1917...looks like a good one.
- Thread starter NorthernHawkeye
- Start date
Not a lot of World War 1 movies compared to WW2. Should be interesting.
Second Lieutenant Sherman T. Potter served in the Calvary during WWI, before he decided to go to medical school before WWII and Korea.
All Quiet On The Western Front
exceptional book and film
exceptional book and film
What is the year LC and JoelB were born?
I will take old farts for 300, Alex.
I will take old farts for 300, Alex.
I am still surprised more was not made of the 100th anniversary of the war and also of our entry into the war. As late comers we did not suffer like the Germans, French and British but still our arrival was like a coming out party for American power.
Guns of August is a great book on the many mistakes that created The Great War.
Actor Lew Ayres who starred in All Quiet On the Western Front, became a pacifist because of that experience. He would not fight but did serve as a medic and chaplain's assistant in the Pacific during WW2.
Guns of August is a great book on the many mistakes that created The Great War.
Actor Lew Ayres who starred in All Quiet On the Western Front, became a pacifist because of that experience. He would not fight but did serve as a medic and chaplain's assistant in the Pacific during WW2.
I haven't had a chance to look closely, but is this based on an actual event? My main issue with war movies in particular is how they have a tendency to fudge the facts in favor of better cinema.
It's weird how there aren't a lot of quality WW1 movies.
It's weird how there aren't a lot of quality WW1 movies.
Americans in general don't know that much about World War 1.
Like Korea it's sort of one of the forgotten wars in our history. People are vaguely aware something happened there, don't know much else but just assume we won because 'merica.
Our current leadership isn't really on great terms with the English, French, and Germans. Unlikely he could be trusted to speak eloquently or with any measure of empathy or dignity to mark the occasion. We dodged a bullet. Better luck in 2117.
Me personally, you have Sergeant York, Paths of Glory, All Quiet on the Western Front, The Blue Max, Lawrence of Arabia, and Gallipoli. There are others obviously but for the most part these are movies I am familiar with.
WWI from a movie standpoint ain't exactly romantic, and was mostly located in one region dominated by what amounted to be a stalemate in the trenches. Trench warfare, the birth of warring in the air...both have been done. There was really only one naval battle of note excluding sub warfare (which WWII movies have sufficiently mined).
WWII produced, literally - thousands of stories ripe for movie fodder. Far flung exotic locations, a myriad of personalities too many to count, famous battles and soldiers in every theater and nearly every corner of the world.
WWI...aside from the Middle East campaign, you have trench warfare and that's just about it. WWI personalities...aside from Sergeant York and The Red Baron, who else is there really?
For me and I'd bet as far as movie studios are concerned, what ground needs to be mined there?
It was a tragic war, a meat grinder phone booth of a war. I just don't believe that it lends itself to the movie making combinations/stories that make compelling movies all that well.
WWI from a movie standpoint ain't exactly romantic, and was mostly located in one region dominated by what amounted to be a stalemate in the trenches. Trench warfare, the birth of warring in the air...both have been done. There was really only one naval battle of note excluding sub warfare (which WWII movies have sufficiently mined).
WWII produced, literally - thousands of stories ripe for movie fodder. Far flung exotic locations, a myriad of personalities too many to count, famous battles and soldiers in every theater and nearly every corner of the world.
WWI...aside from the Middle East campaign, you have trench warfare and that's just about it. WWI personalities...aside from Sergeant York and The Red Baron, who else is there really?
For me and I'd bet as far as movie studios are concerned, what ground needs to be mined there?
It was a tragic war, a meat grinder phone booth of a war. I just don't believe that it lends itself to the movie making combinations/stories that make compelling movies all that well.
"we'll lose 1,600 men"
On the first day of the Battle of the Somme the British Army suffered 57,470 casualties, including 19,240 killed in action.
I have a feeling this movie is going to be really dumb to anyone who knows about that conflict.
It depends. The critics will report, and you decide......
Best WWI movie (loosely-based on WWI anyway) is The Razor’s Edge, starring Bill Murray.
No one saw it but I absolutely loved that flick!
No one saw it but I absolutely loved that flick!
You have no idea of what was going on in the Eastern Front, in the Balkans or in the Africas if you think one region dominated the war. It gets the headlines because that's where we were involved, but arguably the Central Powers lost the war because they couldn't devote their full attention to the West as a result of the Russian and Balkan fronts.
In particular, Germany had to keep sending armies to prop up the Austro-Hungarians that kept them mostly on the defensive outside of Verdun (big exception obviously).
Similar threads
