- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
WW-Inspired Question
Posted on 6/2/17 at 10:53 am
Posted on 6/2/17 at 10:53 am
Why so few WWI movies? Filmmakers love visceral, compelling stories, why so little love for The Great War?
You had the invention of the tank, weaponized aircraft, chemical weapons, trench warfare, a scenario where one side didn't defeat the other so much as both agreed to lay down arms mutually...
Compelling stuff. This needs to be a thing.
You had the invention of the tank, weaponized aircraft, chemical weapons, trench warfare, a scenario where one side didn't defeat the other so much as both agreed to lay down arms mutually...
Compelling stuff. This needs to be a thing.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 10:59 am to VoxDawg
They try to focus on the romantic part of war..
The red baron
Seargent York
The poor aussies in Gallipoli
Etc.
But most of the war wasn't very pretty. Lots of mud.
The red baron
Seargent York
The poor aussies in Gallipoli
Etc.
But most of the war wasn't very pretty. Lots of mud.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 11:13 am to VoxDawg
Downton Abbey had a season that dealt with the homefront and touched on the desperation of the trenches.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 11:16 am to VoxDawg
WW1 is difficult to do a movie about for a number of reasons.
Aside from the first 4-5 months, the entire struggle was fought in the trenches. Difficult to make that compelling.
Due to the type of warfare, all of the encounters kind of mesh together, there are very few battles that have unique characteristics.
The nature of the contest as a whole is difficult as well. There is no defined good guy/bad guy really. The war started due to a complicated string of alliances.
Aside from the first 4-5 months, the entire struggle was fought in the trenches. Difficult to make that compelling.
Due to the type of warfare, all of the encounters kind of mesh together, there are very few battles that have unique characteristics.
The nature of the contest as a whole is difficult as well. There is no defined good guy/bad guy really. The war started due to a complicated string of alliances.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 11:17 am to VoxDawg
They'll never do it, but a Steve Trevor prequel would be awesome. DC has some amazing WWI characters with Enemy Ace and Balloon Buster. But I'm guessing they're done with WWI.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 12:03 pm to VoxDawg
quote:like a magnet for sensationalism.
trench warfare
Posted on 6/2/17 at 12:19 pm to airfernando
WW1 has a lot of issues, when it comes to making a movie about it.
Like has been posted before- trench warfare really has no glamour or excitement to it. People living in a muddy ditch, no advancing, worried about snipers (the "3 men on a match" issue), with the occasional gas attacks and shelling... it's very dehumanizing.
Plus, nobody "wins", they just agree to quit fighting and sign the armistice. I think I read somewhere that there was a net gain of maybe 1 mile of territory gained, if that. Nothing was achieved, other then a lot of death.
So right there, you get the lack of dramatic climax, most stories are simply a matter of endurance if you survive. No daring raids etc.
Add to that, the politics didn't work, and you end up with the major nations going back to war within a couple of decades.
The WW1 aerial battles are the stuff of romantic adventure, but outside that area, the "action" would just be very somber and glum, and without much moral point to the tale.
Like has been posted before- trench warfare really has no glamour or excitement to it. People living in a muddy ditch, no advancing, worried about snipers (the "3 men on a match" issue), with the occasional gas attacks and shelling... it's very dehumanizing.
Plus, nobody "wins", they just agree to quit fighting and sign the armistice. I think I read somewhere that there was a net gain of maybe 1 mile of territory gained, if that. Nothing was achieved, other then a lot of death.
So right there, you get the lack of dramatic climax, most stories are simply a matter of endurance if you survive. No daring raids etc.
Add to that, the politics didn't work, and you end up with the major nations going back to war within a couple of decades.
The WW1 aerial battles are the stuff of romantic adventure, but outside that area, the "action" would just be very somber and glum, and without much moral point to the tale.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 1:35 pm to VoxDawg
Probably because the Nazis are a compelling villain whereas in WW2 the entire war is just a depressing story that has no real resolution at the end of it.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 1:37 pm to VoxDawg
Just looking at a movie involving boring trench warfare type of fighting with biochemical weapons mixed in, that if the participants or combatants I should say weren't wearing gas masks made for god awful ghastly death scenes just didn't make for thrilling action imo. Throw in the always bad gloomy weather conditions it seemed like and other crazy shite going on in those days, and that should give you an ideal as to why WWI wasn't much of an era in terms of making motion picture success happen.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 1:39 pm to Ross
And you're right, the Nazi's were just better villains that everybody loved to hate.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 2:09 pm to VoxDawg
They already have, it's called Lawrence of Arabia
Posted on 6/2/17 at 2:19 pm to VoxDawg
already touched on, but i think the main thing is there are no bad guys in WWI. just alliances gone wrong.
WWII has a clear villain that 99% of the world can look at today and call them the bad guys.
WWII has a clear villain that 99% of the world can look at today and call them the bad guys.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 2:20 pm to sbr2
I didn't say there weren't any. I wonder why there aren't more.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 2:39 pm to 3nOut
quote:
already touched on, but i think the main thing is there are no bad guys in WWI. just alliances gone wrong.
This little gem is getting tiresome. No... the German Army is not the same army that mechanized human extinction to the level it rose to during WW2- but the German Army's march of death through Belgium, decimating entire villages of men, women, and children, was a shocking crime even in times of War. They were far from innocent and Ludendorff was already sowing the seeds of fascism and extinction.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 2:53 pm to BigAppleTiger
quote:
This little gem is getting tiresome. No... the German Army is not the same army that mechanized human extinction to the level it rose to during WW2- but the German Army's march of death through Belgium, decimating entire villages of men, women, and children, was a shocking crime even in times of War. They were far from innocent and Ludendorff was already sowing the seeds of fascism and extinction.
i think that's fair, but i'd say at the time (just my opinion) but that was the savagery of the time. Germany lost WW1 and was punished for playing it way too rough, which lead to WWII.
maybe saying "there's no bad guy in WW1" could be replaced with "there was no Pearl Harbor, Saddam invading Kuwait, 9/11 lynch pin that clearly set one side of being in the wrong from the beginning*."
*outside of the assassination of Ferdinand.
This post was edited on 6/2/17 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 6/2/17 at 4:00 pm to VoxDawg
Our World War is pretty good. Seen that?
Posted on 6/2/17 at 7:46 pm to VoxDawg
World War One is the most depressing single event in world history. Not much of a subject.
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:02 pm to VoxDawg
To show how under served WWI is in Hollywood, Wonder Woman became the top grossing WWI film of all time within a few days:
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News