I saw the movie before I read the book. Though I liked the movie, and still do, the characters in the book seemed to be physically, at least, younger. However, being on the Eastern Front for two years can certainly age a person.Originally posted by Charles_22:
skyraider: Ah, didn't know that you were operating off of a book, and thought you were instead trying to say that the age of the men represented wasn't true-to-form with the German experience about that time.
Great warmovie!
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
"Sir, do you know they've cut us off? We're entirely surrounded."
--- a Marine messenger
"Those poor bastards. They've got us right where we want 'em. We can shoot in every direction."
--- Lewis B. Puller, Colonel USMC, spoken at the Chos
--- a Marine messenger
"Those poor bastards. They've got us right where we want 'em. We can shoot in every direction."
--- Lewis B. Puller, Colonel USMC, spoken at the Chos
Damn, I'm disappointed that "Europa Europa" hasn't garnered any mentions. This is based on the story of Solomon Perel, a German jew who fought for both the Soviets and the Germans during the War In The East. This is a wonderful story of a person struggling with his identity in order to survive. You guys need to check this one out.
-
Frank W.
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
- Contact:
never heard of it....is it a german film??Originally posted by KG Erwin:
Damn, I'm disappointed that "Europa Europa" hasn't garnered any mentions. This is based on the story of Solomon Perel, a German jew who fought for both the Soviets and the Germans during the War In The East. This is a wonderful story of a person struggling with his identity in order to survive. You guys need to check this one out.
Frank W., "Europa Europa" is a German/French production from 1991. It stars Marco Hofschneider as Solly. It was directed by Agnieszka Holland, and won a Golden Globe for Best Foreign Film. It is a remarkable story, all the more so since it is a true one. For those who hate subtitles, yes, it does have them, since the dialogue is in German and Russian.
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
For those of you who have COI recorded in any form, look through the opening credits and look for one picture very carefully. There you will see a picture of Hitler that you've never seen before. In fact, it's so nice that he looks just like a good neighbor that just dropped by, in fact it's so different from any picture you've seen of him, you have to ask yourself why you've never seen one like it before. It sort of stunned me anyway.
-
King__Thunder
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Finland in the capital of Kimi Räikkönen.
Wild Bill if you are intrested of the movie "Unknown solider" with english/Swedish text, then you can by it as DVD.
For exampel from this link, just press on "DVD" and then press on "T" and press on the "Tuntematon Sotilas" and there you have it.http://www.viihdekauppa.com/
If anybody can find it on some other Link please write it in this forum.
[ January 01, 2002: Message edited by: King__Thunder ]</p>
For exampel from this link, just press on "DVD" and then press on "T" and press on the "Tuntematon Sotilas" and there you have it.http://www.viihdekauppa.com/
If anybody can find it on some other Link please write it in this forum.
[ January 01, 2002: Message edited by: King__Thunder ]</p>
If you are a deserter and allalone frezing to the bones in a deep cold forest and would like to have some company, call for friendly fire.
There's a couple of documentary films I've got, WWII 'In Color,' that has some footage of Hitler as a nice-uncle-playing-with-the-kids-at-the-Eagle's Nest-while-Eva-Braun looks on kind of feel to it. It is rather disconcerting, to say the least. But I guess that's how he got his way so often, and had such an endearing effect on people--one does not come to power by ranting constantly and frothing at the mouth.
"They couldn't hit an elephant from this dist--"
--John Sedgwick, failing to reduce suppression during the Battle of the Wilderness, U.S. Civil War.
--John Sedgwick, failing to reduce suppression during the Battle of the Wilderness, U.S. Civil War.
"Winter War" (Talvisota) is available through Amazon:I think they also have a film about the Winter War which I am desperate to see.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00000JPH0/qid%3D1009991058/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F0%5F1/102-6037695-2362563
Worth picking up.
"...these go up to eleven."
Nigel Tufnel
Nigel Tufnel
-
Frank W.
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
- Contact:
i´ve seen a video about hitler (hitler - der privatmann - the private man)....there were much scenes from him playing with his dog or have a talk with some women. he looked like a very nice man.....disturbing!!!Originally posted by Charles_22:
For those of you who have COI recorded in any form, look through the opening credits and look for one picture very carefully. There you will see a picture of Hitler that you've never seen before. In fact, it's so nice that he looks just like a good neighbor that just dropped by, in fact it's so different from any picture you've seen of him, you have to ask yourself why you've never seen one like it before. It sort of stunned me anyway.
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
kendokabob: Yes, I've seen the Eagle's Nest stuff and I've seen some similar stuff regarding his little dance after France fell, and what you say about charm is so true.
Although at first glance the picture I spoke of, specifically, looks as though he's sitting on a couch with a big smile close to the photographer. Though that much is true, I again pulled out my recording and noticed a few things. Firstly, he's in uniform. In my memory I would've told you he was not (although the cap was off). What further made Hitler's joy look all the more friendly is that you see so much of him you don't notice the white gloves at the far right, which I take to be Goering. Funny too, but I also didn't notice that it appeared he was in the railway car that France signed the surrender in, a place I heard that Hitler was in a very serious mood).
Although the picture is likely another military picture (at least Hitler is dressed that way) the way it's shot comes across as non-military, particularly since any time we see Hitler in film they show him at a rally or with a bunch of generals (even the Eagle's Nest set of photos was that way [SS guards and generals etc.]).
Although at first glance the picture I spoke of, specifically, looks as though he's sitting on a couch with a big smile close to the photographer. Though that much is true, I again pulled out my recording and noticed a few things. Firstly, he's in uniform. In my memory I would've told you he was not (although the cap was off). What further made Hitler's joy look all the more friendly is that you see so much of him you don't notice the white gloves at the far right, which I take to be Goering. Funny too, but I also didn't notice that it appeared he was in the railway car that France signed the surrender in, a place I heard that Hitler was in a very serious mood).
Although the picture is likely another military picture (at least Hitler is dressed that way) the way it's shot comes across as non-military, particularly since any time we see Hitler in film they show him at a rally or with a bunch of generals (even the Eagle's Nest set of photos was that way [SS guards and generals etc.]).
-
Panzer Capta
- Posts: 254
- Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 10:00 am
- Location: Bedford, NH, USA
Don't miss this movie...it is incredible!!!!Originally posted by Grumble:
"Winter War" (Talvisota) is available through Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00000JPH0/qid%3D1009991058 /ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F0%5F1/102-6037695-2362563
Worth picking up.
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
History often glosses over details that just dont fit in. Often personalities are only presented the way we want to remember them as well.
I cant get over the fact that during the war Hitler was to some a sex symbol. Yeah thats exactly what I said.
At one time he was a little boy too. But most feel more comfortable with remebering him as the fanatic that caused millions to die.
You just never know what the future holds some times.
I cant get over the fact that during the war Hitler was to some a sex symbol. Yeah thats exactly what I said.
At one time he was a little boy too. But most feel more comfortable with remebering him as the fanatic that caused millions to die.
You just never know what the future holds some times.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Charles_22:
It's funny how setting, costume, and perceived demeanor can so influence people's perceptions of others. Have you ever heard of the psych. experiment where you take a picture of an average guy sitting in a chair, and you give this to somebody and ask them what they think of this person and to describe him. One group gets the picture with the word "warm" written below the guy, and another group gets a picture with the word "cold," written below him.
People's perceptions of the guy's personality tend to reflect the word: so the "warm" guy gets all sort of positive things (compassion, charisma, generosity) attributed to him and vice versa.
And have you ever noticed how average moviegoers tend to hate the *actors* who play the evil guy in movies, but then become all *relieved* when those same actors are interviewed on TV and turn out to be all nice? Given the current state of this country's political climate, I'll bet you could interview Hitler (disguise him by calling him Rudolph Shicklegruber or something & shave his moustache) and people would really like his views on some things--! (And after all, didn't he come up with the idea for the autobahn and the volksvagen? Those ideas must have gone down real easy in 1920's-30's Germany--and led folks to think that, well, if he's this correct about some things--he must be right about everything!)
It's funny how setting, costume, and perceived demeanor can so influence people's perceptions of others. Have you ever heard of the psych. experiment where you take a picture of an average guy sitting in a chair, and you give this to somebody and ask them what they think of this person and to describe him. One group gets the picture with the word "warm" written below the guy, and another group gets a picture with the word "cold," written below him.
People's perceptions of the guy's personality tend to reflect the word: so the "warm" guy gets all sort of positive things (compassion, charisma, generosity) attributed to him and vice versa.
And have you ever noticed how average moviegoers tend to hate the *actors* who play the evil guy in movies, but then become all *relieved* when those same actors are interviewed on TV and turn out to be all nice? Given the current state of this country's political climate, I'll bet you could interview Hitler (disguise him by calling him Rudolph Shicklegruber or something & shave his moustache) and people would really like his views on some things--! (And after all, didn't he come up with the idea for the autobahn and the volksvagen? Those ideas must have gone down real easy in 1920's-30's Germany--and led folks to think that, well, if he's this correct about some things--he must be right about everything!)
"They couldn't hit an elephant from this dist--"
--John Sedgwick, failing to reduce suppression during the Battle of the Wilderness, U.S. Civil War.
--John Sedgwick, failing to reduce suppression during the Battle of the Wilderness, U.S. Civil War.
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
kendokabob: I have a related story which perhaps a lot of us have heard about before. In one of the books I read about Hitler, it was said that the generals for quite a while thought he was a genius, How? Because he knew things they did not. He knew things like how many rounds a certain tank carried, things so trivial for a general to know, hence they turn their attention elsewhere, that they could be fooled into thinking he knew more than they. I'm not sure if Hitler did this deliberately to fool them or if he just had an aptitude for quirky details at times.
OTOH, if it were I, I surely would not comment on someone's qualities based on a picture, such as the test you suggested, but what I was trying to say is that at some point or another our country went to such lengths to make Hitler look like a madman, you would never guess that there was anything on Hitler to suggest he could 'appear' nice.
It seems a bit disingenuous to me, to preach that Hitler was the devil, put out all kinds of material to show him ranting at party meetings and what not, but then not to acknowledge that he had a side that made him believeable or trustworthy. I suppose this was done to cover up something else, and that was, like the generals of Hitler (in general [no pun intended] only, as surely there were exceptions) who were fooled by Hitler's eye for minutia, there were mesmorized by Hitler's economic success as thinking that only good people could lift the German economy.
Of course a number of people were fooled by his not coming from aristocracy too and the fact that the WWI Germany was ran by people who were. As I see it, people all too often make quick and easy assumptions about somebody (the tests you mention for example) and then it takes pounding into their heads to get them to change their minds (popular opinion is the gauge for whether someone is good or bad, while the person will be what they are irregardless of that opinion). Obviously a good many of the people in Germany suffered from that affliction as well. The ol' surely Hitler has done some bad things, but surely not anything THAT bad comes to mind.
Considering how the Germans most likely were always flowered with Hitler's better qualities, or in any case trying to make him look good, and the fact that we captured so many of their films, you'd think by now you would've seen more on this pleasant image of Hitler that was going on, but then that would be for us to admit we were largely wrong about him in the first place and the German people weren't just totally evil people who could've destroyed Hitler with their pinky had they so desired. The logic seems to be that their were no innocents among the Germans because Hitler continued to thrive within their own borders, where he should've been easier to detect. OTOH, it was being within the borders itself which was paradoxically a problem, because it was there where the they would be subject to Nazi retaliation, as the good Germans in prison, or executed, found out. There was something to be said for doing the cause of good, and not being in the prisons, but people tend to think cut-and-dry so often, such as those silly tests you mention, that they won't understand a good German didn't have to have been one of those locked up or dead, and still have been good. If all the good Germans were locked up or dead, then how could the culture be turned around? I haven't seen a lot of uprising against evil in a society perpetrated by escapees out of prisons or the dead, which to believe that since the common German was evil because he didn't overthrow Hitler, would amount to (of course it was tried to, by Von Staufenburg etc., and they got the same treatment dissenters got too. Unlike in recent America, they didn't just say "we respect your opinion", when they didn't, and that was the end of it [though of course Von Staufenburg's type of dissent wouldn't be tolerated by any regime]).
As far as I can tell, Nazism was so repulsive after the fact, that people can't deal with the problem that evil always comes with ready-made disguises. If we were to see the disguises that various people believed about Hitler, then we'd have to admit that we could be fooled too (instead pride tells us that only the Germans could be fooled, but then, how did so many Germans get fooled? By thinking they were better etc., the same crime those who judge them by that yardstick are committing). If we could admit that we could be fooled, maybe we'd have to deal with an awful lot of things that we pushed aside and didn't analyze and just took at face value as good or bad based on some pretty flimsy reasoning (again the test you mentioned comes to mind).
phew!
OTOH, if it were I, I surely would not comment on someone's qualities based on a picture, such as the test you suggested, but what I was trying to say is that at some point or another our country went to such lengths to make Hitler look like a madman, you would never guess that there was anything on Hitler to suggest he could 'appear' nice.
It seems a bit disingenuous to me, to preach that Hitler was the devil, put out all kinds of material to show him ranting at party meetings and what not, but then not to acknowledge that he had a side that made him believeable or trustworthy. I suppose this was done to cover up something else, and that was, like the generals of Hitler (in general [no pun intended] only, as surely there were exceptions) who were fooled by Hitler's eye for minutia, there were mesmorized by Hitler's economic success as thinking that only good people could lift the German economy.
Of course a number of people were fooled by his not coming from aristocracy too and the fact that the WWI Germany was ran by people who were. As I see it, people all too often make quick and easy assumptions about somebody (the tests you mention for example) and then it takes pounding into their heads to get them to change their minds (popular opinion is the gauge for whether someone is good or bad, while the person will be what they are irregardless of that opinion). Obviously a good many of the people in Germany suffered from that affliction as well. The ol' surely Hitler has done some bad things, but surely not anything THAT bad comes to mind.
Considering how the Germans most likely were always flowered with Hitler's better qualities, or in any case trying to make him look good, and the fact that we captured so many of their films, you'd think by now you would've seen more on this pleasant image of Hitler that was going on, but then that would be for us to admit we were largely wrong about him in the first place and the German people weren't just totally evil people who could've destroyed Hitler with their pinky had they so desired. The logic seems to be that their were no innocents among the Germans because Hitler continued to thrive within their own borders, where he should've been easier to detect. OTOH, it was being within the borders itself which was paradoxically a problem, because it was there where the they would be subject to Nazi retaliation, as the good Germans in prison, or executed, found out. There was something to be said for doing the cause of good, and not being in the prisons, but people tend to think cut-and-dry so often, such as those silly tests you mention, that they won't understand a good German didn't have to have been one of those locked up or dead, and still have been good. If all the good Germans were locked up or dead, then how could the culture be turned around? I haven't seen a lot of uprising against evil in a society perpetrated by escapees out of prisons or the dead, which to believe that since the common German was evil because he didn't overthrow Hitler, would amount to (of course it was tried to, by Von Staufenburg etc., and they got the same treatment dissenters got too. Unlike in recent America, they didn't just say "we respect your opinion", when they didn't, and that was the end of it [though of course Von Staufenburg's type of dissent wouldn't be tolerated by any regime]).
As far as I can tell, Nazism was so repulsive after the fact, that people can't deal with the problem that evil always comes with ready-made disguises. If we were to see the disguises that various people believed about Hitler, then we'd have to admit that we could be fooled too (instead pride tells us that only the Germans could be fooled, but then, how did so many Germans get fooled? By thinking they were better etc., the same crime those who judge them by that yardstick are committing). If we could admit that we could be fooled, maybe we'd have to deal with an awful lot of things that we pushed aside and didn't analyze and just took at face value as good or bad based on some pretty flimsy reasoning (again the test you mentioned comes to mind).
phew!
Charles_22,
Well, you've inspired me to go rent Cross of Iron again to look for that picture. And, of course, for the nurse.
As for your commentary. Very interesting. I once had a great English teacher in High School, Mr. White (you may have seen one of his books: one is called Mr. Grey-we thought it was funny too-and the other is Sword of the North). This was Catholic school, and he was telling us about the nature of evil. "Contrary to popular opinion," he said (picture someone who looks like Henry Thoreau, beard and all, "the devil does not wear red pajamas and horns. Rather, he shows up looking more like Raquel Welch."
While Hitler definitely didn't look like Raquel Welch, you get the point. *Something* about Hitler and Nazism, as you say, must have been darned appealing to the Germans.
There was also a German woman of my acquantaince who in her graduate program was studying anti-Axis propaganda by the Allies during WWII. It was interesting to see the kinds of ways that Allied artists portrayed the average German soldier. Generalizations bordering on racism (isn't that ironic) permeated these things--posters to be hung up in the workplace that showed German soldiers that looked somehow like many Americans' stereotypical imagery of Jews--big nose, all conspiratorial.
Also interesting that Ambrose notes in Citizen Soldiers that the average German citizen could not admit that Hitler knew anything about the concentration camps and the mass slaughters--it must have been Goering's fault, or Goebbel's, or Himmler, or somebody, but "not their dear Fuhrer's." "The Fuhrer knew nothing of this!," they'd say.
<img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Well, you've inspired me to go rent Cross of Iron again to look for that picture. And, of course, for the nurse.
As for your commentary. Very interesting. I once had a great English teacher in High School, Mr. White (you may have seen one of his books: one is called Mr. Grey-we thought it was funny too-and the other is Sword of the North). This was Catholic school, and he was telling us about the nature of evil. "Contrary to popular opinion," he said (picture someone who looks like Henry Thoreau, beard and all, "the devil does not wear red pajamas and horns. Rather, he shows up looking more like Raquel Welch."
While Hitler definitely didn't look like Raquel Welch, you get the point. *Something* about Hitler and Nazism, as you say, must have been darned appealing to the Germans.
There was also a German woman of my acquantaince who in her graduate program was studying anti-Axis propaganda by the Allies during WWII. It was interesting to see the kinds of ways that Allied artists portrayed the average German soldier. Generalizations bordering on racism (isn't that ironic) permeated these things--posters to be hung up in the workplace that showed German soldiers that looked somehow like many Americans' stereotypical imagery of Jews--big nose, all conspiratorial.
Also interesting that Ambrose notes in Citizen Soldiers that the average German citizen could not admit that Hitler knew anything about the concentration camps and the mass slaughters--it must have been Goering's fault, or Goebbel's, or Himmler, or somebody, but "not their dear Fuhrer's." "The Fuhrer knew nothing of this!," they'd say.
<img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
"They couldn't hit an elephant from this dist--"
--John Sedgwick, failing to reduce suppression during the Battle of the Wilderness, U.S. Civil War.
--John Sedgwick, failing to reduce suppression during the Battle of the Wilderness, U.S. Civil War.
-
Charles2222
- Posts: 3687
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 10:00 am
kendokabob: Of course I suppose part of the logic of dismissing Hitler in their minds had to do with his being in the public eye so much, and that he started something which seemed so revolutionary. They were probably also affected by the fact that though they didn't elect him, a good number of them voted for him. Nobody ever voted for any of the people you mentioned with the 'possible' exception of Goebbels.
As to Mr. White, his comments are even more apt than they did in the day they were spoken, about what the devil looks like. Obviously to mention Raquel Welch indicates it being spoken no later than 1985, and more likely in the 60s-70s. Since the rapid decline of morality since that time, it has emerged that there are probably more people led to the devil by the Raquels of the world than gullibles following Hitlers.
As to Mr. White, his comments are even more apt than they did in the day they were spoken, about what the devil looks like. Obviously to mention Raquel Welch indicates it being spoken no later than 1985, and more likely in the 60s-70s. Since the rapid decline of morality since that time, it has emerged that there are probably more people led to the devil by the Raquels of the world than gullibles following Hitlers.
-
sebagonzalez
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Uruguay
- Contact:
The best war movie i ever saw was by far the "Stalingrad" movie of 1992. It was a German - Sweede production . I never saw a movie that represented so good the atmosphere of the bitter fight in the streets of Stalingrad. Of course, cause is from the German side, it does not have a "Happy ending". It ends with the main characters of the movie frozen in the gelid ice. I must admit i cried a lot with this movie, it was a really shocking one. Here is a link to some reviews of it:
http://www.1worldfilms.com/stalingrad.htm
A must have Movie.
http://www.1worldfilms.com/stalingrad.htm
A must have Movie.
Mierda....y ahora...que corno hago?
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
You must have seen a different "Thin Red Line" than me then I guess.
The film sucked. Spotty sporadic and poorly executed. Not up to the calibre of the book by any stretch of the imaginaton.
To call it superior is excessive. It was at best a film you watch at home. Certainly not worthy of theatre expenses.
Almost made me think Vonnegut (spelling approx. he did Slaughter House) was in some way connected. Film wandered and had pointless bursts of battle.
The film sucked. Spotty sporadic and poorly executed. Not up to the calibre of the book by any stretch of the imaginaton.
To call it superior is excessive. It was at best a film you watch at home. Certainly not worthy of theatre expenses.
Almost made me think Vonnegut (spelling approx. he did Slaughter House) was in some way connected. Film wandered and had pointless bursts of battle.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
-
Frank W.
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
- Contact:
mhhh...i meant the movie which plays on cuadalcanal feat. sean penn and nick nolte.Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1:
You must have seen a different "Thin Red Line" than me then I guess.
The film sucked. Spotty sporadic and poorly executed. Not up to the calibre of the book by any stretch of the imaginaton.
To call it superior is excessive. It was at best a film you watch at home. Certainly not worthy of theatre expenses.
Almost made me think Vonnegut (spelling approx. he did Slaughter House) was in some way connected. Film wandered and had pointless bursts of battle.
in german it´s called "der schmale grat"
hope we mean the same movie
haven´t read the book,sorry
i liked that film but that depends on
personal tastes,i think
bye
frank