Change Your Image
john-3422
Reviews
Les combattantes (2022)
Not bad, but let down by historical inaccuracies.
It was obvious from the beginning of the first episode that a great deal of time and expense must have been put into this series. The locations and costumes appear to be very accurate. French soldiers are shown wearing the red trousers (le pantalon rouge) introduced in 1829 and still in use at the outbreak of war in 1914. Since such pains appear to have been taken with the visual aspects, it is a pity that less attention has been paid to other historical details. However, in spite of this, I found the stories of the four women quite engaging, although admittedly somewhat schmaltzy and melodromatic.
The most glaring example of a historical inaccuracy is the depiction of the use of poisonous chlorine gas by the Germans in Episode 6. This episode is set in late September 1914, but poison gas was only used for the first time, by the Germans at Ypres, in April 1915!
The distinction between social classes, and between officers and other ranks at that time was quite marked, but is not reflected in this series, and it is often difficult to tell who is an officer. French officers still went into action in 1914 with swords and revolvers, but 'Colin', a lieutenant, is frequently seen carrying and firing a rilfe. Furthermore, men at that time were generally addressed by their surnames and rarely by their first names, so 'Colin' would have been referred to as 'Lieutenant de Renier' both by his brother officers and the men under his command.
I watched this film in the original French with English subtitles. Although this requires more effort, it provides a more immersive experience.
Im Westen nichts Neues (2022)
Remarque would have hated it.
I first saw the original 1930 film in the late 1960s and the 1979 film shortly after it was released. I also read the book, in the original German, about 30 years ago. I was therefore looking forward to seeing German soldiers speaking German, and not with American accents as in the 1930 version (the main irritation for me in an otherwise excellent film) and was expecting the storyline of this new film to be broadly along similar lines. I therefore became increasingly frustrated as this film continued to diverge from the original plot.
This film certainly vividly portrays the reality of trench warfare, but has two significant flaws. The first is that it begins too late, in 1917, when enthusiasm for the war would have been waning on both sides. The fervour with which Paul and his comrades enlisted would have been valid in 1914 (as in the original book and film) but not in 1917 when the scale of the slaughter had become all too obvious. I had expected the soldiers to be wearing Pickelhauben for much of the film, rather than coal scuttle steel helmets, which were only introduced in 1916.
The second flaw is that certain important characters in the book receive little or no attention. The teacher Kantorek has essentially been written out. The development of the relationship between the younger soldiers and the older Stanislaus Katczinsky receives virtually no attention, and instead an older soldier named 'Kat' suddenly appears out of nowhere. The scene in the shell hole where Paul kills a Frenchman would have had much more significance if it had stuck to the original storyline. Paul's utterance 'I have killed the printer Gerard Duval' is one of my enduring memories of a film I first saw half a century ago.
So on balance I think Remarque would have hated a film with the same title as his novel, but with so little resemblance to it.
The Railway Children Return (2022)
Disappointing sequel riddled with woke ideas and historical inaccuracies
Having seen the original Railway Children numerous times since it was first released in 1970, I had high hopes for this film, on the basis that Jenny Agutter had agreed to appear in it. However, I was sorely disappointed, as historical inaccuracies and retrospective applied politically correct ideas totally ruined the film for me. To give just a few examples:
The film is based on children being evacuated from Manchester in 1944 in response to a renewed German bombing offensive. While such an offensive did occur (and was known as the Baby Blitz) it was largely concentrated on London and the south east of England.
Bobbie's grandson, Thomas, had a far too broad Yorkshire accent for someone from a middle-class family.
Lily would not have been detained for a prolonged period by the American MPs, but would have been handed over to the British police at the earliest opportunity.
The British policemen would have been wearing helmets and not flat caps.
Lily seeking to hide Abe's army uniform by giving him civilian clothes is completely ludicrous, as he would have been immediately identifiable by his skin colour (or perhaps color).
A young man with Down's syndrome would not have been employed as a telegraph boy at that time.
The American general at the end of the film would not have been black.
Joyeux Noël (2005)
A powerful film, but would Protestant Scottish soldiers really have participated in a Catholic Mass?
I have been interested in the First World War for almost 40 years, since studying the War Poets at school, and have been aware of the Christmas Truce for a similar length of time. I have read and heard on television reminiscences of men (all now dead) who participated in the truce. It was obviously a very powerful experience for all concerned. Perhaps the most powerful experience was not the truce itself, but the effect on the soldiers when hostilities recommenced, and in many cases for decades afterwards. The English novelist Henry Williamson described his participation in the truce in one of his semi-autobiographical novels and the experience led him not only to question the whole basis of the war, but to develop a strong affinity with the Germans which eventually led to his involvement with fascism and National Socialism.
I was therefore very excited when I discovered that this film had been released. It has not been on general release in the UK as yet, but I managed to see it on a business trip to London. Expecting it to be a sell-out, I booked my ticket well in advance, only to discover that I was one of only two members of the audience in the whole cinema! I was surprised and very disappointed by this lack of interest.
Bearing in mind my existing knowledge of the truce, the film was pretty much what I expected: powerful and moving in places. However, for me there was a slight lack of credibility because of obvious historical inaccuracies and simplifications.
First of all, at the beginning of the film we see two Scottish brothers, who at the outbreak of war are about to enlist. Then we see them in the trenches in France at Christmas 1914. This is highly implausible. The British soldiers in the trenches in December 1914 were those of the Regular Army (The 'Old Contemptibles') together with some Territorial battalions. Unlike Germany and France, which called up trained conscripts, the recruits who joined up in the UK in August 1914 would have had to undergo basic training and very few would have reached the front line in France by Christmas.
Secondly, we see the two brothers' Catholic priest (who has also joined up and is serving in the same battalion) leading a multinational 'carol service' on Christmas Eve with prayers and carols in Latin, in other words a Catholic Mass. Not 'Oh Come All Ye Faithful' but 'Adeste Fidelis'. The French would have almost all been Roman Catholic. It is mentioned that the German regiment comes from Munich, in the Catholic south of Germany, so the majority of them would have been Roman Catholic too. A Franco-German Catholic Mass in these circumstances is quite conceivable. But over 80% of Scots at that time were Protestant! Many Catholic Scots had Irish connections and would have been reluctant to join the British Army, so the proportion of Protestants in a Scottish regiment would have been much higher than this. It is easy to forget in these ecumenical times, but sectarianism in Scotland was very strong at that time, which it still is to some extent. The soldiers would have been mainly Church of Scotland, or from one of the other breakaway Presbyterian sects, and it is very unlikely that they would have knows the words of 'Adeste Fidelis' or of the Latin prayers. In the unlikely event that they did, they would have been very reluctant to participate in such an overtly papist ritual, even at Christmas. Yet the film depicts all the Scottish soldiers enthusiastically participating in this Latin Mass! That such a multinational Catholic Mass could have taken place at that time is so implausible that it seriously undermines the credibility of the film.
No doubt there are many other slight inaccuracies of this nature, but these are the two that jumped out at me.
For those interested in the First World War in general and the Christmas Truce in particular, I would recommend this film as a powerful experience, but they should be aware that although based on a true occurrence, the story itself is fiction with much oversimplification.