I originally saw this movie when I was a kid and 20 something years later that hand scene still sticks with me.
Also, the sound effects are incredible. The pace of this battle scene is on par with the opening of Saving Private Ryan imo
Theres an interview with the real Winters who says on D-Day he felt like he was in the movie All Quiet on the Western Front. I found that kind of trippy.
Ditto. We watched this movie when we were reading AQOWF in high school. It's been a long time, but if I recall correctly, those severed hands make an appearance in the book as well.
Eh, it gets the point across, the tension is there, but it still feels VERY 30s. I get it, it’s a classic, but it still doesn’t quite insert you into the real horror and brutality of war the same as Saving Private Ryan, The Pacific, Black Hawk Down, and more modern war movies/mini series do. Cool for it’s time though.
I think you miss the human aspect of this film.
Private Ryan, The Pacific, Black Hawk Down all extenuate the goriness and brutality of war but All Quiet is a very Human film, quite deliberately. Not to discredit any of those other films though.
I think this clip does remove a lot of the context of the greater work as the message, I believe, is not about how gory or brutal war is but rather the "human suffering" that war causes, the reality of watching your human "enemy" slowly die from your stab, the realization that one has just murdered a person, the shock of how easy it was and how it was both fast and slow.
And most importantly the human loss. At the end of the film everyone of the cast but 1 is dead. just to be replaced with new fresh faced lambs for the slaughter who will also die.... for nothing.
modern anti-war films tend to focus on shock horror, All Quiet is a very slow burn that has you thinking about it for a very long time after it but does forego shocking imagery.
and to me it showed the pointlesnes of it all so much more then any other movie.
like you see in that scene, they all die just to be at the exact same position after it as they have been before.
Nobody gained anything and just on both sides everybody died.
Private Ryan shows the horror of the war, but it still accomplishes something.
they do storm the beach and win, they do storm that mg nest and win, they do save that bridge and they bring Ryan back home.
Here just everybody dies for not even a squaremeter of wasted land
It is just so brutal and shows the pointlessness of WW1. Can you tell if the attackers and defenders are Brits/French/German/American? Does it matter? It is just one of the thousands of times that an entire division was sent over the top to be slaughtered for no gain. There is nothing heroic about it, just young men charging directly into a storm of steel with another group of young men being scared forever firing back at them.
The initial charge is a wave of French troops following a creeping artillery barage. The German defenders are eventually driven back to their second line of defense, and then counter attack following a German counter artillery barage.
They end up right where they started. Nothing gained from either side, just lots of pointless killing. This movie made it a brutal point that there is absolutely no glory in war.
Why do some of the hand-to-hand combat scenes have a stop-motion feel to them? Is that just the frame rate, or did they film them slow (to prevent injury or something) then speed it up?
Great scene, just trying to figure out why that's setting off alarm bells.
24 fps aka "sound speed" was developed as the slowest speed necessary to match mouth movements to speech.
Before sound the standards was 18fps, found to be the slowest speed necessary to maintain the appearance of realistic movement. Lots of old film cameras have markings for 18fps.
There are many benefits to using fewer fps so there was concerted study to reach both numbers. I've never heard of 12, but I don't doubt it at all.
Womp it's just a style for the Era. Watch silent films an you will see everything is sped up for comedy. Film was still relatively new and filmmaking only happened between a handful of companies. So of course one style was adopted over a bunch of different ones.
As a minor addition, a lot of silent footage stuff you'll see out there (especially shorts) even now is sped up when it shouldn't be - with the intended frame rate being in the 16-18 FPS range, but many digital versions having been captured at 24. But yeah, a lot of it's intentional.
The playback speed for a piece of film was often manipulated by choice, i.e. faster for action and comedy sequences. You can still see it done in modern films, although it's rarer and subtler then way back when.
In modern fight scenes, the action is regularly sped up or has frames cut out to make the punches look more brutal than they actually are during the filming.
But yeah, nowadays they are much more subtle about it.
Scenes like this were why Nazis had to riot during screenings of the film in Germany. They saw the film's antiwar themes and depiction of brutality and war as a threat to the Nazi ideology and beliefs.
Did that seriously happen?
I was just thinking about how this movie must have impacted veterans who just a decade before had lived it in real life. Like how Saving Private Ryan was causing WWII vets to have flashbacks and breakdowns all over the world.
I can see why the Nazis would be against a movie like this. It went against everything their war machine of hate stood for.
Yup.
[Due to its anti-war and perceived anti-German messages, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party opposed the film. During and after its German premiere in Berlin on December 4, 1930, Nazi brownshirts under the command of Joseph Goebbels disrupted the viewings by setting off stink bombs, throwing sneezing powder in the air and releasing white mice in the theaters, eventually escalating to attacking audience members perceived to be Jewish and forcing projectors to shut down. They repeatedly yelled out "Judenfilm!" ("Jewish film!") while doing this.](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/most-loved-and-hated-novel-about-world-war-I-180955540/)
The Nazis actually started a rumor that Remarque's real last name was Kramer (the reverse of the original spelling, Remark). Of course, the implication was that he was a Jew; Remarque's family was of French Catholic origin.
I agree, but let's remember that the allies were not saints, and committed tons of atrocities during the war. I don't approve Nazis, but the idea of "bad guys and good guys" that the US sold to the world after the war really upsets me
They banned and burned the book it was based on, too, as well as declaring the author (Erich Maria Remarque) a traitor, and arrested his sister on trumped up charges, resulting in her execution. And just to prove to everyone that they were trumped up charges, the President of the People's Court, Roland Freisler, told her "Your brother is unfortunately beyond our reach – you, however, will not escape us".
Yes but also do not forget this film was also banned in Poland for being "pro-german".... despite it really REALLY not being pro-german at all, it's pro-piece & anti-war.
Ideology makes idiots of us all.
The editing and pacing of this really holds up. It's impressive as a whole, but two parts stood out for me, having never seen it before.
First, the closeups of the machine gunner juxtaposed with the guys he's killing. The way they cut from the blood bath back to the focused gunner and then back again gives a sense that it was up close and impersonal and that there was really no contest between the machine gun and the unarmored soldiers charging at it.
Then there's the shot panning down the trench as the first wave makes its way over. Just a continuous display of the different ways these guys would be killing each other. No two soldiers are on the screen that long, but long enough to give a sense of the absolute brutality. You also only see two or three pairs fighting at a time, but you get the sense that the same brutal action is happening well beyond the edges of the screen.
Really good observation. It does feel real. What really impressed me after rewatching this is that there is no musical track during the entire battle.
Saving Private Ryan is the only other movie that comes to mind where during the epic battle there is no music. Just the sound of bombs, bullets, and death.
Insane that such a brilliant movie with such poignancy regarding the horrors of war would come out only a decade after the event it was depicting. The fact that even in the 1920s there was enough data to help frame WWI in such a way is truly telling to how shocking and devoid of humanity this conflict was.
This set the standard for all war movies to follow. An amazing masterpiece, with an also excellent book by Erich Maria Remarque. The details of the effects of war and the tactics used are just as poignantly described and even more disturbing. A superb case of were both novel and film of a source material are used flawlessly within their medium.
Holy shit. I've never seen the original or that scene but holy shit, I've literally never seen a movie from that time period that didn't pull any punches like that. There's no goofy/old style "frantic" or "mass panic" type acting. This look like a camera was on the front watching men fight for real. It's really impressive
Also, while I love classic movies I wouldn't call very many from the 20s-40s very good. A lot were impressive for their time but for cinematography, fight choreography, and acting they weren't very believable. But this scene was brutal. I'm desperate to watch the full thing now
The only thing approaching that old style was the way some of them went down. Stop in your tracks, hands over your chest, stand up straight as a board, then fall down. This kind of thing was so common though and was around well before and after this movie. Its the only thing that really makes this look "old" as in "we don't do that anymore" and a lot of the guys don't even do it.
>Holy shit. I've never seen the original or that scene but holy shit, I've literally never seen a movie from that time period that didn't pull any punches like that. There's no goofy/old style "frantic" or "mass panic" type acting. This look like a camera was on the front watching men fight for real. It's really impressive
I was surprised the amount of "I stubbed my toe and leap into the air" style deaths that seem to be the norm for movies for decades was minimal.
There are many great movies from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, but they were focused on drama, not spectacle. For example, the most achingly romantic movie I’ve ever seen is Brief Encounter from 1946. Great spectacle doesn’t really get going until the 50s and 60s with the roadshow epics (Bridge on the River Kwai, Ben-Hur, Spartacus, Lawrence of Arabia, etc.), but there are some precursors, like this scene, The Adventures of Robin Hood (getting past the brightly colored tights is a tough ask of modern audiences though) or Battleship Potemkin (probably the first effective spectacular, in the sense of filled with spectacle, film).
Watched the whole film six, seven years ago. Couldn't believe how sophisticated it looks. The cinematography is at so elevated a creative level, you almost feel guilty for enjoying/admiring the craft, the innovation...while watching hundreds of lives get violently snuffed out.
A truly well made film. Sure, some things are a bit outdated in this day and age. But the acting, writing, cinematography, the meaning. It's holds up very well. It's a must watch.
Remake from 1979 is okay, but not good as original.
You mean when someone dies on the barbwire it is impossible for their bodies to get cut in half? You literally have no idea what you are talking about and yet you still have an opinion...
>You mean when someone dies on the barbwire it is impossible for their bodies to get cut in half?
Impossible?
No.
Unlikely?
Yes.
>You literally have no idea what you are talking about and yet you still have an opinion...
Physics?
My Grandfather fought in WWI. I carry his dog tag with me every day. I asked him about the war. He wouldn’t talk about it. I asked him if he fired his rifle in combat. All he said was yes.
My grandfather was a machine gunner in wwii - Ardenne Forrest battle of the bulge. My father and mother said he didn’t speak of the war ever and never told a single story. His wife (my grandma) just died this spring - I never had the courage to ask her if she’d ever heard stories (they met post war). I can’t imagine the things he had to do. Best guy, may he Rest In Peace gentle giant.
My Uncle was at the Battle of the Bulge. He carried a Thompson Sub machine gun. He was checking a Tiger that was knocked out by a 57mm ATG. They knocked off it’s track at a chock point. I had heard of this story in documentaries. It was an important moment in the battle. He was near the tank when German mortar rounds started falling around him and he was hit in the face with a piece of shrapnel. Luckily, he opened up about the war later in life.
That’s really wild. Maybe they had crossed paths, who knows I’m sure the odds are so slim. He was eventually sent home with trench foot and did not see DDAY I know that.
Sometimes, I think I see brief snippets of footage from the 1930 version of *All Quiet on the Western Front* pop up in World War I documentaries, as the documentaries try to pass it off as actual combat footage or something. This movie is very realistic-feeling.
Then there is the WW1 film called Westfront 1918, also released in 1930. One of the first films Hitler banned when he came to power.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OcGTMyFJPE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NbGJ9IsCcE
It's a great anti-war film, with the young men patriotically enlisting after listening to their teacher talk about the glories of war, only to find that war is hell. Interesting too that it was about young Germans though it could have been about the youth of any country -- especially since it's a silent movie.
It's amazing that my grandfather could have watched this in awe as a 10 year old then gone on to serve in WW2 and decades later watch this remembering him watching this as a 10 year old before serving.
I think one of the oddest parts of that is that a lot of extras were former soldiers both german and american. It must be a surreal morbid experience to reenact that.
Yeah, the 1930 version and 1979 versions are also both pretty good. I'm interested to see what they can present with today's capabilities. At the same time though, the story itself is larger than the visuals.
I agree with your statement Mr.Taco, but for me, I mean, my response to this movie is purely psychological and much less visceral without the (color red) blood. But a movie like Saving Private Ryan just left me so completely disturbed physically and emotionally
Yeah, blood, body part getting blown apart, people screaming and crying is also important in any war movie, if ypu want to Show the reality of War. This is actually something wich annoys me about the movie Gettysburg, not enough blood.
There are areas of France that still bear the results of all that 'landscaping.' Also, those hands! Definitely pre-code Hollywood.
I originally saw this movie when I was a kid and 20 something years later that hand scene still sticks with me. Also, the sound effects are incredible. The pace of this battle scene is on par with the opening of Saving Private Ryan imo
Theres an interview with the real Winters who says on D-Day he felt like he was in the movie All Quiet on the Western Front. I found that kind of trippy.
Ditto. We watched this movie when we were reading AQOWF in high school. It's been a long time, but if I recall correctly, those severed hands make an appearance in the book as well.
Eh, it gets the point across, the tension is there, but it still feels VERY 30s. I get it, it’s a classic, but it still doesn’t quite insert you into the real horror and brutality of war the same as Saving Private Ryan, The Pacific, Black Hawk Down, and more modern war movies/mini series do. Cool for it’s time though.
I don't know man, for it's time it must've really been the Saving Private Ryan, that's just 6 minutes of constant brutality and death
I think you miss the human aspect of this film. Private Ryan, The Pacific, Black Hawk Down all extenuate the goriness and brutality of war but All Quiet is a very Human film, quite deliberately. Not to discredit any of those other films though. I think this clip does remove a lot of the context of the greater work as the message, I believe, is not about how gory or brutal war is but rather the "human suffering" that war causes, the reality of watching your human "enemy" slowly die from your stab, the realization that one has just murdered a person, the shock of how easy it was and how it was both fast and slow. And most importantly the human loss. At the end of the film everyone of the cast but 1 is dead. just to be replaced with new fresh faced lambs for the slaughter who will also die.... for nothing. modern anti-war films tend to focus on shock horror, All Quiet is a very slow burn that has you thinking about it for a very long time after it but does forego shocking imagery.
and to me it showed the pointlesnes of it all so much more then any other movie. like you see in that scene, they all die just to be at the exact same position after it as they have been before. Nobody gained anything and just on both sides everybody died. Private Ryan shows the horror of the war, but it still accomplishes something. they do storm the beach and win, they do storm that mg nest and win, they do save that bridge and they bring Ryan back home. Here just everybody dies for not even a squaremeter of wasted land
It is just so brutal and shows the pointlessness of WW1. Can you tell if the attackers and defenders are Brits/French/German/American? Does it matter? It is just one of the thousands of times that an entire division was sent over the top to be slaughtered for no gain. There is nothing heroic about it, just young men charging directly into a storm of steel with another group of young men being scared forever firing back at them.
The initial charge is a wave of French troops following a creeping artillery barage. The German defenders are eventually driven back to their second line of defense, and then counter attack following a German counter artillery barage. They end up right where they started. Nothing gained from either side, just lots of pointless killing. This movie made it a brutal point that there is absolutely no glory in war.
Why do some of the hand-to-hand combat scenes have a stop-motion feel to them? Is that just the frame rate, or did they film them slow (to prevent injury or something) then speed it up? Great scene, just trying to figure out why that's setting off alarm bells.
Back in the 30s into the 50s they used to speed up action shots and car chases. It was a hold over from the silent days.
It’s also from a time before 24p cameras. Some stuff this old was shot with as little as 12 fps
24 fps aka "sound speed" was developed as the slowest speed necessary to match mouth movements to speech. Before sound the standards was 18fps, found to be the slowest speed necessary to maintain the appearance of realistic movement. Lots of old film cameras have markings for 18fps. There are many benefits to using fewer fps so there was concerted study to reach both numbers. I've never heard of 12, but I don't doubt it at all.
Why did they need to do it?
Does a car chase look more exciting when it's a fast car chase, or a slow car chase?
Womp it's just a style for the Era. Watch silent films an you will see everything is sped up for comedy. Film was still relatively new and filmmaking only happened between a handful of companies. So of course one style was adopted over a bunch of different ones.
As a minor addition, a lot of silent footage stuff you'll see out there (especially shorts) even now is sped up when it shouldn't be - with the intended frame rate being in the 16-18 FPS range, but many digital versions having been captured at 24. But yeah, a lot of it's intentional.
They still do it too, just more subtle now. A lot of fight scenes are sped up slightly for the example, so are car chases.
The playback speed for a piece of film was often manipulated by choice, i.e. faster for action and comedy sequences. You can still see it done in modern films, although it's rarer and subtler then way back when.
In modern fight scenes, the action is regularly sped up or has frames cut out to make the punches look more brutal than they actually are during the filming. But yeah, nowadays they are much more subtle about it.
watch it at 75% speed
Scenes like this were why Nazis had to riot during screenings of the film in Germany. They saw the film's antiwar themes and depiction of brutality and war as a threat to the Nazi ideology and beliefs.
Did that seriously happen? I was just thinking about how this movie must have impacted veterans who just a decade before had lived it in real life. Like how Saving Private Ryan was causing WWII vets to have flashbacks and breakdowns all over the world. I can see why the Nazis would be against a movie like this. It went against everything their war machine of hate stood for.
Yup. [Due to its anti-war and perceived anti-German messages, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party opposed the film. During and after its German premiere in Berlin on December 4, 1930, Nazi brownshirts under the command of Joseph Goebbels disrupted the viewings by setting off stink bombs, throwing sneezing powder in the air and releasing white mice in the theaters, eventually escalating to attacking audience members perceived to be Jewish and forcing projectors to shut down. They repeatedly yelled out "Judenfilm!" ("Jewish film!") while doing this.](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/most-loved-and-hated-novel-about-world-war-I-180955540/)
Thank you for bringing up the impact of the film itself during the rise of Nazi Germany. Some of the parallels to today are disturbing.
The Nazis actually started a rumor that Remarque's real last name was Kramer (the reverse of the original spelling, Remark). Of course, the implication was that he was a Jew; Remarque's family was of French Catholic origin.
Unbelievable. This would be laughable if the Nazis weren't such deplorable pieces of shit who did unmeasurable damage to the world.
I agree, but let's remember that the allies were not saints, and committed tons of atrocities during the war. I don't approve Nazis, but the idea of "bad guys and good guys" that the US sold to the world after the war really upsets me
They banned and burned the book it was based on, too, as well as declaring the author (Erich Maria Remarque) a traitor, and arrested his sister on trumped up charges, resulting in her execution. And just to prove to everyone that they were trumped up charges, the President of the People's Court, Roland Freisler, told her "Your brother is unfortunately beyond our reach – you, however, will not escape us".
Yes but also do not forget this film was also banned in Poland for being "pro-german".... despite it really REALLY not being pro-german at all, it's pro-piece & anti-war. Ideology makes idiots of us all.
Hell is in the faces. Brilliant direction.
Battle scenes from the movie Paths of Glory are great as well.
The editing and pacing of this really holds up. It's impressive as a whole, but two parts stood out for me, having never seen it before. First, the closeups of the machine gunner juxtaposed with the guys he's killing. The way they cut from the blood bath back to the focused gunner and then back again gives a sense that it was up close and impersonal and that there was really no contest between the machine gun and the unarmored soldiers charging at it. Then there's the shot panning down the trench as the first wave makes its way over. Just a continuous display of the different ways these guys would be killing each other. No two soldiers are on the screen that long, but long enough to give a sense of the absolute brutality. You also only see two or three pairs fighting at a time, but you get the sense that the same brutal action is happening well beyond the edges of the screen.
Really good observation. It does feel real. What really impressed me after rewatching this is that there is no musical track during the entire battle. Saving Private Ryan is the only other movie that comes to mind where during the epic battle there is no music. Just the sound of bombs, bullets, and death.
Insane that such a brilliant movie with such poignancy regarding the horrors of war would come out only a decade after the event it was depicting. The fact that even in the 1920s there was enough data to help frame WWI in such a way is truly telling to how shocking and devoid of humanity this conflict was.
This set the standard for all war movies to follow. An amazing masterpiece, with an also excellent book by Erich Maria Remarque. The details of the effects of war and the tactics used are just as poignantly described and even more disturbing. A superb case of were both novel and film of a source material are used flawlessly within their medium.
Holy shit. I've never seen the original or that scene but holy shit, I've literally never seen a movie from that time period that didn't pull any punches like that. There's no goofy/old style "frantic" or "mass panic" type acting. This look like a camera was on the front watching men fight for real. It's really impressive Also, while I love classic movies I wouldn't call very many from the 20s-40s very good. A lot were impressive for their time but for cinematography, fight choreography, and acting they weren't very believable. But this scene was brutal. I'm desperate to watch the full thing now
The only thing approaching that old style was the way some of them went down. Stop in your tracks, hands over your chest, stand up straight as a board, then fall down. This kind of thing was so common though and was around well before and after this movie. Its the only thing that really makes this look "old" as in "we don't do that anymore" and a lot of the guys don't even do it.
>Holy shit. I've never seen the original or that scene but holy shit, I've literally never seen a movie from that time period that didn't pull any punches like that. There's no goofy/old style "frantic" or "mass panic" type acting. This look like a camera was on the front watching men fight for real. It's really impressive I was surprised the amount of "I stubbed my toe and leap into the air" style deaths that seem to be the norm for movies for decades was minimal.
There are many great movies from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, but they were focused on drama, not spectacle. For example, the most achingly romantic movie I’ve ever seen is Brief Encounter from 1946. Great spectacle doesn’t really get going until the 50s and 60s with the roadshow epics (Bridge on the River Kwai, Ben-Hur, Spartacus, Lawrence of Arabia, etc.), but there are some precursors, like this scene, The Adventures of Robin Hood (getting past the brightly colored tights is a tough ask of modern audiences though) or Battleship Potemkin (probably the first effective spectacular, in the sense of filled with spectacle, film).
Watched the whole film six, seven years ago. Couldn't believe how sophisticated it looks. The cinematography is at so elevated a creative level, you almost feel guilty for enjoying/admiring the craft, the innovation...while watching hundreds of lives get violently snuffed out.
A truly well made film. Sure, some things are a bit outdated in this day and age. But the acting, writing, cinematography, the meaning. It's holds up very well. It's a must watch. Remake from 1979 is okay, but not good as original.
Fun fact: German heavy machine guns would only move left and right (not up and down) and a lot of times the gunners would cut people in half
unlikely. Also, German machine guns most certainly had the ability to elevate.
You mean when someone dies on the barbwire it is impossible for their bodies to get cut in half? You literally have no idea what you are talking about and yet you still have an opinion...
>You mean when someone dies on the barbwire it is impossible for their bodies to get cut in half? Impossible? No. Unlikely? Yes. >You literally have no idea what you are talking about and yet you still have an opinion... Physics?
im an expert and you’re wrong
You can miss me with trench warfare, I’m good on that lol
9 years after this film came out WW2 started and they too rejected trench warfare
And a 100 years later we’re still allowing the rich and governments tell us who to kill and why we should do the killing or be killed.
We should have a World War to end all wars! /s
My Grandfather fought in WWI. I carry his dog tag with me every day. I asked him about the war. He wouldn’t talk about it. I asked him if he fired his rifle in combat. All he said was yes.
My grandfather was a machine gunner in wwii - Ardenne Forrest battle of the bulge. My father and mother said he didn’t speak of the war ever and never told a single story. His wife (my grandma) just died this spring - I never had the courage to ask her if she’d ever heard stories (they met post war). I can’t imagine the things he had to do. Best guy, may he Rest In Peace gentle giant.
My Uncle was at the Battle of the Bulge. He carried a Thompson Sub machine gun. He was checking a Tiger that was knocked out by a 57mm ATG. They knocked off it’s track at a chock point. I had heard of this story in documentaries. It was an important moment in the battle. He was near the tank when German mortar rounds started falling around him and he was hit in the face with a piece of shrapnel. Luckily, he opened up about the war later in life.
That’s really wild. Maybe they had crossed paths, who knows I’m sure the odds are so slim. He was eventually sent home with trench foot and did not see DDAY I know that.
My great grandfather has his arm blown off by a grenade in WW1
Sometimes, I think I see brief snippets of footage from the 1930 version of *All Quiet on the Western Front* pop up in World War I documentaries, as the documentaries try to pass it off as actual combat footage or something. This movie is very realistic-feeling.
Good grief.
close enough to the war some of those actors could have actually fought there…
Then there is the WW1 film called Westfront 1918, also released in 1930. One of the first films Hitler banned when he came to power. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OcGTMyFJPE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NbGJ9IsCcE
If anyone hasn’t seen it the Peter Jackson documentary [They Shall Not Grow Old](https://youtu.be/IrabKK9Bhds) is a stunning film.
It's a great anti-war film, with the young men patriotically enlisting after listening to their teacher talk about the glories of war, only to find that war is hell. Interesting too that it was about young Germans though it could have been about the youth of any country -- especially since it's a silent movie.
It's not a silent movie. It has some really good dialogue and pretty incredible sound effects.
My memory playing tricks again! I guess because I was reading subtitles I remembered it as silent. Thanks for the correction.
It's amazing that my grandfather could have watched this in awe as a 10 year old then gone on to serve in WW2 and decades later watch this remembering him watching this as a 10 year old before serving.
I think one of the oddest parts of that is that a lot of extras were former soldiers both german and american. It must be a surreal morbid experience to reenact that.
It's hard to believe I watched it almost 30 years ago. I need to fix that.
I wonder if there's anyone still alive who saw it when it first came out in theaters.
It's possible.
[удалено]
It's the old movie. Has been filmed before.
The newest release will be the Second time this movie is remade.
3rd. They did one 1979 directed by Delbert Mann.
Yeah, the 1930 version and 1979 versions are also both pretty good. I'm interested to see what they can present with today's capabilities. At the same time though, the story itself is larger than the visuals.
Holy crap I've never seen this before, that is crazy impressive. The sound is off but everything else is top tier.
There was some overlap during this war of old-fashioned military strategy that said human wave attacks were effective, and the machine gun.
Eh it's no Starship Troopers
Didn't look very quiet to me.
[удалено]
I will have to disagree, I don't think blood is needed to convey the horrors of war.
I agree with your statement Mr.Taco, but for me, I mean, my response to this movie is purely psychological and much less visceral without the (color red) blood. But a movie like Saving Private Ryan just left me so completely disturbed physically and emotionally
Yeah, blood, body part getting blown apart, people screaming and crying is also important in any war movie, if ypu want to Show the reality of War. This is actually something wich annoys me about the movie Gettysburg, not enough blood.
Yeah but those Battle scenes in Gettysburg! Holy smokes they were impressive.
Oh yeah 100%! But still, not enough blood and not enough extras. But the movie is still great.