Discussion in 'WWII Films & TV' started by PzJgr, Mar 25, 2013.
Jeff... The Chechens that did not accept conditional amnesty in 1943.
I didn't say it was a pretty story. The NKVD Armies that followed the RKKA proved to be as bad-or much worse-than NAZI in parts of the Soviet Empire and Eastern Europe-and are still seen that way unto this day. But in the main, most people were just relieved that NAZI was gone and they were willing to accept whatever peace was to come under the new Red Empire.
The film begins with 1941 and deals with five individuals completely "unaware" of terror 1933-1940 and unaware of the Nazi teachings. To me, this appears simply impossible, a total fiction. Characters in the film knew nothing about the terror of civil population of Nazi Germany against the "other" civil population. Events in Poland and Czechoslovakia were simply omitted. The author choose to skip this inconvenience and puts his characters directly into Wehrmacht uniforms and completely unaware of reality. Now, in this circumstances, it is much easier to claim: "But they were just obeying the orders".
It is really up to the director to choose when to start and when to end events in his “artistic creation”. But in reality, the terror began in 1933 and exactly that terror shows the real face of the Nazi Germany. That was the peoples terror: a "spontaneous" terror of outraged civil population against other civilians. Therefore the film falls too short to be named "historic". The author shows just the desirable part of the truth but omits the crucial.
Of course, this film can not and would not influence or change history as a science but it will help to distort perception of the war among younger generation.
But of course they were. Mortality rate in Poland during the Nazi occupation was about devastating 4% per year and has returned to normal after arival of the Red Plague.
And that sums it all up nicely...I must say...my views on this drama...not history...changed over the course of this thread.
No likes left Tamino....Accept an ether one..
Don't worry Urquardt, I've got one for you!
It was probably much worse in Belarus-which was, after all, at the very epicenter of the war. http://belarusdigest.com/story/why-belarus-missing-world-war-ii-history-9168 I have read numerous Partisan accounts and it does seem that NAZI occupation there was horrific beyond all belief-which puts in perspective Belarussian Partisan accounts of the wildly joyous linkups with the conventional Red Army during the liberations.
Jeff, That article brings up an excellent point. How many countries outside of present day Russia faced the brunt of the Eastern Front ? All occupied 3 times in a few years. These countries deserve their recognition as victors too.
I recall reading several articles in the past which described the Red Army venturing into parts of occupied Ukraine and Belarus where there was enormous tracks of land where the population was literally "wiped out", where there was nobody left to meet the Soviets as they drove through burnt villages. I think Belarus especially faced some of the largest anti-partisan operations the war where towards the end of the war areas were simply cleansed rather then making retaliations in response to the enormous amount of activity from the Belarussian partisans
Personal anecdotes don't necessarily prove points, regardless of how attached we are to those who tell us them. Also, if you say you "know" the truth, whats to discuss? Perhaps you didn't intend that part the way I am reading it, its just that I normally read such tautology from religious fundamentalists. For example, my recent research into my European family has revealed letters, letters that reveal that some scummy Soviets had their way with my family who never made it out of Prussia alive because 12 year old girls were fair game. Anyone healthy would agree that is a horrible thing to learn about your history, but its not fair to give all Soviets a bad name for the disgusting things some of them did when the war turned in their favor.
The anti-partisan war in Belarus was basically a German extermination programme, around 9 in 10 of people killed in German anti-partisan sweeps were unarmed.
@ptimms: Thanks mate for mentioning this important historic fact.
Regarding the German intentions in the USSR there were no secrets; they were made public and there is no way to deny. Adolf Hitler in his speech on August 16, stressed that the partisan war in the German rear had its advantages, providing the excuse for destroying "anything that opposes the Germans".
The characters in this film were the only five in the entire German Armed Forces who have never heard of that. Let me paraphrase Benjamin Disraeli:
2. damned lies, and
3. the Nazi denial.
Which explains the wild fighting desperation of those Belarussians who could get arms-NAZI meant to kill everybody and you might as well go down fighting. An entire nation on Sun Tzu's "death ground." Grenkevich terms the resistance as "white hot by 1943" with some 40% of the countryside controlled by the Red Partisans. Zhukov credits the resistance with being instrumental in the NAZI defeats during Bagration and indeed the Partisans did get some great press during the war. It was after the war that it seemed the Soviets just wished the whole Partisan story would go away.
PS. The "Defiance" movie; http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/12/31/movies/31defi.html?_r=0 And I do love this movie despite it's Hollywood distortions and the fact that it is one big, long historical innacuracy. The sights, sounds and most of all the vastness of the Eastern European forests are great. And the "Zus with the Russkis" scenes are over the top excellent.
Your last post script resonates with me Jeff.
I have always preferred to celebrate what they get right, over what they get wrong. Lets be candid WWII is a niche subject for most people and is rarely going to have a great following. A movie like Independence Day is 3 thimes more likely to get greenlit and to make a boatload of cash over anything to to with WWII.
We are the core audience for these films and if we shread every aspect because they got the wrong number of buttons on a uniform or somebody is carrying the wrong rifle, we are only slitting our own throat's when it comes to getting new films.
There is truth to that Belesar.....but some truths are important...maybe not so much the logistics, although they are....But there are some truths that should never be tampered with.
I love the"Geronimo" movie also though it plays fast and loose with the history. Both "Defiance" and "Geronimo" are Hollywoodisms but Hollywoodisms that are somehow correct on the "feel of the human landscape" levels. And the actual landscape work on both flicks is excellent, excellent and again excellent.
Taking Defiance as an example. No single film could show the war from the perspective of a Partisan as no two groups of partisan's were exactly alike. They existed in just about every nation of Europe, some pro Allied, some pro Axis and some who fought either side as the whim took them.
Despite the fact Defiance did not get it all right about Partisan's, it didn't even get it all right about its subject partisan's, it still brought an aspect of the war that gets little coverage here in the west.
War films are difficult, as "experts" or perhaps purists we are too critical. I for example think Forrest Gump is the greatest Vietnam film ever made. The was sequence is loud, scary, confusing and possibly pointless to a point that it probably comes close to being as close as actual combat can be. Another thread anyone?
Life is like a box of chocolates.....
As long as its not like a plate of Haggas!
A good film about partisans?