Concur.
Saving Private Ryan/Gallipoli ripoff.
Booooooring.
Posted on 03/27/2020 4:17:10 PM PDT by EliRoom8
15 minutes in. It's very good. Damn, I should have purchased it.
It goes downhill quickly when it enters the surreal. I watched it yesterday.
Watch “They Shall Not Grow Old” instead.
Thanks. I’ll be sure to check it out.
Concur.
Saving Private Ryan/Gallipoli ripoff.
Booooooring.
“!917” deserved the Best Picture Oscar over that strange movie from South Korea. This was the first time I was rooting for an Academy Award nominee in many years. Of course, I was disappointed, but that’s Hollywood for you.
I’m a pretty serious World War I buff — at least judging by the contents of the large bookshelves in my den.
Although there were some improbabilities in the story of “1917,” the production design and cinematography were outstanding.
Considering that World War II has always overshadowed the Great War as a movie subject, the fact that “1917” got made at all is impressive.
As I always like to tell young folks — those willing to listen to a Boomer, anyway — our world began in 1914. You can’t understand events today without learning about both world wars.
In and Out double burger with cheese.
It was really good.
When I went to London last year, I had a chance to go to the Imperial War Museum.
Their WWI section is incredible, you could spend weeks there and not see everything.
Nah. Just keep shitting on this one.
#AttentionWhore
One scene in the movie shows why not: that dogfight could have done the other way.
Anyway, good plot, good movie.
Loved seeing how German bunkers differ from the British.
Not enough room to discuss our 4 cats.
If your cats have ever done a credible recreation of the Battle of Ypres then by all means tell us about it.
Unless the dogs are chasing the cats. Those are fun.
Yes, and there was a mole and a chipmunk involved.
gone
I understand that but wonder why someone would post IBZT for a comment. Thanks.
That movie was damned chilling. I’ve watched it twice. What a great piece of work.
I read a review about how difficult it was to come up with a happy ending plot on a WW I movie. My understanding in this movie they are trying to stop a futile assault. The problem is if they stop this attack, the leadership will just launch another futile attack a week later so are the sacrifices in the movie really worth it.
All the men who died in WW I believed in their leaders. Should they have? Is it really any different than today? I wonder.
The war certainly changed the demographics in Europe. You never hear of feminists complaining that this war was sexist because not enough women were killed. The sacrifices of these men are not recognized. If taught, the generals are criticized but not the politicians.
The movie captured the individual commitment, the courage of the junior enlisted men and it's a damn shame the Academy picked that very weird Korean flick instead for Best Picture.
I liked that thread where you went all old-man grumpy and posted numerous times on a thread you declared boring and stupid.
As to “1917”, I loved it. It was a cross-sectional slice of the Western Front, with the bizarre world of the trenches framed by the “real” world. It was the best depiction ever of that compression zone of empires colliding. And it really was that small, a scar running from the channel to Switzerland, about two artillery ranges wide, with supply lines stretching out. It rarely moved and was hell on earth from the end of maneuver in 1914 to 11/11/1918.
The plot was drawn from Sam Mendes’ relative who was a courier in the war. A lot of stuff was distilled in to keep the plot moving, and yes, war can seem derivative after so many realistic depictions. But, as I said; I loved it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.