'Passchendaele", the movie.
 

Happened to watch this last night on one of the movie channels. I thought it was an extremely well done film, some of the best war action scenes I've seen. Since my Dad was in WWI, and my Uncle was killed in it, it had particular interest. The family story was that my Aunt insisted on opening the casket and I overheard my Dad telling someone there was a few body fragments and mostly mud. My Aunt later married a German fellow who was my mentor in much of my early life....a man who could fix anything! Few good shots of C96's and Lugers. A Canadian historical action, so lots of .303 British. Bought one of those mail order for about $25 in the '50's. Liked it so much, I bought a copy on eBay! Anyone else seen it? Bill

Hi Bill, There was an extended post about the making of this film on the "other" forum (see link). I too, have seen this movie and, your right, it's very well done. Regards, Norm

http://luger.gunboards.com/showthrea...=passchendaele

Bill,

I watched the movie on youtube.
I know it is not the same, but I was warned about the boring "romantic" scenes.
However the opening sequence and the muddy trench combats at the end are really impressive.
Personally, I was delighted to see a German using the C96 (ok, it's a Bolo version, but it was nice anyway).

Douglas

The helmets in the second photo are M1935 pattern helmets, not WW1 M1916 or M1918s.

This is a GLARING error!!

Great movie.
Bob

If we scratched all the movies about the American west that have glaring historical errors (not to mention jet contrails) we'd have little to watch of that genre.

James

the 'other'........
 

That was quite a thread...over there. Don't know much about Canadian film makers, but I'd guess it's becoming harder and harder to get authentic WWI equipment, particularly enough for a full scale battle. I think the last WWI film I saw was Flyboys and seems computer graphics are replacing a lot. As far as the 'Love' aspect......what soldier isn't thinking about someone back home? I'm not quick enough to catch the nuances of some scenes...............all I saw was a 'Broomy'! Glad though I missed the 'original', I've often thought they should have put the Generals in the trenches to fight it out, the tactics sucked!

Please.
There is a big difference between romanticizing the American West where everybody was a "rugged Individual" and getting an integral part of a nation's uniform wrong. By this definition you'd be ok watching a recreation of the storming of the Normandy beaches by troops wearing the modern "Fritz" helmet, (let's throw in M4 carbines, while we are at it).

This was an easy thing to get right since replica WW1 German helmets are available. This was just sloppy story telling and would put me off the entire film as a consequence.

You guys are kidding, right.................:thumbup:

Harry

I'm not....movies that can't get simple details right are not worth me watching them more than the first time. And I'm not talking about aircraft contrails, which only happen in low budget schlok films made in the 50-60s. A modern western made by reputable people will not have these errors.
My hobbies are firearms, uniforms and history. Doing right by them should be important to filmmakers who really care about the moment and the people they are depicting.
This is why big budget films spend millions on research and advisers to get it right. They know there are millions of gun and history enthusiasts out there who will laugh their heads off at serious gaffs and dismiss the film as amateur's work. To a German uniform enthusiast, those M1935 helmets used in a WW1 movie may just as well be pink sunbonnets. Would the gun guys be ok with M16s in the hands of the WW1 German troops? Filmakers should either respect the men and the moment they are depicting or not make the film at all.

I guess I'm with alanint on this issue of historical accuracy. It bothers me to see such errors too. At least in some films the production crew will hire someone who is an expert just to ensure they maintain accuracy in uniforms and weapons, etc. The inaccuracies probably escape notice of the vast majority of people who view the film; however, those of us who pick up on details can not help noticing them. Yes, I think it is a distraction too.

I wasn't, but I regret making the comment.

James

Accuracy..........
 

I think, I too, have to agree. Thinking back over many movies, I get upset with certain things....those aspects that I'm familiar with. Having spent most of my life in the Army, I go berserk at seeing 'brass' on a uniform reversed, or upside down. Generals, or Privates, with long hair. Or, Winchesters with forestock removed to look like Henry's. Then, there are 'silencers' that make guns go 'Poof'. Uzi's with 3000 round clips. So, having said that, name a (war) movie that's accurate!

"Saving Private Ryan" - That one was fairly accurate, wasn't it?

Despite it's flaws, this is an important movie, particularly so for Canadians. Canada lost over 60,000 men (out of a population at the time, of about 8 million), most of them in Flanders. I don't think our cousins north of the border will be too troubled by a few costume inaccuracies. Regards, Norm

Important movie.....
 

I guess what caught my intention was the name of the film..........I'd never heard of it! I was flipping around looking for a movie..in lieu of some reality show like 'minute to win it', my God we've turned into a nation of morons. The opening scenes sure grabbed my attention. Over the years, I had occasion to work with some of the Canadian military and found them to be outstanding soldiers. I don' know if it was true, or where it may have been, but my Dad, long ago, laughingly said, On Sunday, the Germans and Americans would stop shooting and play cards.

These two pictures say it all ....

I just took a few of my grandsons to see "Captain America", it takes place during WWII, if a few inaccuracies bother you, save your money, otherwise it's a fun movie.

Harry

Saving Private Ryan was pretty good. Detail nuts like me would point out Korean War era back sights on the Garands, versus WW2 "Lock Bar" sights.
Another gaff which would have been easely fixed was the landing craft coming into the beach. Look at the vast horizon shown behind the landing craft as they churn toward Omaha. There is a vast horizon full of.....of....NOTHING!!!! Did these small landing come all the way from England on their own? How did they get there?
A vast armada of ships in the background is not shown until Captain Miller is up on the bluff getting the mission from Dale Die.

Hmmm, "Captain America" is a fantasy...... Its OK to have a few inaccuracies in a movie like this.

I'm not trying to knock all movies...just the ones who ask to be taken seriously then don't do their homework.

You want a well done movie not trying to take itself seriously? Kelly's Heroes, although a comedy, really worked at getting all the GI equipment right, (I even overlook the T34s dressed up as Mk 6 Tigers and the FNDs instead of BARs)

Truth is that 2% of movie goers notice or even care what kind of helmet those guys are wearing.
Artistic lisence withstanding.

Here is a good site about guns in movies:

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Main_Page

Those guys do a good job identifying and pointing anacronisms.

I'm with Alan here. I can't understand producers spending millions with some big breast actres for a couple of romantic scenes instead of having a decent reasearching team to work with militaria and guns. Of course, I'm not talking about movies made until the 70s... that was another story.

It really bothers me.

Douglas.

BTW alanint, his name is Dale Dye, not Dale Die. MR

I'm just mortified by the typo!

For those into WWII historical accuracy:
DO NOT WATCH INGLORIOUS BASTERDS

If you like to stretch the boundaries of sensibility (and don't mind a little political incorrectness):
WATCH INGLORIOUS BASTERDS

Jack

Again, this is not a movie that is asking to be taken seriously. Hell, they can't even spell "Bastards".....

Oh crap, you mean Hitler wasn't killed..........:eek:

Harry

Mr. McQueen,
I guess irony is lost on you. To err is human, pal. Whether you're making a film or pontificating on a minor technical mistake.
MR

It's matter of personal preference. I'm perfectly willing to trade period correctness for six more explosions! But if you want total immersion... you just can't get there with the wrong helmet.

Jack

The only irony I see here is the ludicrous comparison between a minor typo and a major error in wardrobe by highly paid professional filmmakers who are asking you to take their production seriously, (and asking you to PAY to see it!).
Was that your point?
And I don't "pontificate" Throughout my statement I made certain to always state that these errors were a problem for me, not necesarily for anybody else. I'm not looking to win anybody over. What is more, many others on the board agree with me. Feel free to watch all the low budget crap you want.

I will. I used to bitch about every technical mistake and all movies have 'em. Movies are entertainment, no more, no less. Lighten up, comrade.

Really gentlemen you should back-off a bit. Alanint is certainly justified in his criticism of the film's technical accuracy but movies are movies and most of the actors are air-heads and the producers businessmen. Nevertheless for those among us who are avid collectors errors in historical accuracy, that most would never recognize, do tend to stick in the craw.

In "Passchendaele" I found the story line much more bothersome than the technical detail. As I recall the 1970s remake of "All Quiet on the Western Front" had the Germans armed with Enfield 303s or some such thing but the producers did stick close to Remarque's intent. Look at most history-based modern movies and you realize that the effort is not to please the historian but the paying masses.

If you want to know about Passchendaele read Jack Sheldon's work of that title.

I will. I used to bitch about every technical mistake and all movies have 'em. Movies are entertainment, no more, no less. Lighten up, comrade.
__________________
Tempus edax rerum


I'm glad you are so enlightened, oh zen master. I enjoy movies as much as anybody. Its only the major errors which makes them not worth a second look FOR ME. In five years of lurking with only 52 posts, is this really what you place importance on?

I have still to see a movie that is 100% accurate. I used to get upset about the wrong model of cars, wrong guns, wrong type of buildings etc. but I don't care anymore. I just look at movies as entertainment, and if it doesn't entertain me I'll just switch to another channel.

What upsets me though is that History Channel seems to care even less than the film producers. It doesn't matter which battle they're talking about, they will still recycle the same dramatic WWII footage over and over again, regardless of time and location. I'm just waiting to see Spitfires and Messersmitts dogfight over a pacific island. :rolleyes:

Germans
 

Oh... I guess you thought it was over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8lT1o0sDwI

Jack :biggulp:

I have to snicker whenever I see *anyone* in a WW II movie pull out a ball point pen and jot down a note... :D

(Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed "Where Eagles Dare") ;)

Reminds me of Howard Cunningham with his digital watch throughout "Happy Days"

I am a huge fan of "Were Eagles Dare". The editing is superb. They are able to tell a very complex story without you ever asking about continuity or missing connections in the story's logic.
I have visited the castle were it was filmed. Interestingly, the Castle's history is one of Birding and Falconry, so it really is a "Schloss Adler".
Also of interest is a bridge not far from the castle where Otto Skorzeny descended from the mountains and surrendered himself to US forces shortly after the end of hostilities. The courtyard where the helicopter landed is now a Beer Garden and the room who's door they beat down to get to the cablecar is now a gift shop.

That's nothing... I have seen a movie where German soldiers where walking around with MP40's without magazines troughout the movie. Needless to say, there were no battle scenes in that movie. In another masterpiece, Russian soldiers were using Swedish K's, complete with blank adapters. Not to mention that they were driving Swedish Raptgb 915 vehicles with Russian stars painted on them. I guess the director found it cheaper to buy Swedish surplus, rather than authentic equipment.

In other words: My taste is not limited to Academy Award winning movies. Whatever looks good after a sixpack will do. :p

Mr Bullitt,
I'm a lurker? Oh, the shame! I'll have to run to the RX and purchase some hemlock. How could I possibly ever post here again?
Were Eagles Dare?? Nuff said.
Seriously, the cheapest war movie ever has to be "Battle of the Last Panzer", 1969 Spanish production. The tank is definitely not WW11 issue, and CETMEs are used along with some of the worst acting ever filmed. Watch it and laugh.
Zaijian,
MR

PM:
Pfftttttttt.........
Ya know, (although you probably don't) Abraham Lincoln once said, " It is better to remain silient and be thought the fool, then to speak up and leave no doubt"
Keep speaking, genius.
__________________
Tempus edax rerum



:rolleyes: Between this and your PM to me, I think you've proved to the entire board what a child you are....I know I can expect a response. The insecure always have to have the last word, even if its a rasberry PM....