Donate to the Lead Adventure Forum to keep it alive!
I watched it today. Better than I expected. Well-liked war films always get me worried that it's going to be all gooey.As it was, without wishing to get too anal about history stuff (Sopwith Camels in April 1917?!?) or spoil things too much, I thought the first and third parts of the film were very strong. The middle third almost killed it, but they managed to bring it back in the end. The moment when everyone goes over the top I found actually quite moving. The feeling of being part of a vast war was very strong. I actually think it's better than Dunkirk - though it shan't unseat Paths of Glory or All Quiet on the Western Front.The weakest part overall, which I found to be a tremendous disappointment, is the portrayal of the Germans. I can't say more due to plot points but let's just say that war films need to realise that in a war like that both sides are actually trying to survive. All Quiet on the Western Front (thinking of the book here because I'm finally reading it) does that brilliantly in a certain scene involving a Frenchman and shellhole.Recommended from me.
Comparing Wayfaring Stranger to God save the King is a wee bit out there.
Although the point was to be immersed into the first person view of the 2 messengers, so the portrayal of the "Huns" makes sense from that point of view. A film that does portray the view from both sides well may be "Joyuex Noel".I too would recommend the movie. The one shot technique works well too immerse the viewer into the actions of the main characters.
I'd disagree, each and every one of the beastly Huns ( ) did everything in his power to hurt the protagonists - even when badly injured. For me that sadly goes beyond that bounds of "willing suspension of disbelief" in my book.