Band of Brothers

Nostalgair · 22-01-2008, 10:05 AM

Hi All,

I was given the boxed set of "Band of Brothers' for Christmas. I have watched the series over the last few nights and was wondering what other people thought of it. (I'll hold back my viewpoint at this stage.)

I'm aware that Stephen Ambrose has caught criticism from certain sectors, but what did you think?

Cheers

Owen

Antipodean Andy · 22-01-2008, 10:11 AM

I was moved from the moment the old fellas did the "talking heads" at the start.

I'm no expert on authentic equipment etc like clothing but I would have to say it's the best recreation I have seen. It had the right feel and, from memory, didn't seem too Hollywoodised. More importantly, it brought the sacrifices of these men to millions of people. Very much looking forward to The Pacific.

Kyt · 22-01-2008, 10:14 AM

I actually enjoyed watching it as a good WW2 romp. Yes, it is based on historical facts but the combination of Ambrose's rather lax research and writing, the condensing of certain historical events by the production company for conveniance, and the complete lack of acknowledgement of others' contributions, makes it less than perfect as a true record of DDay and after.

But I still enjoyed it.

Antipodean Andy · 22-01-2008, 10:15 AM

So Hollywoodised from the point of view that the Americans won the war!

spidge · 22-01-2008, 10:19 AM

I thought the series was very well done. There were many "subliminal" messages if you wanted to look.

The sets were fantastic and the action scenes most realistic.

I do like the one scene where they were to be sent across the river for prisoners on the next night to the same place by their senior officer because the first nights infiltration was successful.

Their platoon commander told them to get a good nights sleep and he put in a false activity report for the raid that did not happen.

Kyt · 22-01-2008, 10:21 AM

No where as bad as most Hollywood films, and the fact that it is the story of one particular unit certainly excuses most of that. Maybe my antipathy to Ambrose (whom I used to quite like until I saw him on the last episode of World at War where he was completely dismissive of the British war effort) has clouded my view.

Antipodean Andy · 22-01-2008, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyt

No where as bad as most Hollywood films, and the fact that it is the story of one particular unit certainly excuses most of that. Maybe my antipathy to Ambrose (whom I used to quite like until I saw him on the last episode of World at War where he was completely dismissive of the British war effort) has clouded my view.

Dismissive? LOL, his country wasn't even in it from the start!

spidge · 22-01-2008, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy in West Oz

Dismissive? LOL, his country wasn't even in it from the start!

So true however there are those British soldiers I have read, who say, "when Britain was alone" we fought on, "the yanks did not come into the war until after Pearl Harbor".

I ask, when was Britain alone?

Antipodean Andy · 22-01-2008, 10:54 AM

Perhaps they mean the empire. Or perhaps he's referring to the fact that Aussies and Kiwis and Canucks (oh my!) tend to blend in rather well with groups of Poms......

spidge · 22-01-2008, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy in West Oz

Perhaps they mean the empire. Or perhaps he's referring to the fact that Aussies and Kiwis and Canucks (oh my!) tend to blend in rather well with groups of Poms......

What I am referring to is that it is easier not to include the peripheral nations when speaking of "us" or "we".

One chap said to me when I questioned the comment and spoke of New Zealand, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Rhodesia etc

"Well they were "British" and their troops were obliged to defend the "Empire".

Sometimes it is easy for the major "partner" to forget or minimalise the contribution of the rest of the team.