1917

Yes, the indians on the western front by 1917 were largely at Divisional or Army Supply units and would not have being close to regiment.... Irrespective, the film was ok, but I felt 'paths of glory' by kubrick is a far better product to show war at a more visceral level.

The trouble is the plebs watching this stuff really believe what they're seeing....
Yes, enjoyed PoG when I watched some years ago and largely agree (although of course much of it centres on what happened afterwards).

For continuity of depicting the changing WW1 Battlefields, I thought the 1980's series Anzacs did a very good job for its time....
 
Yes, enjoyed PoG when I watched some years ago and largely agree (although of course much of it centres on what happened afterwards).

For continuity of depicting the changing WW1 Battlefields, I thought the 1980's series Anzacs did a very good job for its time....
That was my general bone of contention with 1917....... Young people believe this sort of thing, that individuals can effect change, the heroes of the air and all that bollox.. In real war, its the collective bravery, both in the face of all the horror from the enemy and those in command on our side under pressure, desperate to win victories and show progress, whilst covering up the inevitable clausewitzian clangers along the way.

The film could perhaps have done with an overarching story of why a Battalion was out of contact and beyond the two lads, what other measures were underway simultaneously... I expect in a real world, the two brave lads after braving perils galore would have arrived at the neigbouring battalion and found the entire mission was pointless.....
 
Well, made the extra effort to Cardiff for the IMAX experience - looked nice, didn't connect with it at all. Zero feeling of peril for the guy, having seen a trailer once, knowing that scenes had yet to be shown. Minor 'oh' when the other guy was stabbed, more annoyed that a mechanised unit rocked up without him noticing. A number of not right historical/soldier stuff but I've given up on that sort of thing nowadays.

Looked nice though.

Starting checking the phone during the girl/baby scene - not that it was bad, I just didn't care.

Did I say it looked nice?

Six of us in the main IMAX screen in Cardiff. Mid afternoon, thought it'd be busier.
 
They went to the farmhouse to scrounge food. They had been commenting about lack of food all the way until that point
Agree but they were given a few “nice things” by some officer in the dug out as they got their orders and Schofield gave the French lass a load of scoff in the town . So why stop. Ah artistic license .
 
Agree but they were given a few “nice things” by some officer in the dug out as they got their orders and Schofield gave the French lass a load of scoff in the town . So why stop. Ah artistic license .
It would be worth clearing the building to make sure they didn't get shot in the back after they'd passed.
 
Now, I've only seen the trailers but it did strike me that it showed the CoC 1917 trying to avoid a catastrophe , a bit opposed to the callous indifference that is the popular vision, which we know to be incorrect.
If it gets the younger generation to look back and see their forefathers in a positive new light then its worth it. Mho is that bit by bit we're lifting the lid on WW1 and with it getting a sense of pride in great grandad and what he went through.
 
That was my general bone of contention with 1917....... Young people believe this sort of thing, that individuals can effect change, the heroes of the air and all that bollox.. In real war, its the collective bravery, both in the face of all the horror from the enemy and those in command on our side under pressure, desperate to win victories and show progress, whilst covering up the inevitable clausewitzian clangers along the way.

The film could perhaps have done with an overarching story of why a Battalion was out of contact and beyond the two lads, what other measures were underway simultaneously... I expect in a real world, the two brave lads after braving perils galore would have arrived at the neigbouring battalion and found the entire mission was pointless.....
Well, if we are being historically purist....

By 6 April, when the film begins, the Germans had already drawn back into the Hindenburg Line (although the film was correct to show Ecoust as still being on the German outpost line at this point). 18th and 62nd Divisions are correctly placed N/S relative to Ecoust and S&B would logically have had to go left (north) from the 18th Divisional area into 62nd Divisional area to reach Ecoust by the most direct route. But,18th and 62nd Divisions were by then actively following up, not still hunkered down in the trenches, as the Germans had abandoned the area to their front two weeks earlier on 20 March; only those units directly around Arras were still in contact. The situation portrayed in the film would more accurately have occurred around 23/34 March, just after the German pull-out.

I'd also agree that the overall plot is too random - if most of his Division was still stuck in the trenches, why was the 2nd Devons bounding across country (and from what jump off point?), presumably on the GOC's orders. Why were S&B not running into the Devon's Brigade echelon as they progressed. Also, why were random units from other formations crossing their path? Historically of course, 8th E Surreys, the Yorkshires and 2nd Devons, although all on the northern Somme front at this date, were in completely different divisions....

I think much could have been sorted with a more tightly scripted brief from Firth's character at the beginning. Not sure why it wasn't, as the writing team had clearly read up on Albericht....
 
Last edited:
Just seen the film . Good film , entertaining and the other folks watching , after eating a bucket of pop corn enjoyed it.
As posted before , bit ? to green.

Being an old git and liking military history .

On their way to the shortest way across no mans land . Passed through a section with blue and white TRFs . Signals? En mass on the front line? Might be the wrong and I have no idea what the trfs were in WW1.


Also did not see one parapet or periscope as they ran through the trenches until just before they went over the top.

They loaded their Lees before going over but never loaded again .

Walking past the dead horses, every time I have smelt a dead , rotting Mammal I was dry reaching. , near to vomiting.

Correct difference between the UK and German trenches. UK , mud , Wood, wicker. German , cement.

The death, I remember in basic 1980, your field dressing is for you, if you need to use three ? ( I have one for me , you have one for you ?) after three the wounded man is going to die. Too much blood lost. Very good with the makeup.

Final scene, nice to see some with the 1917 SMLE wire cutters on the end of their SMLEs.

End . So the field dressing station is 50 yards behind the front trench , in green grass , open field in front of the massed Bosh with artillery? Really?

Mind a good cinema trip .
One area 1917 did a lot of work on was evidently the uniforms and TO&E - Blake and Schofield wear the maroon flash of 8th East Surreys. The Royal Signals type flash is of their sister regiment in 55 Brigade, 7th Buffs, my Grandad's battalion. So entirely, nay painstakingly accurate...
 
Last edited:
I've not seen the film but waiting for the 1430 news on R5 was a review of it which was positive from the aspect of its non wokeness.
I probably won't see it but it sounds good.
 
Posted this before , very good IMO of a WW1 dit.

BBC radio 4 “Tommies”

look it up
Tenner on iTunes fir complete series

The Indian monument outside Longueval is worth seeing, on raised ground it lets you see the dips folds and line of advance into the village.
 
Well, if we are being historically purist....

By 6 April, when the film begins, the Germans had already drawn back into the Hindenburg Line (although the film was correct to show Ecoust as still being on the German outpost line at this point). 18th and 62nd Divisions are correctly placed N/S relative to Ecoust and S&B would logically have had to go left (north) from the 18th Divisional area into 62nd Divisional area to reach Ecoust by the most direct route. But,18th and 62nd Divisions were by then actively following up, not still hunkered down in the trenches, as the Germans had abandoned the area to their front two weeks earlier on 20 March; only those units directly around Arras were still in contact. The situation portrayed in the film would more accurately have occurred around 23/34 March, just after the German pull-out.

I'd also agree that the overall plot is too random - if most of his Division was still stuck in the trenches, why was the 2nd Devons bounding across country (and from what jump off point?), presumably on the GOC's orders. Why were S&B not running into the Devon's Brigade echelon as they progressed. Also, why were random units from other formations crossing their path? Historically of course, 8th E Surreys, the Yorkshires and 2nd Devons, although all on the northern Somme front at this date, were in completely different divisions....

I think much could have been sorted with a more tightly scripted brief from Firth's character at the beginning. Not sure why it wasn't, as the writing team had clearly read up on Albericht....
I wasn't really arguing accuracy. Its cinema, as much as Dunkirk was another tightly controlled narrative, about a few characters, which the modern cinema seems to like, to make its simplistic moral tales..... It lacked the group as band of brothers, or the complex storylines of paths of glory, or even the simple moral tale of AquietOTWF covering the germans and the futility.
 
I wasn't really arguing accuracy. Its cinema, as much as Dunkirk was another tightly controlled narrative, about a few characters, which the modern cinema seems to like, to make its simplistic moral tales..... It lacked the group as band of brothers, or the complex storylines of paths of glory, or even the simple moral tale of AquietOTWF covering the germans and the futility.
Noted - I think we'd both agree that whilst the cinematography, many of the historical details and the micro-narrative were there, it lacked something in the macro-space.

Scratching my head a bit, I think for me it was the impression that Schofield and Blake were adrift in a world as alien to them as it was to us. Something in my view also common to Dunkirk and Atonement.

In reality, the men would have very much felt themselves as part of a larger whole, and that sense was missing. In the trench sequences, there would have been wisecracks with men they knew, questions from units they didn't. Another example was the singing scene towards the end - more likely to have been a vocal situation, with the odd catcall and a bit of side-banter. Also under-represented was the strong influence of senior NCOs, who would certainly have intervened forcefully at several points in the story...

In short, the soldierly element of humour and shared purpose was somehow missing - contrast with the 1958 Dunkirk and, as you say, the original All Quiet....
 
Last edited:
Noted - I think we'd both agree that whilst the cinematography, many of the historical details and the micro-narrative were there, it lacked something in the macro-space.

Scratching my head a bit, I think for me it was the impression that Schofield and Blake were adrift in a world as alien to them as it was to us. Something in my view also common to Dunkirk and Atonement.

In reality, the men would have very much felt themselves as part of a larger whole, and that sense was missing. In the trench sequences, there would have been wisecracks with men they knew, questions from units they didn't. Another example was the singing scene towards the end - more likely to have been a vocal situation, with the odd catcall and a bit of side-banter. Also under-represented was the strong influence of senior NCOs, who would certainly have intervened forcefully at several points in the story...

In short, the soldierly element of humour and shared purpose was somehow missing - contrast with the 1958 Dunkirk and, as you say, the original All Quiet....
I think you make the point better than I ever could... Mendes grandfather, would probably have recognised things in the film, but would have not recognised the two lads and I suppose the intention of the director is to connect them, with the youth watching the film.
 
... and as mentioned above, where I think Mendes missed a trick; instead, the portrayal of Black and Asian troops has the sense of being random..

snip - @old-bloke "...So the field dressing station is 50 yards behind the front trench , in green grass , open field in front of the massed Bosh with artillery? Really?...".

I think this was a basic editing error in what was otherwise superb continuity. At the start of the sequence we do see Schofield walking out of the newly cut trench into the dressing station, but later in the sequence, Blake's brother comes over the hill with the latest consignment of wounded, implying that the attack took place over the hill well forward of the DS.

i went to see this last night and thought the distances involved were probably given some artistic licence in order to let the continuous shot way of filming work.

same issue with the dressing station as at the beginning where they are sitting in the rear getting fed and doing laundry then 100m later they're in the front line. this is ridiculous but if you want to shoot it in a single shot, so the film is almost in real time* then you cant have them spending 2 hours traipsing up a communications trench.

all in all i enjoyed it. there wasnt too much "oh isnt this all just awful and futile" etc. and overall it looked right. what i also enjoyed about the film was that it carried you through different landscapes, something which was only really possible if you set it in one or two specific times/events during the war where there is a bit of movement. i know enough about WW1 to get irked by the same stuff others had been (just have an Indian unit somewhere FFS) but to most people this stuff wont matter and i tried to let it go.

all in all i enjoyed it but didnt find myself feeling connected with the two guys, which looking at it now seems a bit obvious as we meet them and they get bounced into action immediately with little time throughout to get to know/care about them



*with regards to time there were some points when i think more time was meant to have passed than was shown on screen. the obvious ones are explicit (i.e. when he was knocked out), but there are others where i think more time is meant to have passed than is shown such as when he's sat with his dead mate, the various bits when walking up trenches which all look the same and seem to blur into a mass of men cramped in a small space and the clearest one to me was on the truck. in real time they'd have been about 200m from the farmhouse whereas when he gets out he is in another landscape.
 
Last edited:

Latest Threads

Top