TANG submarines were lost in a circular run of their own Torpedo. To prevent this a timer was added to the detonation sequence. It resulted in a tactic whereby a submarine under torpedo attack by another submarine might charge the torpedo in the hope of reaching it before the timer allowed it to detonate. The torpedo would hit the target and then sink into the ocean. This idea was included in the Hunt for Red October. At the time we were instructed not to confirm or deny any facts in the movie. Doing so would be a breach of security. I always thought the gun battle in the crew quarters using the ballistic missile tubes as shelter was stupid. It is widely known that is a design feature of an American SSBN, and not a Russian Typhoon. I don't think that Tom Clancy got that fact wrong, he just wanted to make the gun battle more emotional. |
February 9th, 2013 at 11:19:07 PM permalink | |
Fleastiff Member since: Oct 27, 2012 Threads: 62 Posts: 7831 | The Zimmerman note was a triumph of British intelligence who forged it. |
February 10th, 2013 at 9:33:24 AM permalink | |
Fleastiff Member since: Oct 27, 2012 Threads: 62 Posts: 7831 |
The book and movie were far more than that, remember he did stand there confronting the Germans with his empty 45 and the total number captured was very high. He was bankrupt when he sold his story and in ill health so some details got "Hollywooded" such as lightning bolt giving him religion and stuff like that. The movie remains a public relations movie made on behalf of Warner Brothers for the "Get the USA into the War" movement. |