Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Spielberg's '1917'


Mark Hone

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Gardenerbill said:

Essentially Dennis Hopper is a car driver on a long journey across US intimidated by a massive truck.

 

I may have, then. On my Kit Weekend, collecting my TA kit in Perth (Scotland, as opposed to any other paces called Perth of which you might have heard) we ended up in a cinema and the plot sounds familiar. It was, however, 1978 and I recall sleeping through much of it. I thought Robert redford was in it, so again, I might have the wrong movie in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gardenerbill said:

Essentially Dennis Hopper is a car driver on a long journey across US intimidated by a massive truck.

 

Dennis Weaver, not Dennis Hopper.  Close, but no cigar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 593jones said:

 

Dennis Weaver, not Dennis Hopper.  Close, but no cigar!

 For those with very long memories, Dennis Weaver was Chester in Gun Law.

Mike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Steven Broomfield said:

 

As any fule kno, awards and merit are not necessarily connected. It will be log-rolling between meejah luvvies.

Wise words, Sir!!

 

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Gardenerbill said:

Essentially Dennis Hopper is a car driver on a long journey across US intimidated by a massive truck.

Terrifying film.

THERE IT IS AGAIN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/12/2019 at 18:47, simond9x said:

I agree. I was so disappointed in ‘Dunkirk’ but everyone else seemed to enjoy it.

Technically accurate!

The entire film was more a farce than anything else.

Does anyone believe that the French roadblocks were at the top end of the beach? It looked like an illustration out of 'Field Fortifications'.

The thought of a sailor going on board one of the small ships in his Number Ones complete with lanyard and boots, is just to bizarre to be laughed at.

At the end the Commander (Branagh) would not have said, "Good Morning, Rear Admiral". It would have been either "Admiral", or more likely "Sir".

And all those lovely polished helmets abandoned on the sand in neat rows, and the rifles neatly piled up. All the men in perfectly turned out uniforms and newly shaved, huddling on the Mole. I was waiting for the men on the beach to be perfectly dry. Certainly none got wet. The 1960s Daring Class that suddenly appeared by CGI. Why not a 1940 ship by CGI? I could go on.

Edited by healdav
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already apologised for saying 'Technically accurate' (a phrase I will regret misusing ntil I die), but there's no need to repeat it three times in one post!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Steven Broomfield said:

I've already apologised for saying 'Technically accurate' (a phrase I will regret misusing ntil I die), but there's no need to repeat it three times in one post!

Sorry. It's been corrected.

For some reason the system didn't say 'saved', so I thought it hadn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, 593jones said:

 

Dennis Weaver, not Dennis Hopper.  Close, but no cigar!

Duly edited, may I congratulate you on your excellent pedantry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dennis getting menaced. Must have been a right old beano. :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gardenerbill said:

Duly edited, may I congratulate you on your excellent pedantry.

 

You are more than kind, sir, I was happy to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, healdav said:

Sorry. It's been corrected.

For some reason the system didn't say 'saved', so I thought it hadn't.

 

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was the truck in Duel meant to have been driven by a demon or something ?  We never actually got to see the driver.  It was a thrilling ride as I recall.

 

One caveat re '1917'.  It is inevitably aimed at the American market.  This single factor will have dominated narrative construction, script and the selection processes for mise en scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/12/2019 at 20:51, Moonraker said:

.... Are any black soldiers included ..

On 16/12/2019 at 21:15, Rob Comber said:

It’s understandable to have an element of inclusivity, as long as it’s believable ...

 

28 minutes ago, Hyacinth1326 said:

... It is inevitably aimed at the American market.  This single factor will have dominated narrative construction, script and the selection processes for mise en scene.

So shouldn't there be some American characters in it? (Perhaps there are?)

 

And if they were black American soldiers, that would tick two inclusivity boxes at once. Or there could be a black female American war correspondent; that would be three boxes ticked. Or a black female American nurse or doctor.

 

(And a few posts ago I remarked about misdirected cynicism expressed early in this thread.)

 

Moonraker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reviews I have seen make this a must-see for moi. It looks like great entertainment if a bit loose with historical accuracy. 

 

Bernard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a review in the latest issue of Bulletin, and the writer (Matthew Purser) seems pretty enthusiastic about it.

 

He saw it at the press launch, and had the opportunity to ask Sam Mendes and others questions about what they were trying to do. It's not intended to be completely historically accurate, as it's "a blend of his (Sam Mendes) grandfather's stories" but he hoped that the story would sum up the scale and horror of the Great War by looking at it through a tiny lens - 24 hours in the lives of two young, innocent soldiers.

 

He did comment in his review about some inaccuracies - he points out that trees in blossom wouldn't have happened at the time that the file is set, and his partner was bothered about the Hollywood perfection of the actor's teeth. However, he does encourage all WFA members (and, I suppose, those who are not) to see the film.

 

Personally, I wasn't sure whether I would see it, having seen a trailer for it in the cinema last week.  However, I think that i probably will, but I'll try to keep an open mind about it first!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will just simply say that while there may be a few historical inexactitudes in the film they will number far less than any film on any aspect of the Roman Empire, with Gladiator not the worst by a long shot. Even the original Spartacus with its great pre-computer generated images of a Roman legion moving into battle formation has its failings...

 

Yes, perfect white teeth... I guess they can never get away from that one!

 

Anyway, I look foward to seeing it IF it ever shows over here

 

Julian

Edited by trajan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you couldn’t really have them all looking like Sean McGowan could you lol!

Thats one of the things that really jarred me with Peter Jackson’s, They Shall Not Grow Old although I had read about Pre-Dentistry teeth on the WF it was still a bit of a shock to see how awful the men’s teeth were 

But there you go 

I think we can forgive the film makers that one but it does accentuate the difference between reality and fiction 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who don’t live in the U.S. or aren’t otherwise aware of the U.S. movie calendar: 1917's release date is not random. Movies released in December in the States are generally films that are considered by their studio to be contenders for Oscar nominations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A supposed tribute to Sam Mendes grandfather, Alfred Mendes MM who served with the 1st Rifle Brigade. I'd like to go and see it, but must say that the trailer is a huge turn-off - lovely green fields, totally untroubled by any artillery craters or mud.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, KizmeRD said:

A supposed tribute to Sam Mendes grandfather, Alfred Mendes MM who served with the 1st Rifle Brigade. I'd like to go and see it, but must say that the trailer is a huge turn-off - lovely green fields, totally untroubled by any artillery craters or mud.

Michael


I’ll go and see it, remember it is entertainment and hopefully will spark an interest in some to take a greater interest. Maybe even learn that it was not all mud and devastation!

Ps In the “grassland” image have a game of spot the sniper, he is there I promise.

 

Doug.

BF74484D-9395-4C8A-AA0C-6A19871924A5.jpeg

DA2A6D1A-33BB-4C48-9506-A029D69B260A.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shall watch it but avoiding anything about it so can make up my own mind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the plot is summarised on Wikipedia complete with spoilers.  The Regiment in question is the 2nd Battalion The Devonshire Regiment., 95th Brigade, 5th Division. The retreat to the Hindenburg Line was apparently a feint in their sector.  Has anyone read the Battalion Diary ?

Edited by Hyacinth1326
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Hyacinth1326 said:

Well the plot is summarised on Wikipedia complete with spoilers.  The Regiment in question is the 2nd Battalion The Devonshire Regiment., 95th Brigade, 5th Division. The retreat to the Hindenburg Line was apparently a feint in their sector.  Has anyone read the Battalion Diary ?

 

I see that Wikipedia still has the battalion as 1600 men, so is anything else in the article to be relied on?

 

I wonder if Sam Mendes and Krysty Wilson-Cairns read the Battalion Diary?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colin Firth does in fact refer to Two Battalions in the trailer 

looking at the uniforms I assumed 10th Battalion Cheshire Regiment was featured 

I guess we’ll have to wait and see 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...