*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 08:51:15 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Recent

Author Topic: 1917 Film  (Read 11587 times)

Offline SteveBurt

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1283
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2020, 10:23:06 AM »
It sounds similar to 'Dunkirk' - very immersive, but don't go pointing out historical nit-picks and plot holes as that is not the point. The point is to make you feel like you are there, which it sounds like it does well (as did Dunkirk).

Offline Ben Waterhouse

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 140
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #16 on: January 15, 2020, 10:48:56 AM »
It sounds similar to 'Dunkirk' - very immersive, but don't go pointing out historical nit-picks and plot holes as that is not the point. The point is to make you feel like you are there, which it sounds like it does well (as did Dunkirk).

Though the “there” wasn’t Dunkirk in 1940... The 1958 version was much, much better in that regard.
Arma Pacis Fulcra

Offline SteveBurt

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1283
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2020, 09:44:15 PM »
Now what did I say about no nit-picks?  ;)

Offline janner

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2877
  • Laughing Cavalier
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2020, 08:37:12 AM »
Just saw it. Loved it.

It’s full of implausible things - you could argue that the whole central premise is basically flawed. Given that the nature of the Western Front was that the front lines were essentially continuous and unbroken, without gaps the enemy could exploit (which was the whole reason for almost 5 years of stalemate slaughter) why would you have to send two runners FORWARD across No Man’s Land and through the abandoned German lines in order to reach another British Division? Because they’re not going to be on their own, ten miles out in front of the rest of your lines. Why wouldn’t you just go along the line? Makes no sense at all.
And then there are several other lesser points at which you go ‘well that doesn’t make any sense’ and a few nerdy military history buff moments where you go ‘well that’s not right’...

By this point, both sides were moving beyond linear defences on the Western Front to adopt defence in depth. This system established an outpost line backed by a mainline of resistance and strongpoints that served as rallypoints. It accepted a degree of penetration was necessary to absorb an enemy attack and meant the frontlines were, to a degree, more fluid. This meant to old front lines were largely abandoned due to the greater dispersal of troops.

The film is set during the German withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line (whose design is a classic example of this defence methodology), during which 2nd Devons are shown being drawn into a trap as they follow-up.

Cor bugger Janner!  ;)

Online Captain Blood

  • Global Moderator
  • Elder God
  • Posts: 19308
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2020, 09:49:51 AM »
Hmmm.
Fair point. But do you think the situation portrayed in the movie, with one British division evidently isolated nine miles forward of the main British line, and critically, way out on the other side of no man’s land, is plausible? It doesn’t seem so to me.
There were salients of course. But completely isolated large formations, entrenched and facing forward far beyond the enemy’s opposing frontline and with no communications / resupply corridor to the rear and the main British frontline? Colour me sceptical  ;)

Not that it spoiled the movie. I thought it was excellent. It just feels like a set-up to suit the filmmaker’s dramatic purposes, rather than reflecting reality.

Offline Baron von Wreckedoften

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 860
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #20 on: January 17, 2020, 11:40:38 AM »
Then there's the small point of why they wouldn't fly an aircraft over and drop a message - standard operating procedure by mid-1917.

With regard to "nit-picking", the blurb in support of the film has said that it wants to tell cinema-goers what WW1 was really like, and whilst it's good that it seems to have departed from the "Oh, what a lovely war!"/"Slackbladder comes last" version of history, if they are serious about educating the public then they owe it to both their audience, and those who lived through the real thing, to do it properly.
No plan survives first contact with the dice.

Andrew_McGuire

  • Guest
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #21 on: January 17, 2020, 12:51:37 PM »
Then there's the small point of why they wouldn't fly an aircraft over and drop a message - standard operating procedure by mid-1917.

I'll confess straightaway I haven't seen the film, but my initial thought when reading of the scenario was that it did appear somewhat implausible, and indeed contrived, as I said earlier. In addition to the point mentioned above, you have to wonder - unless it's explained in the script - why the formation in question lacked a radio set, and, even given a sound reason for this, why a humble pigeon might not have been employed.(The Blackadderesque explanation would probably be that pigeons are a valuable resource.)

Without wishing to appear too cynical, my feelings about the film took a slight downturn on reading an interview with the script writer, whose original inspiration to go into film was the outstanding 2000 release Charlie's Angels. I'll post the link if I can find it. Some of the other content I can remember would probably not be readily believed without evidence.

Andrew_McGuire

  • Guest
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #22 on: January 17, 2020, 01:12:01 PM »
Before posting the link, I have to admit to a slight error in my previous post, which will be readily apparent to anyone who reads the paragraph in question. The real bombshell, so to speak, comes a little later in the interview which appears at the approximate mid-point of the article. (Just below the picture of Colin Firth).

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jan/03/the-stupidest-thing-humanity-ever-did-to-itself-sam-mendes-and-colin-firth-on-1917
« Last Edit: January 17, 2020, 06:07:20 PM by Andrew_McGuire »

Offline Alan Mercer

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 238
    • Alan's Wargaming Miniatures
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #23 on: January 18, 2020, 02:20:24 PM »
Saw it this morning. I liked it. Yes, it doesn't have the same tension as, say, Dunkirk, but a good effort.

Offline Cubs

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4914
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #24 on: January 18, 2020, 02:49:29 PM »
In addition to the point mentioned above, you have to wonder - unless it's explained in the script - why the formation in question lacked a radio set, and, even given a sound reason for this, why a humble pigeon might not have been employed.

Runners were still widely used in WW1 because they were the most reliable way of getting a message from A to B, unless they were static locations where telephone cables had been laid. Battlefield radio was still in its infancy, short ranged and notoriously unreliable and aircraft navigation and spotting were crude at best, so a plane would be as likely to circle randomly round the wrong location getting shot at. A runner could ask/answer questions, make decisions and find a unit whose location was difficult to pin down.
'Sir John ejaculated explosively, sitting up in his chair.' ... 'The Black Gang'.

Paul Cubbin Miniature Painter

Andrew_McGuire

  • Guest
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #25 on: January 18, 2020, 04:01:27 PM »
Yes, of course. Furthermore, a pigeon could only fly to a location with which it was already familiar, rather than one only recently occupied. On reflection, then, not such an implausible scenario as I first thought.

Offline Cubs

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4914
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #26 on: January 18, 2020, 08:30:32 PM »
It's terrifying how limited battlefield radios still are. It's been estimated that in the event of a NATO vs Russia conflict, NATO battlefield radios could be taken out in minutes with a single EMP strike by Russia, because of their limited capacity and centrally-controlled set-up. Let's hear it for diplomatic solutions to the world's problems!

Offline Blackwolf

  • Potato Cup 3 winner
  • Supporting Adventurer
  • Galactic Brain
  • *
  • Posts: 6225
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #27 on: January 18, 2020, 09:42:08 PM »
Alas,I haven’t seen the film yet,although such a situation is mentioned in the Lousier War,a memoir of a chap in a MG platoon,however there was no rescue and the main protagonist was captured...
One wonders why no one has made any of Derek Robinson WW1 novels into a film,would have thought they would be right up P. Jackson’s alley for instance,Goshawk Squadron for example  (actually shortlisted for the Booker prize)?
May the Wolf  Walk With You
http://greywolf1066.blogspot.com.au/

Painting Clubs Joined: APC,MPC, PPC,PAPC,LPC.

Offline monk2002uk

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 727
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #28 on: January 19, 2020, 07:48:21 AM »
The book 'True World War I Stories' (ISBN 1 84119 095 0) details the account of B Neyland in a chapter entitled 'A Wireless Operator'.  He was a sapper in the Royal Engineers Wireless Section.  His unit of 3 men, including himself, had to carry a wireless set forward in the attack at Rolincourt, Arras.  Even in 1917, it took another 4 men (7 all told) to carry ' the set, accumulators, dry cells, coils of wire, earth mats, ropes and other details'.  The first British efforts at using 'mobile' forward radio operators to support artillery co-ordination with infantry attacks took place during the Battle of the Somme.

The Fuller phone was more typically carried forward during an attack to facilitate real-time battlefield comms. Wire-based technologies were still used as well, though vulnerable to being cut as we all know. None of the above technologies were suitable for an infantry division cut off many miles from the front line (which is a completely unrealistic scenario in any case on the Western Front in 1917 but hey ho).

Typically, radio sets were provided to high level commands early in the war.  These commands would be relatively stationary, so had time to set up the radios and transmit.  During the Germans advance into France, army HQs would report back to the German High Command on a daily basis via radio.  Infamously, during the British advance up the Tigris and Euphrates in Mesopotamia, General Maude required his cavalry to report in by radio every hour!  Given that it took 20 minutes to set up a wireless station, then 15 mins to take it down, there was not a lot of time for actually advancing.  The Marquess of Anglesey in his history of the British Cavalry has a picture of a wireless set in operation.  He also includes the following footnote:

'The success which attended wireless communications during the first half of the campaign "was almost unique throughout the British theatres".  For the first two years (after 1915), it was unhampered by security restrictions...'

Wireless sets were carried in some British tanks specifically earmarked to support battlefield comms but not in 1917.

Robert

Offline bergschotten

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 222
Re: 1917 Film
« Reply #29 on: January 20, 2020, 06:32:35 AM »
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jan/03/the-stupidest-thing-humanity-ever-did-to-itself-sam-mendes-and-colin-firth-on-1917

Hi, I watched 1917 for a second time yesterday evening and thoroughly enjoyed it despite knowing how it ends.

I read the Guardian article, mentioned by Andrew, and thought some of the comments (as reported) by the screenwriter were silly to say the least however these comments did not detract from the experience of the movie, and it is, lets not forget, a movie and therefore artifice -a vehicle for telling a story. 

The way narrative, and the physical landscape unfolds, through the eyes and experiences of the two soldiers, is in my opinion, absolutely brilliant-transcending the mundane and through scaling the millions of protagonists down to two people it effectively amplifies the incalculable horror, danger and randomness of war. The technical use of the continuous scene, the music and sound

I don’t know enough about WWI to comment of accuracy, tactics or pigeon’s but I do, well I like to think I do, know good cinema when I see it and this was most certainly an excellent movie.

 Plus parts were filmed in one of my favourite places in Glasgow the Graving Docks at Govan.


Stephen