WWII Films

Story said:

Fedor Bondarchuk‘s $30 million Stalingrad.
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/ne...-blows-up-everything-to-find-love-in-wwii.php

Click to expand...

MOSCOW -- Fyodor Bondarchuk's Stalingrad has become Russia's top-grossing movie of 2013, beating the third installment of the Iron Man franchise. It's the first time in the country's post-communist period that a local film has beaten out Hollywood blockbusters to lead the year-end list. According to local research group Movie Research, Stalingrad grossed $50.8 million (1.66 billion rubles), topping Iron Man 3's $42.2 million (1.38 billion rubles) Russian total.

Click to expand...

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/stalingrad-tops-russias-box-office-667735

I seen the trailer for the Russian 'Stalingrad" movie, and I want to see it.

Watched my all time favorite WWII movie last night, "Kelly's Heroes".

DavidJones said:

I seen the trailer for the Russian 'Stalingrad" movie, and I want to see it.

Click to expand...

It's a good film, best seen in the original German with English subtitles though IMHO!

Dixon Cannon said:

http://imdb.com/title/tt0135706/

http://imdb.com/title/tt0102443/

http://imdb.com/title/tt0338434/

http://imdb.com/title/tt0115770/

'When Trumpets Fade'
'A Midnight Clear'
'Silent Night'
'Brylcreem Boys'

...and for graphic appeal - 'Come And See'

http://imdb.com/title/tt0091251/

-dixon cannon

Click to expand...

excellent choices....I'd add Cross of Iron uncut version and Gallipoli, if you don't mind subtitles here's a few excellent foreign language films that I don't think have been mentioned;
Assembly
Brotherhood
9th Company
Days of Glory
The Winter War
El Alamein

Patrick Murtha said:

Mr. Former English/History Teacher and American Studies Major chiming in here: "Oughn't" was indeed a more common linguistic usage in earlier decades. It would not have sounded stilted in the Forties.

It's always good to be careful not to inappropriately apply our standards and norms to earlier times -- in fact, that's virtually a working definition of the "historical sense," but it's one of the hardest things to impart to students, who tend to be very "presentist" (I know from experience).

Click to expand...

Had to reply to this post since I have a degree in History as well as a minor in English. Too many people, students and adults tend to "modernize" the past too much--especially in the genre of fan fiction. You can't tell them that though. Not me though, when it comes to writing historical fiction or even fan fiction that takes place in another time (i.e. the 1930s, '40s, '50s, '60s or even '70s), I research everything to the tiniest detail that pertains to the story so that it can be as authentic and accurate as possible. I want the reader to see and realize how these characters acted, looked, thought, spoke etc.

But back to the original topic. I love WWII "homefront" movies. Red Sky At Morning (1971), The Best Years of Our Lives (1946), and The Men (1950) are favorites of mine. Others that haven't been mentioned yet are Bright Victory (1951), Eyes in the Night (1942), The Fighting Sullivans (1944), Tender Comrade (1942), and The Human Comedy (1943. An amusing WWII-set movie was The Last Time I Saw Archie (1961) with Robert Mitchum and Jack Webb.

I have seen and loved Band of Brothers and Flags of Our Fathers. Will check out others listed here.

-Kristi

Has anyone mentioned "Empire of the Sun" (1987)," Shanghai" (2010) or "Black Rain/Kuroi Ame (1989)? All good to extraordinary films!

I've seen Empire of the Sun & Shanghai. I enjoyed both very much (although Empire was very long, from what I remember).

Lots of great WWII movies. I think that "The Pacific" mini-series has been overlooked. Band of brothers was the first and the best of these but The Pacific was very very good.

12 O'Clock High
Fighter Squadron
Best Years of Our Lives
Mrs. Miniver
All the Young Lions

Just discovered a fascinating 16mm film by a "Doc Furniss", a Physician with the AAF 92nd BG (Podington). Amazing footage of this B-17 base, many varieties of aircraft, personnel, accidents, and even mission footage. Well-narrated but not by the Dr. himself. Runs over 90 min.

carter said:

Das Boat is one of the finest depictions of submarine warfare ever filmed.

Click to expand...

A great library of WWII films, I've been jotting down notes as I read this thread.

I know quite a bit about the production of Das Boot: It's insanely accurate. A bolt for bolt copy of a Type VII sub. I was on the actual sub they copied a day or two before I had the chance to tour the sets at Bavaria Studios. Insane. The man who built it used almost all original materials, so the set is STEEL through and through. You'd never see that in Hollywood. The only thing made of the wrong stuff were the engines which were wood to make them light enough to turn with an electric motor. The production design was based on the photos taken by Lothar-Gunther Buchheim during the mission in question and I believe Buchheim consulted on the film.

A number of top directors were interviewed for the job (It was sort of a mini series for German TV before it was recut into a feature) but when they discovered that the sets were done and they were a 1:1 copy with no extra space and only a few "wild walls" (removable walls) they chose not to be involved. Wolfgang Peterson embraced the tight spaces. He had them bold the hull shut and shot in 16mm, much of it hand held and with only a couple of fiberoptic units and the "practical" lights for illumination. Practicals are the actual lights seen on the set; they rarely contribute much except to look like sources of light. It was a real tour de force. The entire cast knew their jobs just as a real crewman would, just watch how the men operating the main tank levers hang from the handles, how the torpedoes are lubricated before being ponderously inserted in the tubes, how the midships head is packed with food on departure "we have to eat before we can s***!" ... all the real deal. A rare example of getting all the details right.

For something from the other sides POV, the Japanese film ARMY or RIKUGUN made in 1943 is an outstanding war film on the mindset conditioning for war of the Japanese people. The director Keisuke Kinoshita got into a lot of trouble for subverting the films intended propaganda elements.

Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence is a favourite of mine. Haven't seen it in yonks, I should try to dig it up:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085933/

David Bowie, along with, yes, Gene Simmons, is a musician I wish had acted more often.

John Huston's documentary Battle of San Pietro filmed an infantry company slogging through Italy; starkly capturing its combat attrition and subsequent Graves Registration detail.

My all-time favorite WWII movie movie is Robert Aldrich's "Attack!" (1956). It was in truth an anti-war movie, unsympathetic to the military system, for which reason the DoD refused cooperation so it had a small budget. Its small but stellar cast included some of the best character actors of the era in supporting roles and the stars were truly stellar. It flopped at the boxoffice because America was still coming off its WWII victory high and a movie that didn't portray the Army in the most positive light was shunned.

The cast was incredible. It should have made Lee Marvin a star ten years before he actually achieved stardom. Jack Palance and Eddy Albert were never better. What also made it grittily believable was that Marvin, Palance and Albert were all decorated veterans of the war. Ironically, Albert, who played the cowardly CO of the outfit, was the most heroic of them all. Marvin was severely wounded in the Pacific and Palance was in a plane crash resulting in the facial burns that gave him that famously immobile, lipless lower face. Most of the other supporting actors also served in the war. You just can't buy authenticity like that these days. It's a horrific and riveting movie.

Inkstainedwretch said:

My all-time favorite WWII movie movie is Robert Aldrich's "Attack!" (1956). It was in truth an anti-war movie, unsympathetic to the military system, for which reason the DoD refused cooperation so it had a small budget. Its small but stellar cast included some of the best character actors of the era in supporting roles and the stars were truly stellar. It flopped at the boxoffice because America was still coming off its WWII victory high and a movie that didn't portray the Army in the most positive light was shunned.

The cast was incredible. It should have made Lee Marvin a star ten years before he actually achieved stardom. Jack Palance and Eddy Albert were never better. What also made it grittily believable was that Marvin, Palance and Albert were all decorated veterans of the war. Ironically, Albert, who played the cowardly CO of the outfit, was the most heroic of them all. Marvin was severely wounded in the Pacific and Palance was in a plane crash resulting in the facial burns that gave him that famously immobile, lipless lower face. Most of the other supporting actors also served in the war. You just can't buy authenticity like that these days. It's a horrific and riveting movie.

Click to expand...

Agreed... When I saw this film as an adult (I'd seen numerous times as a kid) I wondered aloud how it ever got made in the '50's. I'm not sure if it's totally anti-war as more anti-stupidity and anti-waste of human life like "Paths of Glory". Great film though.

Worf