D-Day

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

No argument there, but this particular HC series was several years ago; it used then recently discovered aerial photos to cover a range of operations from D-Day to the Pacific, and it was much better than most HC endeavours, i.e., "Patton 360," which were often "uneven".

I doubt that in 1944 aerial photos sufficiently displayed the level of involvement of destroyers, and I doubt they delivered proof that DDs had turned the tide or that they had a key role, especially since Allied aerial recon failed to identify numberous strongpoints, gun nests, and even installations and since the evaluation of the pre-landing photos covering beach installations misled the Allied command to think that the bomber campaign had been pretty successful. What some of the photos taken on D-Day actually showed was that big (valuable) guns had been moved further inland, resulting in dedicated bombing runs to destroy the guns right after. It also turned out that some guns had never been installed on the coast and that they had been stored inland instead (ie. Pointe du Hoc), but this detail could only be assessed on the ground, by the Rangers who took the Pointe.

So, until I see another source/author accurately evaluating photos/claims, I'll stick to the COMINC's assessments and proceed to characterize this HC claim as gossip. [:)]

If that were the case, there would have been a public outcry on this side of the Atlantic by D-Day vets who saw the doc and disagreed w/it, as well as similar comments on the Matrix forums, but I don't recall that either happened.

In addition to aerial shots, the doc used footage of destroyed D-Day defensive positions while it "voiced-over" narration to the effect that the German defenders (obviously) didn't appreciate the DDs firing at them from point blank range, but that's the only "proof" cited.

IMO, the DDs performed the job originally assigned to the armor that never made it to the beach, but even if the DDs didn't penetrate all the bunkers, the shell-shocked defenders would be in no condition to offer much resistance w/blood coming out their ears!

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

But why wouldn't they, considering all the A-list actors that were originally signed-on by the two producers of the highly successful TLD and who were also involved w/TTT?

There could be a ton of reasons.
Do you think that 9 years later 20th Century Fox just has to come up with the names of a producer team, in order to have hordes of A-actors beat a path to their door?
There was the highly unpopular Vietnam War, there was a somewhat cheesy script, and I'm really not sure what Hollywood aces thought about Kurosawa, at the time. It takes more than 2 producers to convince top-notch actors to join in. And then there's the possibility that the producers/director decided to go with certain actors, like flipper pointed out.

All these are possible, but are they probable?

Vietnam was simmering for years, but look at the success of "The Dirty Dozen".

And it didn't take much more than the same two producers to attract stars to TLD.

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy
... Still, you don't know what amount had been supposedly "wasted".

Very few do, and for the reasons I already posted.

[anarchyintheuk]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Then consider that the American actors in TTT were not leading men. In fact, some were former film stars who had already stepped-down to do TV; it would be like hiring David Hasselhoff to play Admiral Kimmel [;)]

I think the Midway producers realized that mistake and got Hank Fonda and Chuck Heston involved.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

And the Hasselhoff comparison was a double entendre for GG; everyone knows "Germans just love David Hasseloff," at least according to SNL!

A little anecdote to explain why Hasselhoff had been popular here back in 1989 (I still don't get why though eheh):

Some time after "Knight Rider" was already dropped from US TV channels, it started to be hip in Germany (broadcast here started in 1985 - well, it takes some time for the dubs, and it took German channels some time to pick up feature shows from the US, back then).

Hasselhoff, whose popularity went rather downhill (until "Baywatch" came up in 1989), tried to "penetrate" [:D] the music sector, and produced 2 Albums in the US, which created small sales. In 1989, at a point where the Knight Rider just annoyed German audiences (maybe except for some kids still watching it), he produced an album ("Looking for Freedom") with Jack White, a German songwriter who had written and produced songs for Engelbert, Paul Anka, Laura Branigan ("Self Control") and a number of German singers.

The song "Looking for freedom" was anything than a modern pop-song, it was rather a typical German "Schlager" (would "winner" be a proper translation? Such a song is an old-fashioned blend of a cheesy folk-song and a bad pop-song), which explains why it failed to be successful in any other country than Switzerland, Austria and Germany. In fact, it had been picked up in Switzerland first - with the title single climbing to #1, then it was #1 for 2 weeks in Austria, but then it got to #1 for 8 weeks in Germany, eventually. In Germany, 70,000 singles per day were sold, at times.

The common explanation for the success, despite the song's cheesy lyrics and musical score, is that the single had been released around the time the wall in Berlin came down, and that the Germans mistakenly picked up the song as a peace anthem and as a hymn for the people in East Germany, who wanted to be "free", as the title contained the word "Freedom".

Nowadays, if you wonder and if you ask people how someone in his right mind could actually buy that record, everyone and his mom immediately denies that he/she was part of the willing crowd who bought that crap, the track has such a high cringe factor, lol. Later on, he claimed that his song contributed or even initiated the fall of the wall in Berlin. ROFL.

I suspect millions of mothers-in-law bought the CD, as well as the idiots who thought this to be a peace hymn. The majority of people laughed about him, though.
Hasselhoff had an appearance in "America's got talent" this year, where he performed some 60's song, which made him come up with the statement "when I've been to Germany [1989] back then, I sang pop-songs only"..... The people over here laughed again, as Looking for freedom was anything but a pop-song. [:D]

Btw, Hasselhoff showed up in Germany a few weeks ago, pretty drunk, I think during the 20-yr-anniversary event celebrating the fall of the wall.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

In addition to aerial shots, the doc used footage of destroyed D-Day defensive positions while it "voiced-over" narration to the effect that the German defenders (obviously) didn't appreciate the DDs firing at them from point blank range, but that's the only "proof" cited.

That's what I wanted to hear, errr read. [:)]
Until I see some substantial evidence, I'll keep referring to that as HC gossip.

IMO, the DDs performed the job originally assigned to the armor that never made it to the beach,

As I documented with the COMINC AAR above, the DDs performed the role that had been assigned to them prior to the landings. That only the minority of tanks had made it to the shore (eg. an initial number of 13 tanks in one sector, 3 tanks in another sector - where 2 had been knocked out or disabled quickly) doesn't mean that DDs took over their role. Quite some of the DDs did a good job, and particular DDs even excelled at their mission.

... but even if the DDs didn't penetrate all the bunkers, the shell-shocked defenders would be in no condition to offer much resistance w/blood coming out their ears!

I doubt they penetrated ANY bunker with their 5inch guns, especially since they were using HE rounds mostly. If i am not mistaken: 5 inch = 127 mm.

US forces at the "Siegfried line", in late 1944, had to bring up 155mm (!) self-propelled howitzers in an attempt to crack the German bunkers. But even those did not trash the installations, and the Germans usually just had to clear the debris blocking the embrasures, remove the dead and wounded, in order to fire again. The US troops got so frustrated that they sent Shermans with snow plows to cover the embrasures and exits with debris and soil, burying the bunker crews alive, so that they could make progress.
I posted a picture of such a bunker who got reportedly hit by a 75mm HE tank shell in the "Battle of the Bulge"-Forum, but I'll post it again:



The few self-propelled 155mm howitzers, brought to the Siegfried Line later on, created bigger damage, most likely. Still, afaik, they didn't have bunker-buster ammunition (anti-concrete rounds), just HE.

The German bunkers in Normandy were bigger and held enough personnel/reserves to compensate losses caused by direct fire. They crews could fall back to seperate air-raid refuges until after the bombardment had ended.

German bunker design was standardized, but the design of the bunkers in France was newer than the design of the Siegfried Line installations (built in the 1930s), hence it featured thicker exterior walls. Despite the lack of construction material and manpower, many of them featured the required design characteristics.

The 3 or 5 guys operating the MGs/guns "with blood coming out of their ears" could be easily replaced by the replacements waiting in the soldier's room. Some bunkers had a crew of 30+ men, troops in surrounding trenches, gun nests and supply dumps not counted, for sure.

A German pillbox from the Siegfried line, the Normandy installations were bigger/more sophisticated, though:

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Then consider that the American actors in TTT were not leading men. In fact, some were former film stars who had already stepped-down to do TV; it would be like hiring David Hasselhoff to play Admiral Kimmel [;)]

I think the Midway producers realized that mistake and got Hank Fonda and Chuck Heston involved.

And they hired an impressive suppporting cast to back them up.

Glenn Ford ... Rear Admiral Raymond A. Spruance

Hal Holbrook ... Commander Joseph Rochefort

Toshirô Mifune ... Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

Robert Mitchum ... Admiral William F. Halsey

Cliff Robertson ... Commander Carl Jessop

And others.

Wasn't Glenn Ford a USN Reserve officer?

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

And the Hasselhoff comparison was a double entendre for GG; everyone knows "Germans just love David Hasseloff," at least according to SNL!

A little anecdote to explain why Hasselhoff had been popular here back in 1989 (I still don't get why though eheh):

Some time after "Knight Rider" was already dropped from US TV channels, it started to be hip in Germany (broadcast here started in 1985 - well, it takes some time for the dubs, and it took German channels some time to pick up feature shows from the US, back then).

Hasselhoff, whose popularity went rather downhill (until "Baywatch" came up in 1989), tried to "penetrate" [:D] the music sector, and produced 2 Albums in the US, which created small sales ...

The song was anything than a modern pop-song, it was rather a typical German "Schlager" (would "winner" be a proper translation? Such a song is an old-fashioned blend of a cheesy folk-song and a bad pop-song), which explains why it failed to be successful in any other country than Switzerland, Austria and Germany. In fact, it had been picked up in Switzerland first - with the title single climbing to #1, then it was #1 for 2 weeks in Austria, but then it got to #1 for 8 weeks in Germany, eventually. In Germany, 70,000 singles per day were sold, at times.

The common explanation for the success, despite the song's cheesy lyrics and musical score, is that the single had been released around the time the wall in Berlin came down, and that the Germans mistakenly picked up the song as a peace anthem and as a hymn for the people in East Germany, who wanted to be "free", as the title contained the word "Freedom ...

I didn't know "the Hoff" could even sing!

Until today, I doubt few on this side of the Atlantic ever knew the rationale for his popularity in Germany.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

I didn't know "the Hoff" could even sing!

The point is, his skills weren't sufficient for the US market, and his skills are really pretty erm ... limited. And that makes his success here even worse. [:D]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ot_katYYiU

Listen to his tune, and tell me what US genre that would be. I guess there's no counterpart on the US market. Engelbert used to sing hmmm ballads, so Hoff's Schlager song won't fit in that category, for sure.
His song features a bit more modern kind of our infamous Schlager. Schlager usually features outdated drum kits, a primitive musical score, and memorizable refrains *cough*.

Oh and look at the cheap studio set in his music video, and the "Knight Rider" scenes ... hmm, the lyrics - knight rider - freedom... hmm, weird mix, eh? Doesn't make sense at all. [:D]

Until today, I doubt few on this side of the Atlantic ever knew the rationale for his popularity in Germany.

Well but after hearing the tune you'll really doubt that people who bought that crap here behaved rational, ahahaha.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

... Listen to his tune, and tell me what US genre that would be. I guess there's no counterpart on the US market. Engelbert used to sing hmmm ballads, so Hoff's Schlager song won't fit in that category, for sure.
His song features a bit more modern kind of our infamous Schlager. Schlager usually features outdated drum kits, a primitive musical score, and memorizable refrains *cough*.

Oh and look at the cheap studio set in his music video, and the "Knight Rider" scenes ... hmm, the lyrics - knight rider - freedom... hmm, weird mix, eh? Doesn't make sense at all. [:D]

Until today, I doubt few on this side of the Atlantic ever knew the rationale for his popularity in Germany.

Well but after hearing the tune you'll really doubt that people who bought that crap here behaved rational, ahahaha.

Did you see this comment on the YouTube page?

" ... We all know YOU GERMANS bought his music and made the Hoff think he can actually sing. WW1, WW2 and now this? That's it..rebuild the wall and you keep the Hoff."

I guess you can call this song a "ballad": the "Hoff" belts out lyrics like (the late) Ethel Merman.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Vietnam was simmering for years, but look at the success of "The Dirty Dozen".

I had overlooked that one [:)]: "Dirty Dozen" was finished in late 1967, it was released 2 months before the Tet-Offensive in 1968, which caused the major crisis within the Johnson administration afterwards. The (minor, almost underground) uproar in the US in 1967 wasn't even anywhere near the public uproar that was present in 1970 (when Tora was produced). If you compare for that matter, then pls pick examples that compare well. [:D]

If you take a look at the US war movies which had been produced after 9/11 and/or around the time the US started their engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq, where quite some of them carried a lot of pathos and maybe even - what we call - "hurrah-patriotism" (= "rah-rah patriotism"?), means a somewhat uncritical and unreflected attitude towards war, you might not find many A-actors in the cast lists (if any at all), as so many were reluctant to be part of the war show.
In 1968, John Wayne was the only one who dared to make a movie (partially directed by him) about the Vietnam war ("The Green Berets"), his approach advocated the engagement in Vietnam, to say the least.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Vietnam was simmering for years, but look at the success of "The Dirty Dozen".

I had overlooked that one [:)]: "Dirty Dozen" was finished in late 1967, it was released 2 months before the Tet-Offensive in 1968, which caused the major crisis within the Johnson administration afterwards. The (minor, almost underground) uproar in the US in 1967 wasn't even anywhere near the public uproar that was present in 1970 (when Tora was produced). If you compare for that matter, then pls pick examples that compare well. [:D]

How abt "Kelley's Heroes" (1970) that featured the tagline, "Never have so few taken so many for so much"?

Even today, KH still has a cult following, perhaps because of its anti-war theme as well as an star cast.

And where was it filmed? Yugoslavia, where WW II equipment was still "available".

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy
If you take a look at the US war movies which had been produced after 9/11 and/or around the time the US started their engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq, where quite some of them carried a lot of pathos and maybe even - what we call - "hurrah-patriotism" (= "rah-rah patriotism"?), means a somewhat uncritical and unreflected attitude towards war, you might not find many A-actors in the cast lists (if any at all), as so many were reluctant to be part of the war show.
In 1968, John Wayne was the only one who dared to make a movie (partially directed by him) about the Vietnam war ("The Green Berets"), his approach advocated the engagement in Vietnam, to say the least.

TGBs was an apologetic for Vietnam, but there was a change in movies after Korea, i.e., Rbt Altman's (MASH) "Attack" (1956) w/Jack Palance in B&W.

And after Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan," realism re-entered war, and I don't think we're ever going back to "Back to Bataan".
SPR's D-Day scence outdid anything in TLD, and note how it was filmed in grainy color -- almost B&W -- thru an unsteady camera, as if you were there on the beach.

A brilliant film, even if one of the latter vignettes was typically Spielberg ET-sappy.

Honerable Mention: 1945's "A Walk int the Sun": dated, but way ahead of it's time.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

How abt "Kelley's Heroes" (1970) that featured the tagline, "Never have so few taken so many for so much"?

Well, but that one was pretty much more like a humorous adventure flick, which made fun of the military as well, it's about some people who opt for hunting for gold to "enhance" their personal (financial) "happiness", instead of doing their jobs [:D]. This could have been filmed in Chicago, at the gold mines in Africa or wherever, the WWII environment was just thought to spice up things, and maybe to transfer some general funny rants about the military. It was anything but a serious war (or anti-war) movie. The WWII-environment was rather a vehicle for dropping jokes about the military (in WWII).

KH is an anarchic comedy that captures absurdity of war on some occasions, but that's it. A comedy is very well able to uncover the absurdity of war and to serve as anti-war installment, but I wouldn't overrate the intentions of this particular movie as there are other (arty) comedy approaches with more depth (eg. "The Great Dictator" by Charles Chaplin) and a real anti-war or "freedom" (-of-speech) message.
There are so many scenes where they rant about the drawbacks of Shermans, for example, like the fact that early Sherman guns (75mm and 76mm) were somewhat ineffective against Tigers and totally ineffective against the MBT, the Panther, on frontal approaches.
I've seen it. [:)]

You might want to go for content and not just for date of release, if you do these kinda comparisons. [:)]

Rbt Altman's (MASH) "Attack" (1956) w/Jack Palance in B&W.

Yep, if that's the movie where the stubborn senior officer ("Cooney") gets killed by his own soldiers, that would qualify. It just happened to be released when the US weren't at war.[:D]

And after Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan,"

No war when that one was released either.

I did not say that US directors or US producers never put out realistic and even critical war movies, my point was that it was hard to get A-actors aboard a full-blown (serious) war movie production, in 1970. Look at the cast list of Black-Hawk Down (the movie is soaked with pathos, although it could have actually shown the mistakes in operational planning and could have explicitly pointed out the embarrassing absence of adequate US equipment [they only had HumVees instead of armored cars] on this theater, but that would have cost them the actual full support of the US Army), the only actors sticking out may be Sizemore and McGregor, Sizemore may be an excellent supporting actor, but not an A-actor, and McGregor used to fill supporting roles too, back then. Other post-9/11 war movies don't feature A-actors either.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

... Look at the cast list of Black-Hawk Down (the movie is soaked with pathos, although it could have actually shown the mistakes in operational planning and could have explicitly pointed out the embarrassing absence of adequate US equipment [they only had HumVees instead of armored cars] on this theater, but that would have cost them the actual full support of the US Army), the only actors sticking out may be Sizemore and McGregor, Sizemore may be an excellent supporting actor, but not an A-actor, and McGregor used to fill supporting roles too, back then. Other post-9/11 war movies don't feature A-actors either.

I can't think of a major post 9-11 A-list mil movie, but the absence of US heavy equip in BBD was based on reality: during the actual operation, the Clinton admin wouldn't send tanks and APCs into Somalia for "humanitarian" or other PC reasons. It was a poor judgement that later cost a Clinton official his job.

We had up-armored HMMVs in Bosnia; it only made them more difficult to come to a stop.