Posted on 05/31/2004 7:49:27 AM PDT by sonofatpatcher2
Patton came out in 1970.
Just flipped the boob tube over to Turner Class Movies and realized I forgot The Battle of Britian (1969) nor to think of it that wonderful PBS "Piece of Cake" (1988) miniseries.
There are so many I fear I have slighted. I hope my fellow freepers will call me on them...
I used to watch the old WWII war movies every weekend, and late night during the week if I could get away with it. I also read everything I could get my hands on about the war. I was obsessed. People said I was a little war-monger. I guess some would say the same today, the way I beat the drum for the Iraq war, and still support it 100%.
Of all the war movies I've ever seen, Patton is still the greatest war epic ever. It is just... awesome. Saving Private Ryan was nearly as good, but didn't capture the grand sweep of history and the larger-than-life personality of the MAN, General George S. Patton.
When Trumpets Fade - The battle of the Huertgen Wood
Me too! Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see you list one of the best war movies ever made. Errol Flynn in "Objective Burma", 1945. It's a great film.
One more. "The Longest Day" is one of the finest historical movies on WWII ever released. Covers everything. You place it in the honorable mention catagory. Wrong! In addition, "Saving Private Ryan" pales in comparison to the overall quality and story telling of "The Longest Day".
There are several other disagreements I have with your list. But these are a few glaring errors I found. You touched most of the bases.
Yep, I messed up on them. So many films, so litle time since I started this little project at 4 this AM. Glad you found my boo-boos...
Yes, The Longest Day was more historically accurate as it was based on fact from the best selling book while Saving Private Ryan was a fictious plot that was more historically correct in uniforms, weapons and very realistic in showing the horror and bloody carnage of combat.
6 of one, half-dozen of the other. Both are great films and we can agree to disagree...
Yes, overlooked Objective Burma as I am sure I missed others.
Granted, a good B war film. However, you forgot to mention Rock's close personal friend, George Nader, who was the co-star of the flick.
AND don't forget the very first love of my life-- Julie Adams. She was the most beautiful woman I had ever seen at the age of 7 in 1954 when I saw her in a bathing suit in the Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954). By the time of Away All Boats, I was a worldly old man of 9 and had discovered the difference between boys and girls. I panted every time she was on screen.
Finally I figured she was too old for me. Naw, that's not true, I fell for Annette Funicello as she was more may age in 1956.
BTW, saw Julia on "Murder, She Wrote" in the early 1990s and discovered she was still a babe. However, she would now say I was too old for her!
And yes, gall-dung-it! Annette would say the same thing if you asked her today...
Okay.
The opening scenes of Saving Private Ryan were very realistic and the most intriguing part of the movie. Generally speaking, however, films are meant to be entertaining. The most entertaining war films ever made have a surealistic quality to them, that left the most horrific parts of human conflict up to the individuals imagination.
Films produced today tend to pass on surrealism, in favor of realism. The younger generation feeds on and enjoys all types of gratuitous violence. The "the horror and bloody carnage of combat" is no different. Sometimes it maybe necessary, but realism isn't always a positive attribute found in Hollywood movies.
If you move away from the initial shock value of a film like "Full Metal Jacket" --- which I think is an excellent example of a VietNam era war movie --- and place it side by side with a film like "Objective Burma", the latter holds up very well. A good example of entertaining and compelling storytelling at its best. The same holds true for "The Longest Day" besting "Saving Private Ryan" as pure entertainment.
Btw, I enjoy the history channel too. Especially their programs that touch on every detail of the aspects of war.
Here we go agreeing to disagree again. IMHO I did not find Full Metal Jacket to be a Vietnam film in tone at all. Yes, the Marine Corps boot camp was vintage and R. Lee was great, but the 'in country' plot played like the standard WW2 film. I think Stanley Kubrick wrote the screenplay in this way because he was such a hermit that he did not know how to portray the Vietnam experience.
I could be wrong but I believe most, if not all Nam vets would say Stanley's opus was only one-quarter to one-eighth jacketed...
I found "Full Metal Jacket" to be more surrealistic in tone, then any of the other VietNam era war flicks. "Apocolypse Now" blended realism with surrealism and told a good story, but not a new story. The "Bridge On the River Kwai" touched many of the same bases, 20 years earlier.
>>> ... Full Metal Jacket ... but the 'in country' plot played like the standard WW2 film.
Oh really. I'll bet you found the arrogance of Oliver Stone's "Platton" more to your liking and Kubrick's "Paths of Glory" also out of touch with reality. So be it.
BTW The Devil's Brigade is now showing on Turner Classic Movies...
How 'bout "The Best Years of our Lives" (1947?) This may not classify as a "war" film, but as most of you know, it's about three men at war's end who reenter civilian life. One, Homer _______ , a double amputee, plays a very powerful part of a returning sailor without hands facing the monumental challenges of readjusting to the civilian world.
RB
Saw We Were Soldiers and The Longest Day last night. My son is the only ten year old I know who can sit through all of the Longest Day. One of our favorites.
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.