This is one of the best WWII movies I've ever seen. I'll go as far as to say it's better than "Private Ryan". The actors' performance is very good: Sean Penn, Nick Nolte, Travolta, etc... The film also portrays perfectly the soldiers' feelings, without that Hollywood crap that accompanies its movies. The action scenes are credible too, even though the Japs are portrayed as quite dumb.
I agree Mito, other than the first 30 minutes, SPR was much too Hollywood, TRL was more about the psychology of combat and the psychology of jungle warfare. It's a great film that many overlooked because there "wasn't enough fighting" for a war film.
As far as war films go, TRL isnt a favorite of mine, but I do like it. If I were to name four war films that are my favorites Id go with: Cross of Iron Das Boot Kelly's Heroes Bridge on the River Kwai These are the ones off the top of my head. Has anyone seen Stalingrad or The Winter War? Both are said to be really good shows but I cant find them anywhere.
Realism in WW2 movies? Hmm. How about Flying Tigers? Gotta love how John Wayne keeps a cigar firmly in place while diving on the Japanese zeros! On a more serious note, whether it be SPR, TRL, Pearl Harbor, or yes, even U-571 - the point is that it is great to see a resurgence in WW2 films. I remember not too long ago watching movies like The Battle of the Bulge and thinking to myself: "why don't they ever make second world war movies anymore?" Enthusiasts like ourselves can pick out intricate details of these new films, but it is great to see WW2 getting exposure that had fallen off for so long.
I agree that the resurgence is a good thing, but what I fear is that we are seeing a "pop history" emerge, and this can be very damaging to historical accuracy. I just read an article today in the Globe and Mail newspaper that stated Canadian students felt that Canada's victory over the Soviets in a 1972 hockey series was more defining for Canada than was WW2! Talk about your misplaced values! It's great to admire a sport and hold it in high regard, but these students surely don't understand what history is. They have been stripped of the ability to distinguish terrible human sacrifice on a huge scale from a simple hockey game, and it's stupid moronic WW2 films that help do this to children. I'm not talking about historical innaccuracies like a german soldier using a thompson smg. What I'm talking about is this Hollywood need to entertain us with the terrible sacrifice of these brave men. In these films, war has just become another story where the good guys win and get the girl, and the bad guys get "blowed up real good". Hollywood demonises the enemy and makes them look evil, when war is never that black and white. Even when we do see war for what it really is in a film, they can only maintain this for the first 30 minutes, (as in SPR). Can you tell I feel strongly about this?
Oh, and one more thing. I'm not saying that you can never take a topic like WW2 lightly. Kelly's Heroes and 1941 are both great films because the stories are not veiled in realism. They make no attempts to disuise the cavalierness of the story, and do not abuse the accuracy of WW2 by claiming or even insinuating that the stories are based on reality. The film U-571 however tries to portray an epic historical drama, but it ends up like so many other bad films where it's the good guys vs the bad guys and after a few close calls the good guys win and get the girls.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rommel: I agree Mito, other than the first 30 minutes, SPR was much too Hollywood, TRL was more about the psychology of combat and the psychology of jungle warfare. It's a great film that many overlooked because there "wasn't enough fighting" for a war film.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hello There! Actually, the film has quite a lot of "action scenes". When american GI's make a direct assault against the hill defended by Japs, they are "chewed to pieces". Woody Harrelson's performance is great. When he tries to throw a grenade, he throws the pin instead. After the it explodes, he yells: "I blew my butt off"... That was sad, but funny. I believe Sean Penn's remark says it all: "THIS IS ALL ABOUT PROPERTY". He was 100% right. All wars are about money, property, etc... WWII was just that. German imperialism against US imperialism.
Unfortunately, TRL was handicapped by a ludicrous portrayal of Japanese soldiers - their reputation was one of not surrendering or being taken alive - I think less than two dozen men of the Iwo Jima garrison lived through the invasion. No modern army in history, (and few ancient armies), ever actually fought to the last man the way the Japanese did. This was not as true in the last months of the war - but I certainly don't think that the Japanese on Guadalcanal were ever seen in large numbers whining and crying and throwing their hands in the air. That just dishonours both the Japanese, and the poor Marines and GIs who had to fight against them. They were much better opponents than you see in the movie. SPR was very Hollywood - with Germans too stupid to stay off the street in Ramelle, and Americans too stupid to attack a MG nest from the flank or rear. (There were no other Germans around, obviously - cause they have time to bury the dead afterwards - so why not circle around the radar station and throw grenades from the rubble?) TRL had some neat moments - you really got a feel for the way a battalion was organized, and the chain of command (also the importance of the First Sergeant). Both movies, as with all productions, had an element of Hollywood too large to be ignored. Too bad. Pork Chop Hill, for my money, is still the grittiest, best represenation of infanty in battle. Platoon was good too. Stalingrad was a nice attempt, but for a German movie, had as much Hollywood in it as SPR did.
i thinkthat the thin red line was really good....and in a film with a certain theme you cant avoid some clichées or hollywood-esque things. They are movies after all...There are really few good documentaries about ww2 stuff (actually a lot) The thin red line had depth and it could have had more if it was possible to leave more scenes (more than an hour was cut) But i found it strange too that the japanese gave such a poor fight. (the G.I. s killed them with their handguns...in masses) But the scenes in the jungle were atmospheric and paranoia inducing... i loved it. Stalingrad and Das Boot belong to my favourites too. Both are german films and i think they are excellent. You cant compare SPR aor U-571 with those. I think it was ridiculous when people actually said that SPR was an anti war movie (remeber the beginning and the end? and the stereotypical farm in the middle west that doesnt exist anywhere?...Or the different types of grunts like in a computer game (i am referring to commandos)? ) btw... usually i am named Rommel but here the name was already taken. ;-( but nevermind..i found a replacement *g*
Sorry about the name thing . I agree with you about Stalingrad and Das Boot, they are both solid films and portray the tension of combat very well. I just hope that anyone making a new film realises that quality ww2 films have staying power and will always be popular, where bad productions will fall by the wayside of memory. eg: U-571 is already out of everyone's minds while Das Boot will be famous forever. I think that good, non-cliche history film make more money than cliche filled films.
Sorry to disagree, but I would take U-571 over Thin Red Line anytime. I thought TRL was particularly boring and a waste of $6.50 to see it. I think it would have been much better, if they had chopped an hour from the movie. At least the Guadalcanal Natives were accurate looking.
TRL was a joke. Guadacanal was a major fight of the USMC. The marines in this film are portrayed as draftees that are incapable of bringing the fight to the enemy. It was a extremely costly campaign for the americans which is not at all shown in this movie. Nick Nolte is totally over the top with his acting, problably the worst performance he ever did. where is the famed gung ho semper fi behaviour of the marines? The japanese were famous for massive counterattacks but i saw none... TRL was all about the thoughts of men in war, not about the war itself. Therefor it does not fit the description war movie, but should be called a drama. U571 is not even worth mentioning. this movie is so unbelievably full of errors... typical HH (Hollywood History.) negros were only allowed to serve the navy as cooks and such in 1942 and certainly not as a fighting sailor in an elite unit such as the submariners units. Teh american talks about his days in world war 1, eventhough that war was known as the great war at that time. the destroyer that shoots at the topside sub with more then 50 guns of various caliber without really hitting the sub from a mere 200 meters???? 1 bowshot torp that makes the destroyer explode from bow to stern in one giant explosion???? impossible. German veterans can not fix their sub's engine in a few days time and US newbies climb on board and get it repaired under 20 minutes or so?? yah right. Well i could go on and on, but its not worth it. Das Boot is the one to watch, way more realistic. ------------------ *** We shall not retreat, nor shall we surrender. If we cannot stay here alive, we shall stay here dead***
I agree with you Mart the thin red line was not very good and could be considered a drama...it was alittle TOO philosophical for my liking. Also man was it long! jumping around all over the place! U-571 was a good action movie...but only as a fiction war film...it was fun to watch but there were inaccuracies ------------------ Admiral William "Bull" Halsey... There are no great men, only great challenges that ordinary men are forced by circumstances to meet.
Im glad im not the only one to see the TRL, as a way too long boring pile of crud. U 571, definately much better. One thing I did like about TRL was the fact that the Marines were wearing Herring-bone twill uniforms, which were the proper ones. U 571 was meant to be ficticious but, many folks still pound it for details. Tow things I didnt like about U 571 were: The fact that there was a scene that just HAD to be in there. This is the scene where the U-boot fellow, was ordered by his Kapitan, to shoot those survivors in their lifeboats. I have never known that to actually happen, nor was there an oder given from the OKM, to do such a thing. The other small error I cant stand was, on one of the German uniforms, one of them had the brest eagle patch on the left side of the uniform---never happened!
I saw the original TRL, and the new one and I didnt like either version. Although, I did like the action scenes.
Hi Mahoney, Do you know if the original is out on tape? Do you think that would be just a waste of money?
