BOT's Top 50 Historical Fiction Films - The Countdown

[Plain Old Tele]

@The Panda 

...in the Historical Accuracy section, was Andrew Dominik critically reviewing his own movie in the third person? 🤔

Edited May 12, 2020 by Plain Old Tele

[charlie Jatinder]

I mean, okay people don't like Argo, which I absolutely loved the first & last time I watched in 2013 iirc but TWWB is a film loved by pretentious lot and good enough film for normal moviegoers like me. Should be in Top 15 IMO atleast.

[The Panda]

3 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

@The Panda 

...in the Historical Accuracy section, was Andrew Dominik critically reviewing his own movie in the third person? 🤔

Oops lmao I’ll fix that in a sec

[The Panda]

 

 

"A shrub? Nonsense! I shall name a great tortoise after you: Testudo Aubreii!"

 

Historical Setting: Primarily Outside Galapagos Isles 

 

Source from the Period

 

"M.R. Editor,    Dover, December 16, 1805.
I am just come from on board the Victory: she is very much mauled, both in her hull and rigging; has upwards of 80 shot between wind and water: the foremast is very badly wounded indeed, and though strongly fished, has sunk about six inches: the mainmast also is badly wounded, and very full of musket shots; she has a jury mizen-mast, and fore and main-top-masts, and has a great many shot in her bowsprit and bows; one of the figures which support the arms has both the legs shot off. I clearly ascertained that Lord Nelson was killed by a shot from the maintop of the Redoutable: he was standing on the starboard side of the quarter-deck, with his face to the stern, when the shot struck him, and was carried down into one of the wings: he lived about one hour, and was perfectly sensible until within five minutes of his death. When carrying down below, although in great pain, he observed the tiller ropes were not sufficiently tight, and ordered tackles to be got in them, which now remain; the ship he engaged was so close, that they did not fire their great guns on board the enemy, but only musketry, and manned the rigging to board, but nearly the whole that left the deck were killed; the ship had 25 guns dismounted with the Victory's fire; a shot carried away four spokes from the wheel of the Victory, and never killed or wounded any of the men steering; temporary places have been fitted up between decks for the wounded men, which are warmed by stoves.

R.J."

- Report from the Victory after the Battle of Trafalgar. Naval Chronicle Vol 15

 

Historical Context

 

"Certainly an important part of the answer lies in economic history, though the economic
historians have rather tended to run away from the question.18 It seems likely that in
1789, and even in 1802, France’s general economic situation; her rate of growth, her
foreign trade, her advance in many (though not all) aspects of industry and technology,
were superior or not noticeably inferior to those of Britain.19 By 1815 Britain had clearly
gained a commanding economic and technological lead over France which endured for
a century and a half. Perhaps this had nothing to do with the war, but common sense
might suggest that Britain’s continued capacity to trade, and in particular to export,
throughout the Napoleonic War had something to do with it.20 This, however, is a
subject which calls for the expertise of the economic and fiscal historian, and the space
of another article, if not another book, to deploy it. What can be addressed here is how
Britain’s apparently marginal naval victories might have led to her dominant position
in 1814 and 1815.

The first essential is to decide why sea battles are fought at all. It is obvious enough
what victory on land gains: position, territory, and the wealth and power which flow from
them. It is less obvious what is gained by victory at sea, which cannot be permanently
occupied. The Mahanian orthodoxy, dominant a century ago and not dead yet, argued
that great fleets existed to win great battles and gain the command of the sea, but
it suited neither Mahan’s genius nor his purpose to explain with any clarity either
how victory translated into command of the sea, or why it was necessary. In practice
there was a great deal of confusion and disagreement on this point. British admirals
traditionally tried to win battles, but traditionally did not explain why. French admirals
tended to take a different approach. The Comte de Toulouse was advised by his council
of war not to renew the battle of Malaga in 1704 because ‘Ce que nous fîmes hier suffit
pour la réputation des armes du roi et de la Marine’ (‘What we did yesterday will suffice
for the reputation of the Navy and the king’s arms’). This underlying idea that the

effects of naval victory were merely psychological was a French tradition. ‘Savez-vous
ce qu’est une bataille navale, Messieurs?’ Maurepas asked in a famous bon mot: ‘on se
rencontre, on se canonne, on se sépare et la mer n’en reste pas moins salée’ (‘Do you
know what a naval battle is, gentlemen?... They meet, they fire away at one another,
they part – and the sea stays as salty as before!’)

 

Successive generations of French ministers, admirals and theorists argued that battle
was a dangerous distraction from the real objects of war at sea, and there are still
French admirals alive today who take the same line. Victory at sea, they imply, was
something of a self-indulgence; a vulgar display by officers lacking self-discipline and
moral fibre."

- The nature of victory at sea, N. A. M. Rodger

Journal for Maritime Research

 

Historical Accuracy

 

""I was impressed by 'Master and Commander.' I think it was the best portrayal of life in a warship during the Age of Sail that has been produced in Hollywood. The language, the uniforms, the rigging of the ship, the customs of the Royal Navy of that period, the portrayal of the captain by Russell Crowe, all seemed quite authentic to me," said Dr. William S. Dudley, director of NHC.  Dudley is a recognized authority on early 19th century naval warfare, and edited the first two volumes of the Centers "The Naval War of 1812: A Documentary History."  "It colorfully evokes life aboard a warship in the age of sail," said Dr. Michael Crawford. Head of the Center's Early History Branch, which studies this period, Crawford is the editor of the third volume of "The Naval War of 1812: A Documentary History."

Another Early History Branch historian, Christine Hughes, said, "I liked the movie. I thought it gave a fairly accurate depiction of naval life of the period."

 

Karen Hill, Navy Museum educator, has a unique insight on 19th-century sailing having recently spent two weeks on the U.S. Brig Niagara on the Great Lakes, where the crew ran the ship as if during the War of 1812.  "The Niagara is a brig, so she is smaller and designed differently than the ship used in 'Master and Commander', but all of the commands that I heard in the film with regard to her sailing and handling were the same that I heard, repeatedly," Hill said.  It was so well done that NHC senior historian Dr. Edward J. Marolda said, "One can see, hear, and almost smell what it must have been like for England's Jack Tars in the wooden sailing ships of the Nelsonian Age."  "I was impressed with the depiction of the combat scenes: the crew moving to and fighting at their battle stations, the working of guns below decks, the damage to ship and personnel from shot and shell, the care of the wounded and the repair of the ship after battle," said Early History Branch historian Charles Brodine.

 

"Master and Commander also did a fine job of illustrating how disguise and deception could be employed with effect in the age of sail," said Brodine. "Warships could and would change their appearance in order to fool the enemy, whether to make captures or elude battle. Numerous American captains used such 'ruses de guerre' with great effect in the War of 1812."  All of this leads to the question of what, if anything was historically inaccurate about the film?  Hughes felt, "that Aubrey (Crowe's character) took more risks than was realistic for someone with an inferior vessel. Attempting a battle during a raging storm is a case in point."  "In general, the least accurate aspect is the concept that a French privateer would be built in Boston along the lines of one of our 44-gun frigates. Generally, privateers were not as well built as a U.S. Navy 44," said Dudley.  Though everyone enjoyed the battle scenes, "there would have been much more screaming and moaning by wounded men during battle," said Crawford. In addition, "the flogging scene was unconvincing. The cat-o-nine-tails seemed to raise welts no bigger than a schoolmaster's switch would have caused, rather than tearing skin from the miscreant's back."  "There was a good depiction of relations among officers; but the 'foremast men are two-dimensional (a criticism made of Patrick O'Brian's novels, as well)," Crawford continued. "The image of the common seamen as childlike, simple and superstitious reflects the way officers of the age may have viewed them, but is not a realistic portrayal.""

- Master and Commander, Is it Naval History?

Brian S. Chi, Naval Historical Center Public Affairs

 

 

The Film Itself

 

The Story

 

"In April 1805 during the Napoleonic Wars, H.M.S. Surprise, a British frigate, is under the command of Captain Jack Aubrey. Aubrey and the Surprise's current orders are to track and capture or destroy a French privateer named Acheron. The Acheron is currently in the Atlantic off South America headed toward the Pacific in order to extend Napoleon's reach of the wars. This task will be a difficult one as Aubrey quickly learns in an initial battle with the Acheron that it is a bigger and faster ship than the Surprise, which puts the Surprise at a disadvantage. Aubrey's single-mindedness in this seemingly impossible pursuit puts him at odds with the Surprise's doctor and naturalist, Stephen Maturin, who is also Aubrey's most trusted advisor on board and closest friend. Facing other internal obstacles which have resulted in what they consider a string of bad luck, Aubrey ultimately uses Maturin's scientific exploits to figure out a way to achieve his and the ship's seemingly impossible goal."

 

Critic Opinion

 

"Weir is aided in his anthropological and psychological explorations by Crowe, whose understated performance never threatens to overwhelm the subtle interplay of shipboard life, and Bettany, whose Maturin, an amateur naturalist and borderline anarchist, broadens the movie's subject matter beyond naval warfare. (The Maturin of the film is a narrow slice of the Maturin of the books, who is also, on occasion, a spy, a duelist, and an assassin. While the necessity of this narrative simplification is clear enough, it's less apparent why the character, introduced by O'Brian as "a small, dark, white-faced creature" is played by an actor who is six foot three, blond, and handsome. Apparently Hollywood makes giants of us all.) In the end, though, the film belongs to its supporting cast of mostly unknowns, whom Weir sketches with care: the grizzled sailor whom the crew treats as a quasi-mystic following his recovery from shipboard brain surgery (George Innes); the 13-year-old midshipman who, like his hero Lord Nelson, loses an arm in battle (Max Pirkis); the ill-fortuned "Jonah" despised by the crew (Lee Ingleby); and so on.

 

For all his emotional investment in the crew of the Surprise, Weir doesn't stoop to melodrama. (The jarring exception is a slow-motion suicide that recalls the director's heavy-handed treatment of Neil's death in Dead Poets Society.) Crewmembers die, and the film, like their shipmates, goes on. The tone is neither tragic nor uncaring. This is war, after all, and war in the days before modern medicine; death is an anticipated, even inevitable occurrence. There's something refreshing about this stoicism, perhaps because it represents so striking a departure from the usual aesthetic of modern film.That said, another look at Master and Commander shows that its co-option by conservatives eager to draw parallels with the need for resolve in Iraq was more than a little silly. The film is resolutely apolitical. Yes, it extols military steadfastness and sacrifice, but those politically neutral qualities of character appear on both sides of the conflict. Aubrey respects, even admires, his French counterpart. For conservatives, of course, Jack Aubrey was at war with Jacques Chirac, a British hero out to destroy "old Europe." In Master and Commander, the enemy is just another man doing his job (albeit one that happens to be in lethal discord with Aubrey's), not an embodiment of evil or decadence or anything else. In this way, too, the film evokes a different time."

- Christopher Orr, The Atlantic

 

BOT User Opinion

 

"There's so much wonderful character exploration and plots that they could've explored in a sequel. Bethany's Maturin, for example, is a spy for the Admiralty against Napolean, and there's a great subplot spanning a couple of books where Aubrey gets discredited and dismissed from the service, and has to become a privateer to regain glory and honor. It's actually incredibly moving." - @Plain Old Tele

 

Factoids

 

Master and Commander: The Far Side of the Sea was directed by Peter Weir.  It received 49 points and 10 votes.

 

 

Countries Represented: Algeria (1), Austria (2), Belarus (1), England (1), France (1), Germany (2), Israel (2), Korea (1), The Ocean (1), Poland (1), Japan (3), Spain (1), United States (16), Vietnam (1)

 

Time Periods Represented: 16th Century (1), 17th Century (2), 18th Century (2), 19th Century (5), 1920s (1), 1930s (3), 1950s (2), 1960s (5), 1990s (1), 21st Century (2), Classical Period (2), Middle Ages (1), World War 1/1910s (1), World War 2/1940s (6)

 

Cross Section of Times and Countries: 18th Century - Austria (1), 18th Century - United States (1), 19th Century - The Ocean (1), 19th Century - United States (4), 21st Century - United States (2), 1920s - United States (1), 1930s - Germany (1), 1930s - Korea (1), 1930s - United States (1), 1950s - Algeria (1), 1950s - United States (1), 1960s - United States (4), 1960s - Vietnam (1), 1990s - United States (1), Classical Period - Israel (2), Middle Ages - England (1), Sengoku Period - Japan (1), Tokugawa Shogunate - Japan (2), World War 1 - France (1), World War 2/1940s - Belarus (1), World War 2/1940s - Germany (1), World War 2/1940s - Poland (1), World War 2/1940s - Spain (1), World War 2 - Austria (1), World War 2 - United States (1)

 

Directors Represented: Park Chan-Wook (1), Francis Ford Coppola (1), Kevin Costner (1), Andrew Dominik (1), Stanley Donen (1), David Fincher (2), John Ford (1), Milos Forman (1), Bob Fosse (1), Anthoney Harvey (1), Terry Jones (1), Philip Kaufman (1), Gene Kelley (1), Elem Klimov (1), Masaki Kobayashi (1), Stanley Kramer (1), Akira Kurosawa (1), Michael Mann (1), Penny Marshall (1), Adam McKay (1), Steve McQueen (1), Theodore Melfi (1), Sam Mendes (1), Gillo Pontecorvo (1), Martin Scorsese (2), Steven Spielberg (2), Oliver Stone (1), John Sturges (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Peter Weir (1), Robert Wise (1), William Wyler (1)

 

Decades Represented: 40s (1), 50s (2), 60s (6), 70s (3), 80s (5), 90s (3), 00s (5), 10s (9)

 

 

Edited May 12, 2020 by The Panda

[The Panda]

 

 

"Why return to the City of God, where God forgets about you?"

 

Historical Context: 1960-1980s, Poverty and Crime in Rio de Janeiro

 

Source from the Period

 

"Zé Cabo found himself caught in that exact situation. He had never wanted
to leave his home or his community unless he could move to Gloria, his favorite
neighborhood. But he was forced to move to a less central part of Nova Brasília
in 1990 due to the traffi c. He described the house he bought in Nova Brasília
in a conversation on July 30 2003:

 

This house was worth US$15,000 when I bought it in 1990, and I invested
another $5,00 adding on and improving it—now it’s worth zero. I moved here
because I had to get out of the way of the traffi c—I was right in the middle of
things there. When I came here to this remote corner, there were only a few
houses—it was a long, steep uphill climb, not convenient to anything. Now it
has grown, and the traffic has followed. Look at my garage door—full of bullet
holes. I had to teach the grandchildren to duck under the bed when they hear
gunfire—one night a bullet came right through the window. . . . Did you see those
guys who hang out in front of my door sniffing glue, smoking maconha (pot), and
snorting cocaine in broad daylight? I would leave right now if I could sell or rent
it, but no one wants it.

 

Ironically, drug traffic has turned favelas into places where you need permission to enter—just like the gated ghettos of the rich.
The residents’ movements within the favelas are constrained as well. As Nilton told me in 1999,

 

We live in a place where you do not have the liberty to act freely, to come and go,
to leave your house whenever you want to, to live as any other person who is not

in jail. It is imprisoning to think, “Can I go out now or is it too dangerous?” Why
do I have to call someone and say that they shouldn’t come here today? It is awful,
it is oppressive. No one should have to live like this

 

In 2001, Djanira said, “The entrance of the narco-traffi c and the violence
ended our freedom, ended our happiness, and ruined everything.”36
The families who had left Rio and gone back to their hometowns were driven
out of the favelas by the violence and its consequences. I went to interview Zé
Cabo’s brother Manuel José on the outskirts of Natal, the capital of the state of
Rio Grande do Norte, in early December 2001. He lives with his wife in a two story house with a small tropical garden, which she tends. He said:

 

I lived in Nova Brasília since I was a young man. I married there, raised a family. I left in 1999 because of the violence. My house was just behind Zé Cabo’s
house. . . . Th ere were so many assaults. Th e last straw was when my wife and I were
returning from visiting her relatives in Botafogo [a neighborhood on Guanabara
Bay near the center of Rio]. We were assaulted coming home on the bus. Th e guys
said to her “Não é nada, não, tire as jóias [this is no big deal, nothing—take off
your jewelry].” Th ere were five of them—we were near Jacarezinho [the biggest
favela in the North Zone]. After that we said let’s leave and go back to our terra
[land]—we paid 750 reais (US$375) for a small plot of land here and spent three
years building this house."

- Favela: Four Decades Living on the Edge in Rio De Janeiro

By Janice Perlman

 

Historical Context

 

"Largely ignored by city and state government for much of the first half of the twentieth century, the favelas began to attract political attention starting in the mid-1940s. During this period, populist politicians ascended to power on both the national and local stage championing a platform of poverty alleviation and national modernization. A central part of their program was providing modern, sanitary, public housing units as an alternative to slums, which were thought to breed not only disease, illiteracy, and crime, but also moral corruption and political radicalism. The “proletarian parks” of the 1940s, the brainchild of Mayor Henrique Dodsworth (1937–1945), set a precedent of favela removal for a series of full-scale eradication campaigns initiated in the 1960s and ’70s. These original settlements were intended as temporary housing for displaced favela residents until the city and state government could erect permanent housing projects. As they were not properly maintained and their management style was quite unpopular among their residents, the parks were abandoned within several years after their first occupation.  In addition to the reduction of poverty, the ostensible primary reason for the construction of public housing, it is clear that real estate interests pressured policy makers to pursue an aggressive course of favela eradication in the 1960s and ’70s. Many favelas were located on precious inner city land in Rio’s most affluent neighborhoods, making them ripe territory for lucrative commercial and residential construction ventures. As arch-conservative military generals usurped power from the progressive statesman João Goulart on a national level, state and city politics, led by the pugnacious former journalist Carlos Lacerda, became more draconian as well. Over the next two decades, the state government undertook a large-scale slum removal program paired with a massive relocation effort in which displaced favelados were settled in public housing compounds located on the city’s periphery.

 

Through the founding, first of the Housing Company of Guanabara (Cooperativa de Habitação Popular do Estado da Guanabara), and later of the Banco Nacional de Habitação (National Housing Bank) and the Coordination of Social Interest of the Greater Rio Metropolitan Area (Coordenadoria de Habitação de Interesse Social da Área Metropolitana do Grande Rio), the federal and Guanabara state governments created a formal apparatus for the destruction of squatter settlements and the forced relocation of their residents into public housing compounds that they proceeded to neglect after the initial stages of resettlement. Church officials were also active players in these mid-century housing debates, and while their solutions were somewhat more humane than that of the government, they proved nearly as paternalistic and self-interested as government policymakers.Yet because favela removal failed to address the root causes of Rio’s housing shortage, the city’s favela population continued to grow steadily during the 1950s, ’60s and ’70s. As a result, government officials eventually determined that eradication was not a viable solution to the favela problem, abandoning it as an official policy in the late 1970s. Unfortunately, by the time eradication efforts ceased, Rio’s poorest citizens had experienced a significant assault on their basic human rights. The removals of the 1960s and ’70s had displaced about 140,000 people and exacerbated the city’s housing problem, as it had further marginalized the poor both geographically and socio-economically. Punished for their poverty, favelados living in remote, poorly maintained housing compounds came to typify the marginal population that the government had painted them to be in order to justify the removal of their communities.

 

Although the 1950s through the ’70s was a time of great strife for favela residents, several pivotal developments took place that contributed positively to their struggle to obtain decent housing. The Reclaiming Service for Favelas and Unhygienic Housing (Serviço Especial de Recuperação das Favelas e Habitações Anti-Higiênicas) and the Community Development Company (Companhia de Desenvolvimento de Comunidade) completed groundbreaking experiments in favela development, serving as important precursors to the urbanization campaigns that the city, state, and federal governments would later adopt as the primary solution to the favela problem. These programs orchestrated much-needed improvements in infrastructure, while encouraging political empowerment and integration into the social economy of the larger city."

- Favelas in Rio de Janeiro, Past and Present

Brazil: Five Centuries of Change, Brown University

 

Historical Accuracy

 

"The film, which begins in the 1960s and ends in the early 1980s, follows the lives of Li'l Ze and Rocket, a young photographer who chronicles the decline of Cidade de Deus, against a backdrop of drugs, criminal rivalry and wanton violence.  Now home to around 40,000 people, the community was originally built for families relocated to the outskirts by Rio's authorities to rid the city centre of its favelas. However, it became notorious for its gangsters, criminals and dangerous streets.    In one of the most memorable scenes, Li'l Ze orders a boy to choose another boy to shoot dead.  Felipe Silva, one of the children in the scene, recalls: "I was scared to death of Leandro Firmino. They kind of made me fear him so I could cry in that scene."  Firmino, now 35 and father to a 21-month-old boy, was recruited directly from the favelas to make the film, an adaptation of Paulo Lins's novel.  "It's gone pretty fast," says Firmino. "I'm surprised people remember it. It's very much alive, even among children of 11 or 12."

 

"It was normal," he says. "I lived here. Cidade de Deus has the difficulties of the favela but it always had a kind of culture.  

 

"When I launched the film and became a public persona, it was cool, but it wasn't a big novelty because we had already seen others - musicians, some who no longer live here, and some who still live here.

 

"For example, if you talk about funk in Rio de Janeiro, you talk about Cidade de Deus. It was normal. It just raised morale here among people that I had produced this piece of work."

 

The reaction of the community to the new documentary is perhaps more telling.  Cavi Borges, executive producer, says: "There are many people in City of God who don't like the film because of the violence. When they heard we were doing a documentary, they were like: 'Oh no, not again.'

 

"But ours is a different form. It's a reference for Brazilian cinema; everything is City of God, City of God, City of God. It's good and bad"

- City of God, 10 years on

Donna Bowater, The BBC

 

 

The Film Itself

 

The Story

 

"Brazil, 1960s, City of God. The Tender Trio robs motels and gas trucks. Younger kids watch and learn well...too well. 1970s: Li'l Zé has prospered very well and owns the city. He causes violence and fear as he wipes out rival gangs without mercy. His best friend Bené is the only one to keep him on the good side of sanity. Rocket has watched these two gain power for years, and he wants no part of it. Yet he keeps getting swept up in the madness. All he wants to do is take pictures. 1980s: Things are out of control between the last two remaining gangs...will it ever end? Welcome to the City of God."

 

Critic Review

 

"An intoxicating shot of cinematic adrenaline, "City of God" starts with a desperate chicken escaping slaughter and being chased by a gang of pistol-packing prepubescents.  It's an apt allegory for the frantic fight for survival of the protagonists in this ferocious blast of gangster mayhem.  Rocket (Alexandre Rodrigues) narrates our journey into the slums of Rio de Janeiro, the City of God. A child of the 60s, he witnesses two decades of barbarity, greed, rape and revenge which fuel a catastrophic gang war.  Fear and an instinct for self-preservation keep him on the straight and narrow, but his childhood associate Li'l Zé (Leandro Firmino da Hora) grows into the ghetto's godfather - a ruthless, demented killer who makes Joe Pesci's "GoodFellas" psycho look like Mary Poppins.

 

Comparison's with Scorsese's crime classic are inevitable, given the hyperkinetic action, tar black comedy, and eye-snatching visual panache. But while there's no doubting the genius of "GoodFellas", for all its brutality it remained a caper, a gripping spectacle of hood vs hood, where the mobsters chose their glamour-filled lifestyle and ultimately got what they deserved.  In "City of God", desperation drives children to acts of outrageous violence, crime appears to be the only option in the moral and economic wasteland of the Brazilian favelas. Even the grotesque Li'l Zé is not without humanity, while the fate of other so-called gangsters is poignant.

 

For all its whiz-bang camerawork and outrageous entertainment value, the movie is grounded by its true life origins (Paulo Lins' fact-based novel), and the superb performances of a largely non-professional cast recruited from the streets. Gut-troubling horror follows cruel bellylaughs, and the relentless action is underscored by unforgiving poverty.  Shocking, frightening, thrilling and funny, "City of God" has the substance to match its lashings of style. Cinema doesn't get more exhilarating than this."

- Nev Pierce, The BBC

 

BOT User Opinion

 

" remember when I first saw this I was simply blown away. Taking us into the crime world of Rio De Janeiro it belongs up there with the great crime films, like the Godfather, Goodfellas, Mean Streets, etc. It's an epic film that spins three decades. It's got great performances from mostly non actors. It's brutal and violent and very harrowing. And the ending of this movie is scarier than anything I've seen in a horror movie. If you haven't seen it please do." - @DAR

 

Factoids

 

City of God was directed by Fernando Meirelles.  It received 50 points and 8 votes.

 

 

 

Countries Represented: Algeria (1), Austria (2), Belarus (1), Brazil (1), England (1), France (1), Germany (2), Israel (2), Korea (1), The Ocean (1), Poland (1), Japan (3), Spain (1), United States (16), Vietnam (1)

 

Time Periods Represented: 16th Century (1), 17th Century (2), 18th Century (2), 19th Century (5), 1920s (1), 1930s (3), 1950s (2), 1960s (6), 1990s (1), 21st Century (2), Classical Period (2), Middle Ages (1), World War 1/1910s (1), World War 2/1940s (6)

 

Cross Section of Times and Countries: 18th Century - Austria (1), 18th Century - United States (1), 19th Century - The Ocean (1), 19th Century - United States (4), 21st Century - United States (2), 1920s - United States (1), 1930s - Germany (1), 1930s - Korea (1), 1930s - United States (1), 1950s - Algeria (1), 1950s - United States (1), 1960s - Brazil (1), 1960s - United States (4), 1960s - Vietnam (1), 1990s - United States (1), Classical Period - Israel (2), Middle Ages - England (1), Sengoku Period - Japan (1), Tokugawa Shogunate - Japan (2), World War 1 - France (1), World War 2/1940s - Belarus (1), World War 2/1940s - Germany (1), World War 2/1940s - Poland (1), World War 2/1940s - Spain (1), World War 2 - Austria (1), World War 2 - United States (1)

 

Directors Represented: Park Chan-Wook (1), Francis Ford Coppola (1), Kevin Costner (1), Andrew Dominik (1), Stanley Donen (1), David Fincher (2), John Ford (1), Milos Forman (1), Bob Fosse (1), Anthoney Harvey (1), Terry Jones (1), Philip Kaufman (1), Gene Kelley (1), Elem Klimov (1), Masaki Kobayashi (1), Stanley Kramer (1), Akira Kurosawa (1), Michael Mann (1), Penny Marshall (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Adam McKay (1), Steve McQueen (1), Theodore Melfi (1), Sam Mendes (1), Gillo Pontecorvo (1), Martin Scorsese (2), Steven Spielberg (2), Oliver Stone (1), John Sturges (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Peter Weir (1), Robert Wise (1), William Wyler (1)

 

Decades Represented: 40s (1), 50s (2), 60s (6), 70s (3), 80s (5), 90s (3), 00s (6), 10s (9)

 

 

 

 

Edited May 12, 2020 by The Panda

[The Panda]

And honorable mentions for today

 

 

61.    All the President’s Men
62.    Spartacus
63.    The Age of Innocence
64.    Gandhi
65.    Gone With the Wind 

66.    Chinatown
67.    Kundun
68.    Kingdom of Heaven
69.    There Will Be Blood 
70.    Argo 
71.    Inherit the Wind 
72.    Fiddler on the Roof
73.    The Thin Red Line
74.    Little Women (2019)
75.    BlacKkKlansman 
76.    The Wind Rises 
77.    The Shawshank Redemption
78.    Letters from Iwo Jima
79.    Casino
80.    MASH 
81.    Roma 
82.    The King’s Speech 
83.    Unforgiven 
84.    The Last Samurai 
85.    Alexander Nevsky 
86.    Aguirre, The Wrath of God 
87.    Spotlight
88.    (Tied for 88) Platoon 
88.    (Tie for 88) L.A. Confidential 
90.    1776  
91.    The Godfather Part II
92.    Persepolis 
93.    A Man for All Seasons 
94.    Blood Diamond 
95.    Becket 
96.    Barry Lyndon 
97.    First Man 
98.    Ugetsu 
99.    The Searchers 
100.    Cinema Paradiso

[The Panda]

Also here are some films that received votes that did not make the top 100 (in no particular order)

 

300

Lady Bird

The Prestige

The Last Temptation of Christ

Red Beard (1965)

Quest for Fire

The Patriot

Steve Jobs

Forrest Gump

The Passion of Joan of Arc

To Kill a Mockingbird

Tombstone

The Last Emperor

Atonement

Rocketman

The Passion of the Christ

Ivan's Childhood

Mulan

Empire of the Sun

The Madness of King George

Pocahontas 

Edited May 12, 2020 by The Panda

[Eric Atreides]

23 minutes ago, The Panda said:

Also here are some films that received votes that did not make the top 100 (in no particular order)

 

300

Pocahontas 

[Plain Old Tele]

#17?!?!

 

Do you want to see a guillotine in Piccadilly!? Want to call that raggedy-ass Napoleon your king!? You want your children to sing La Marseillaise!?

[Cap]

29 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

#17?!?!

 

Do you want to see a guillotine in Piccadilly!? Want to call that raggedy-ass Napoleon your king!? You want your children to sing La Marseillaise!?

I would say forget it Tele, it’s BOT. But that didn’t even make the list. 

[The Panda]

 

 

"tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!!"

 

Historical Setting: Middle Ages, First War of Scottish Independence

 

Source from the Period

 

"Hardly had a period of six months passed since the Scots' had bound themselves by the above-mentioned solemn oath of fidelity and subjection to the king of the English, when the reviving malice of that perfidious [race] excited their minds to fresh sedition. For the bishop of the church in Glasgow, whose personal name was Robert Wishart, ever foremost in treason, conspired with the Steward of the realm, named James,(1) for a new piece of insolence, yea, for a new chapter of ruin. Not daring openly to break their pledged faith to the king, they caused a certain bloody man, William Wallace, who had formerly been a chief of brigands in Scotland, to revolt against the king and assemble the people in his support. So about the Nativity of the Glorious Virgin (2) they began to show themselves in rebellion ; and when a great army of England was to be assembled against them, the Steward treacherously said to them [the English] - ' It is not expedient to set In motion so great a multitude on account of a single rascal ; send with me a few picked men, and I will bring him to you dead or alive.' When this had been done and the greater part of the army had been dismissed, the Steward brought them to the bridge of Stirling, where on the other side of the water the army of Scotland was posted. They [the Scots] allowed as many of the English to cross the bridge as they could hope to overcome, and then, having blocked the bridge (3) they slaughtered all who had crossed over, among whom perished the Treasurer of England, Hugh de Cressingham, of whose skin William Wallace caused a broad strip to be taken from the head to the heel, to make therewith a baldrick for his sword.(4) The Earl of Warenne escaped with difficulty and with a small following, so hotly did the enemy pursue them. After this the Scots entered Berwick and put to death the few English that they found therein ; for the town was then without walls, and might be taken as easily by English or Scots coming in force. The castle of the town, however, was not surrendered on this occasion.

 

After these events the Scots entered Northumberland in strength, wasting all the land, committing arson, pillage, and murder, and advancing almost as far as the town of Newcastle ; from which, however, they turned aside and entered the county of Carlisle. There they did as they had done in Northumberland, destroying everything, then returned into Northumberland to lay waste more completely what they had left at first ; and re-entered Scotland on the feast of S. Cecilia, Virgin and Martyr." (5)

 

1. Father of Walter Stewart who, by his marriage with Marjory, daughter of Robert I., became progenitor of the Stuart dynasty.
2. 8th September.
3. Ponte obturato
4. Other writers say the skin was cut up into horse-girths.
5. 22nd November"

- Stirling Bridge, The Lancaster Chronicle

 

Historical Context

 

"Much of William Wallace’s life remains a mystery as historians disagree over the facts surrounding the hero’s eventful life.  The exact circumstances of the patriot’s birth are unknown but it is believed that he was born around 1270, either at Elderslie near Paisley or Ellerslie in Ayrshire, into a minor noble family.

 

As a result of Wallace’s rising, John de Warenne, the Earl of Surrey, was ordered to march north by King Edward I in September 1297. Warenne had a huge force of heavy cavalry and was anticipating a victory.  Stirling was the main entry point to the north of Scotland, so it was here, just north of Stirling Bridge, on the Abbey Craig that Wallace encamped with his army.  The bridge (which stood 180 metres upstream from the 15th century stone bridge that still stands today) was only wide enough for two horsemen to pass abreast, and it would have taken the English army hours to cross.  On the 11th September the battle began as the English were forced to cross the bridge.  Wallace and Andrew de Moray waited until more than half the English had made the crossing before springing their trap.  Scottish spearsmen charged down the causeway.  Those on the right flank forced their way along the river bank to the north end of the bridge, preventing the English from escaping.  Those on the south bank of the river, including Warenne, retreated to Berwick.  From those trapped on the north side, more than 100 men-at-arms and 5,000 Welsh infantry were caught and slaughtered by the Scottish forces.  Wallace’s comrade Andrew de Moray was wounded in battle, and died two months later.

 

After his betrayal and capture, Wallace was taken to London, where he was tried.  He was found guilty, hanged, disembowelled, beheaded, and quartered on 23rd August 1305.  Wallace’ death did not end Scotland’s Wars of Independence. Robert the Bruce continued the fight and achieved victory at the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314.  For more information on the story of William Wallace and of The National Wallace Monument you can buy The National Wallace Monument Guide Book in the Visitor Reception Centre, or inside the Monument."

- Sir William Wallace, Guardian of Scotland, the National Wallace Monument

 

Historical Accuracy

 

"While much of the story depicted did occur, including the English occupation of Scotland during the time of Edward I, king of England, the depiction of the revolt against the English and other events do not correspond well to historical accounts.    In the movie, William Wallace began fighting against the English after the death of his wife in 1297, who according tot he movie was killed by the English. In fact, no records exist of William Wallace having ever been married. However, a later poem did mention he had a wife that was killed and it led him to seek revenge. More likely, Wallace was either ambitious to break English authority or resented English occupation of his ancestral lands. This may have been why he became one of the leading early Scottish rebels. Braveheart also suggests that Wallace's actions in response to his wife's death triggered to a wider rebellion against the English.  However, a rebellion across various parts of Scotland had already started, with William Wallace joining William, Lord of Douglas as an ally. One of the first major acts of rebellion was the assassination of the Sheriff of Lanark, William Heselrig. The account by Thomas Grey does indicate a woman or girl present with William Wallace. Some have suggested this was his wife. Similar to the movie, Wallace may have left the town initially then came back with some supporters to lead an attack where the Sheriff was then killed. As the events occurred at the same time as other rebellious acts across Scotland, the attack may have been a premeditated and coordinated event.

 

The movie depicts an aging Edward I as being tormented by William Wallace. The attacks were shown as successful skirmishes in most cases, but it is likely these attacks were either negligible, failures, or were insignificant. They did not have a meaningful impact on the English presence in Scotland. Edward I most likely did not consider Wallace a major threat at this point, because Wallace was struggling to raise an army after the disaster at Falkirk.  Additionally, he probably had a weakened position in Scotland. Wallace was betrayed, as suggested in the movie, by a Scottish noble (John de Menteith) who was loyal to Edward in 1305. Wallace was captured and soon put on trial for treason at Westminster Palace. At the trial, he did seem to say that he was not guilty of treason because he never claimed loyalty to the English crown. This was depicted in the movie. However, he was also charged with other offenses such as pillaging civilians. This charge was probably true because he did lead raids into northern England.

 

By the end of August 1305, Wallace was found guilty and drawn and quartered, a death reserved for traitors. Wallace's body parts and head were displayed in different parts of England to make an example against those considering of revolting against the English king.[9]  Despite Wallace's death, he is shown as gaining revenge by impregnating the future consort of the king of England, Edward II's wife, Isabella of France. In reality, Isabella would have been no older than 9 years of age at this time and not yet married to Edward II.[10] She was not even in England at this time. While Edward II is portrayed as effeminate, historical records do indicate he was possibly gay. But his role in English rule was not significant until after his father's reign. However, because Edward II was a relatively weak king, the Scots did successfully rebel against him.  Robert the Bruce, in many ways, was far more successful than William Wallace. He successfully rebelled against England and Scotland regained its independence under his reign. The Battle of Bannockburn, as suggested by the movie, was a major turning point. Bannockburn was the culmination of years fighting the Scots and English. Nevertheless, as the movie suggests, the Scots did gain their independence after the reign of Edward I.

 

Much of William Wallace's life has now been steeped in myth, where in actuality very little is known about him. Most of what we do know deriving from primary accounts center around the battles from 1297-1298 and when he was captured in August 1305. Nevertheless, William Wallace did, for various reason, gain a symbolic importance. Later stories, such as Exploits and Death of William Wallace helped to create a romantic and tragic character, perhaps more similar to later figures rather than William Wallace. Nevertheless, the significance of William Wallace is evident to the national character of Scotland where today many statues and monuments are dedicated to him."

- How historically accurate is Braveheart?, DailyHistory

 

 

The Film Itself

 

The Story

 

"William Wallace is a Scottish rebel who leads an uprising against the cruel English ruler Edward the Longshanks, who wishes to inherit the crown of Scotland for himself. When he was a young boy, William Wallace's father and brother, along with many others, lost their lives trying to free Scotland. Once he loses another of his loved ones, William Wallace begins his long quest to make Scotland free once and for all, along with the assistance of Robert the Bruce."

 

Critic Opinion

 

"The story of William Wallace, who led the Scots in a struggle for freedom from England's brutal rule, "Braveheart" evokes old-fashioned movie epics. Mr. Gibson's stroke of brilliance is to revel in those epic qualities -- tragic romance and unbounded heroism, gorgeous photography and a cast of thousands --and add a swift contemporary kick. "Braveheart" is also an explosive action movie. The logical comparison is not with the pallid "Rob Roy" but with a "Die Hard" film. The medieval Scots use spears, swords, axes and giant rocks, and they use them with a vengeance.  They get quite bloody in the process, too. At the start of the film, the child William (sweetly played by James Robinson, who looks remarkably like Mr. Gibson) wanders into a hut where his clansmen have gone to make peace with the English. The boy sees their bodies hanging from the rafters, establishing right away that this movie is about a savage time.

 

 

Despite that, the early episodes are more lyrical than brutal. Wallace is sent abroad to be educated, returns as Mel Gibson and falls in love with a beautiful woman named Murron (Catherine McCormack). Wallace and Murron are married in secret to elude an English law allowing a nobleman to rape a Scottish bride on her wedding night. The romantic marriage ceremony, at night in a clearing in the woods, is so evocative of "Romeo and Juliet" that there must be trouble ahead.  Just enough of the typical Gibson persona shows through to make Wallace accessible and likable in modern terms. The love affair with Murron plays off the actor's heartthrob image. And there are flashes of irreverent wit, including a weirdly zany rock-throwing contest between Wallace and his loyal friend Hamish (Brendan Gleeson).  Wallace is a warrior with wit and a romantic soul. But when someone he loves is murdered by the English, he is capable of slitting the murderer's throat in revenge. From then on, "Braveheart" becomes a film of sly political treachery and extravagant, unrelenting battles."

- Caryn James, The New York Times

 

BOT User Opinion

 

"Epic, epic, epic." - @CoolioD1

 

Factoids

 

Braveheart was directed by Mel Gibson.  It received 51 points and 6 votes

 

 

Countries Represented: Algeria (1), Austria (2), Belarus (1), Brazil (1), England (1), France (1), Germany (2), Israel (2), Korea (1), The Ocean (1), Poland (1), Japan (3), Scotland (1), Spain (1), United States (16), Vietnam (1)

 

Time Periods Represented: 16th Century (1), 17th Century (2), 18th Century (2), 19th Century (5), 1920s (1), 1930s (3), 1950s (2), 1960s (6), 1990s (1), 21st Century (2), Classical Period (2), Middle Ages (2), World War 1/1910s (1), World War 2/1940s (6)

 

Cross Section of Times and Countries: 18th Century - Austria (1), 18th Century - United States (1), 19th Century - The Ocean (1), 19th Century - United States (4), 21st Century - United States (2), 1920s - United States (1), 1930s - Germany (1), 1930s - Korea (1), 1930s - United States (1), 1950s - Algeria (1), 1950s - United States (1), 1960s - Brazil (1), 1960s - United States (4), 1960s - Vietnam (1), 1990s - United States (1), Classical Period - Israel (2), Middle Ages - England (1), Middle Ages - Scotland (1), Sengoku Period - Japan (1), Tokugawa Shogunate - Japan (2), World War 1 - France (1), World War 2/1940s - Belarus (1), World War 2/1940s - Germany (1), World War 2/1940s - Poland (1), World War 2/1940s - Spain (1), World War 2 - Austria (1), World War 2 - United States (1)

 

Directors Represented: Park Chan-Wook (1), Francis Ford Coppola (1), Kevin Costner (1), Andrew Dominik (1), Stanley Donen (1), David Fincher (2), John Ford (1), Milos Forman (1), Bob Fosse (1), Mel Gibson (1), Anthoney Harvey (1), Terry Jones (1), Philip Kaufman (1), Gene Kelley (1), Elem Klimov (1), Masaki Kobayashi (1), Stanley Kramer (1), Akira Kurosawa (1), Michael Mann (1), Penny Marshall (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Adam McKay (1), Steve McQueen (1), Theodore Melfi (1), Sam Mendes (1), Gillo Pontecorvo (1), Martin Scorsese (2), Steven Spielberg (2), Oliver Stone (1), John Sturges (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Peter Weir (1), Robert Wise (1), William Wyler (1)

 

Decades Represented: 40s (1), 50s (2), 60s (6), 70s (3), 80s (5), 90s (4), 00s (6), 10s (9)

 

 

Edited May 12, 2020 by The Panda

[Cap]

Look, at least the Patriot has Jason Issacs deliciously hamming it up for the screen. 

[4815162342]

[The Panda]

 

 

"QUIET IN THIS WHOREHOUSE!"

 

Historical Setting: World War 2, The Ocean

 

Source from the Period

 

"Additionally A 12.: 6 February. While heading into an underwater attack, the
fixed eye level periscope was locked into the cruise at surface position by an
oil leak of 65 ATU [Pressure above Atmospheric]. Cause unknown. With the
increasing oil leak the periscope continued to maneuver. Investigation at the
yard is essential.

 

Additionally A 13.: 6 February. Steering switch for the observation periscope
cut. The fatigued return stage spring was replaced, the switch was cleaned. Time
2 hours.

 

Additionally A 14.: All of the onboard valves were blown at the yard during
repairs, so as to maintain them leak free from the beginning of the job, so that
the blowing connections are always under pressure during each individual dive.

Additionally A 15.: 20 February. The pressure at stage 3 of the Electric
Compressor climbed to 60 ATU [Pressure above Atmospheric]. Further obstructions
were removed from the pressure valves at stage 4. After replacement work the
compressor operated normally.

 

Additionally A 16.: On 24 February. Following a surface attack on a steamer, the
coup de grace should be given while submerged. During the dive the boat listed
inexplicably to the stern. Trimming with air pumps forward was not desirable,
with "all hands forward" [order for the crew to rush to the bow of the boat] the
listing towards the stern passed. After breaking the surface, it was established
that the trim switch was loosened from the trim controls following a break in
the spindle security plate. From this point on the switch was set in the lower
position (to trim from bow to stern). On course for a night attack, the order
should be issued for trim water to be shifted to no 3 bow, for flooding in a
stern tube and flooding in a bow tube, altogether over 1000 liters were shifted
to trim the bow, a great amount, due to the break down of the trim control. The
stern was trimmed. By greater attention to the trim control, the correct
external trim setting was made with respect to the trim switch, and with
knowledge of the correct trim timing. Removal of the obstruction took 45 minutes."

- PAGE FROM GERMAN SUBMARINE U-107 ENGINEERING SECTION DIARY OPERATIONS FROM 24 JANUARY TO 1 MARCH 1941

 

Historical Context

 

"The German Navy was a force to be reckoned with during World War II (WWII). German submarines – or unterwasser boats (U-boats) – were on a mission to destroy merchant vessels carrying supplies to allied forces in order to hinder their war efforts. Aided by intelligence reports on the location, destination, and speed of merchant vessels, the U-boats would search the seas for victims.  Sometimes they were organized into so-called “wolf packs” and hunted in North Atlantic waters in groups. Other times, in geographically spread out regions where wolf packs were not feasible, a U-boat would hunt by itself.

 

When a U-boat spotted a target, it was not uncommon to track enemy vessels for days as the sub called in reinforcements for a large, coordinated attack. Equipped with deck guns and torpedoes, the attack could happen from the surface or from underwater, depending on circumstances. If the U-boat was on the surface, crew might assess the damage they had inflicted visually, before diving back under water to remain protected from a counter attack.  Brief reports sent from the U-boats to their headquarters back on land gave account of their successes, measured in the amount of enemy tonnage they were able to send to the bottom of the ocean.

 

Reinhard Hardegen, recalls in his book On Combat Station! U-Boat Engagement Against England and America what it felt like to be a German U-boat commander at this time: “We were to sail to America as the first envoys to hit a good number of merchant ships in different harbors all at the same time. Those were our orders. As a U-boat commander I could not have dreamed of anything more exciting, it was new territory for me. We knew much was at play with this first attack on America; we had to get the first strike right. The stronger the hit was, the more effect it would have.” Hardegen’s orders included a battle call: “Hit them like you’re beating a drum. Attack on! Sink them! You mustn’t come home empty handed.” The resulting offensive became known as Operation Drumbeat (Operation Paukenschlag)."

- U-576: Life and Death On a World War II German U-boat

Debi Blaney - NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research

 

Historical Accuracy

 

"Marketed both by its German name Das Boot and in English as The Boat, the film was unusual in its promotion. With a very non-descript English name, Das Boot eventually stuck as the title for the film.  The outdoor mock-up of U-96 was simply a shell propelled by a small engine which was stationed in La Rochelle, France.  It has a history all its own. One morning the production crew arrived on set and went to where it was normally docked to find it missing.  A breakdown in communication resulted in the crew not being informed it had been rented out by Steven Spielberg who was filming Raiders of the Lost Ark at the same time.  Incredibly, just a few weeks later during production the mock-up was damaged and sank during a storm. Production crews recovered and patched the mock-up for the final scenes.  The full-sized mock-up version was used for the filming of the Gibraltar surface scenes. The rockets and bomber plane, a Douglas SBD Dauntless dive bomber, were real. The British ships were models.  All the cast members were fluent in English and dubbed themselves for the English version.  While filming, the actors were not allowed to go out in sunlight to help create the pallor typical of submariners who seldom see the sun during missions.  The actors were intensely trained as submariners learning how to quickly navigate their tight quarters.

 

Novelist Lothar-Günther Buchheim, whose work inspired the film, shared his disappointment with Petersen’s adaptation criticizing, in particular, the overacting of the cast which he felt was unrealistic.  A U-boat correspondent himself, Buchheim was very critical of what he felt was Petersen’s sacrificing of realism and suspense in dialog, narration, and photography for eye candy effects and cheap dramatic thrills.  An example is the exploding of bolts in the U-Boat. In reality, a single bolt loosening on the hull would be sufficient to cause worry for the crew that the entire boat would crush under water pressure. In the film, Petersen shows several bolts loosening.  Buchheim further criticized Petersen’s depictions of crew behavior citing the loud behavior during patrols as unrealistic and crew celebrations after achieving torpedo hits or surviving bombing attacks as unprofessional.  He criticized the scene where Lt. Werner had an oil-drenched towel thrown in his face. As an officer, despite being an outsider, Lt. Werner would have immediately commanded special respect. The towel incident would not have been tolerated.  In whole, Buchheim was most critical of the ultimate glorification and mystification of Nazi Germany’s WWII U-Boat war, German heroism, and nationalism.  His original work was an anti-war novel."

- Das Boot, The Background, Facts and Goofs, Joris Nieuwint

 

 

The Film Itself

 

The Story

 

"It is 1942 and the German submarine fleet is heavily engaged in the so-called "Battle of the Atlantic" to harass and destroy British shipping. With better escorts of the destroyer class, however, German U-boats have begun to take heavy losses. "Das Boot" is the story of the crew of one such U-Boat, with the film examining how these submariners maintained their professionalism as soldiers and attempted to accomplish impossible missions, all the while attempting to understand and obey the ideology of the government under which they served."

 

Critic Review

 

"''DAS BOOT'' isn't just a German film about World War II; it's a German naval adventure epic that has already been a hit in West Germany. Its attitude toward war is distinctly critical, which must account for some share of the film's popularity. But so do the quiet compassion and precise detail with which its story has been told.  Wolfgang Petersen, who skillfully directed the homosexual love story ''The Consequence,'' brings to this film a careful, thoughtful, sympathetic tone, and a great deal of verisimilitude. Most of the action is confined to one U-boat, with a camera that travels up and down its single, claustrophobic corridor. Mr. Petersen pays great attention to the sights, sounds and smells that characterize the U-boat, on which several dozen men are confined. His direction powerfully fosters the impression that you, too, are there.  Audiences here aren't likely to consider ''Das Boot,'' which opens today at the 68th Street Playhouse and the Embassy 72d Street Theater, the novelty it apparently is at home. Movies of this genre have been turned out by Hollywood plenty of times. But this one is particularly thorough.

 

When the man tending the engine room has a mad scene, the film strikes a conventional note, as it does in numerous instances. But Mr. Petersen finds both the time - 2 1/2 hours - and the explicitiness to present familiar episodes more graphically than Hollywood might. He is also free to end this already-embittered movie on an unusually grim note, sending home its anti-war message in no uncertain terms. ''Das Boot'' is yet another moving testament to the wastefulness of battle."

- Janet Maslin, The New York Times

 

BOT User Review

 

"The mother of all submarine movies, the greatest genre that will ever exist

 

You can feel the tension at every moment and it never feels tiring in all its 3 and a half epic hours." - @darkelf

 

Factoids

 

Das Boot was directed by Wolfgang Peterson.  It received 51 points and 8 votes.

 

 

Countries Represented: Algeria (1), Austria (2), Belarus (1), Brazil (1), England (1), France (1), Germany (2), Israel (2), Korea (1), The Ocean (2), Poland (1), Japan (3), Scotland (1), Spain (1), United States (16), Vietnam (1)

 

Time Periods Represented: 16th Century (1), 17th Century (2), 18th Century (2), 19th Century (5), 1920s (1), 1930s (3), 1950s (2), 1960s (6), 1990s (1), 21st Century (2), Classical Period (2), Middle Ages (2), World War 1/1910s (1), World War 2/1940s (7)

 

Cross Section of Times and Countries: 18th Century - Austria (1), 18th Century - United States (1), 19th Century - The Ocean (1), 19th Century - United States (4), 21st Century - United States (2), 1920s - United States (1), 1930s - Germany (1), 1930s - Korea (1), 1930s - United States (1), 1950s - Algeria (1), 1950s - United States (1), 1960s - Brazil (1), 1960s - United States (4), 1960s - Vietnam (1), 1990s - United States (1), Classical Period - Israel (2), Middle Ages - England (1), Middle Ages - Scotland (1), Sengoku Period - Japan (1), Tokugawa Shogunate - Japan (2), World War 1 - France (1), World War 2/1940s - Belarus (1), World War 2/1940s - Germany (1), World War 2 - The Ocean (1), World War 2/1940s - Poland (1), World War 2/1940s - Spain (1), World War 2 - Austria (1), World War 2 - United States (1)

 

Directors Represented: Park Chan-Wook (1), Francis Ford Coppola (1), Kevin Costner (1), Andrew Dominik (1), Stanley Donen (1), David Fincher (2), John Ford (1), Milos Forman (1), Bob Fosse (1), Mel Gibson (1), Anthoney Harvey (1), Terry Jones (1), Philip Kaufman (1), Gene Kelley (1), Elem Klimov (1), Masaki Kobayashi (1), Stanley Kramer (1), Akira Kurosawa (1), Michael Mann (1), Penny Marshall (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Adam McKay (1), Steve McQueen (1), Theodore Melfi (1), Sam Mendes (1), Wolfgang Peterson (1), Gillo Pontecorvo (1), Martin Scorsese (2), Steven Spielberg (2), Oliver Stone (1), John Sturges (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Peter Weir (1), Robert Wise (1), William Wyler (1)

 

Decades Represented: 40s (1), 50s (2), 60s (6), 70s (3), 80s (6), 90s (4), 00s (6), 10s (9)

 

 

 

Edited May 12, 2020 by The Panda

[CoolioD1]

fun fact: das boot is german for "the butt"

[terrestrial]

1 hour ago, CoolioD1 said:

fun fact: das boot is german for "the butt"

that is BS

[The Panda]

 

 

"You still think it's beautiful to die for your country. The first bombardment taught us better. When it comes to dying for country, it's better not to die at all."

 

Historical Setting: World War 1, France

 

Source from the Period

 

"We are now 150yd from Fritz and the moon is bright, so we bend and walk quietly onto the road running diagonally across the front into the Bosche line. There is a stream the far side of this - boards have been put across it at intervals but must have fallen in - about 20yd down we can cross. We stop and listen - swish - and down we plop (for a flare lights everything up) it goes out with a hiss and over the board we trundle on hands and knees. Still.  Apparently no one has seen so we proceed to crawl through a line of "French" wire. Now for 100yd dead flat weed-land with here and there a shell hole or old webbing equipment lying in little heaps! These we avoid. This means a slow, slow crawl head down, propelling ourselves by toes and forearm, body and legs flat on the ground, like it snake.  A working party of Huns are in their lair. We can just see dark shadows and hear the Sergeant, who is sitting down. He's got a bad cold! We must wait a bit, the moon's getting low but it's too bright now 5 a.m. They will stop soon and if we go on we may meet a covering party lying low. 5.10. 5.15. 5.25. 5.30. And the moon's gone.

 

"Cot the bombs, Sergeant?"

"'No. Sir, I forgot them!"

"Huns" and the last crawl starts.

 

The Bosch is moving and we crawl quickly on to the wire - past two huge shell holes to the first row. A potent row of standards are the first with a nut at the top and strand upon strand of barbed wire. The nut holds the two iron pieces at the top and the ends are driven into the ground 3ft apart. Evidently this line is made behind the parapet and brought out, the legs of the standard falling together. All the joins where the strands cross are neatly done with a separate piece of plain wire. Out comes the wire cutter. I hold the strands to prevent them jumping apart when cut and Stafford cuts. Twenty-five strands are cut and the standard pulled out. Two or three tins are cut off as we go. (These tins are hung on to give warning and one must beware of them.) Next a space 4ft then low wire entanglements as we cut on through to a line of iron spikes and thick, heavy barbed wire.  The standard has three furls to hold the wire up and strive as we can, it won't come out. "By love, it's a corkscrew, twist it round" and then, wonder of wonders, up it goes and out it comes! It is getting light, a long streak has already appeared and so we just make a line of "knife rests" (wire on wooden X-X) against the German parapet and proceed to return. I take the corkscrew and Stafford the iron double standard. My corkscrew keeps on catching and Stafford has to extract me twice from the wire, his standard is smooth and only 3ft so he travels lighter. He leads back down a bit of ditch. Suddenly a sentry fires 2 shots which spit on the ground a few yards in front. We lie absolutely flat, scarcely daring to breathe - has he seen? Then we go on with our trophies, the ditch gets a little deeper, giving cover! My heart is beating nineteen to the dozen - will it mean a machine gun, Stafford is gaining and leads by 10yd. "My God," I think, "it is a listening post ahead and this the ditch to it. I must stop him." I whisper, "Stafford, Stafford" and feel I am shouting. He stops, thinking I have got it. "Do you think it's a listening post?" There! By the mound - listen."

 

"Perhaps we had better cut across to the left Sir."

"Are you all right Sir," from Stafford.

 

I laugh, "Forgot that damned wire." (Our own wire outside our listening post). The LP occupants have gone in. Soon we are behind the friendly parapet and it is day. We are ourselves again, but there's a subtle cord between us, stronger than barbed wire, that will take a lot of cutting. Twenty to seven, 2 hrs 10 minutes of life - war at its best. But shelling, no, that's death at its worst. And I can't go again, it's a vice. Immediately after I swear I'll never do it again, the next night I find myself aching after "No Man's Land"."

- Charles Hudson, letter to his sister (undated, 1915)

 

Historical Context

 

"Although there had been some trench warfare in the American Civil War of 1861 - 65, and the Russian-Japanese War of 1904 - 05, it wasn't until the First World War that fixed trench warfare became the standard form of fighting. The trench system along the Western Front ran for approximately 475 miles, in an "S" shape across Europe, from the North Sea to Switzerland.  Trench warfare created a living environment for the men which was harsh, stagnant and extremely dangerous. Not only were trenches constantly under threat of attack from shells or other weapons, but there were also many health risks that developed into large-scale problems for medical personnel. Apart from the inescapable cold during the winters in France, trenches were often completely waterlogged and muddy, and crawling with lice and rats.  Diseases such as trench fever (an infection caused by louse faeces), trench nephritis (an inflammation of the kidneys), and trench foot (the infection and swelling of feet exposed to long periods of dampness and cold, sometimes leading to amputation) became common medical problems, and caused significant losses of manpower."

- Trench Warfare - Hell on Earth, Australian War Memorial

 

Historical Accuracy

 

"All Quiet on the Western Front is, as most American high school students know, the story of a company of volunteer German soldiers stationed behind the front lines in the last weeks of World War I. Based on Remarque’s time as an infantryman, it’s the first-person account of Paul Baumer, who joins the cause with a group of his classmates.  It’s a gritty pull-no-punches look at the horrors of war. Limbs are lost, horses are destroyed, starving soldiers root through garbage for food, the troops are ravaged by poison gas and artillery bombs, and few make it out alive. Baumer himself dies on a tranquil day shortly before the Armistice is signed. Apolitical in terms of policy and strategy, Remarque’s anti-war masterpiece tapped into the global sorrow following a conflict that led to more than 37 million casualties between 1914-18. The humanity of All Quiet on the Western Front was captured in The New York Times review as, “a document of men who—however else there lives were disrupted—could endure war simply as war.”

 

Ironically it was this very humanity, and relentless political agnosticism, that made Goebbels see the All Quiet on the Western Front film as a threat to the Nazi ideology. A few weeks prior to the December screening, the National Socialist German Workers’ Party surprised the nation on election day, garnering 6.4 million votes, 18 percent of the total. It was a stunning victory for Adolf Hitler that gave his party 107 seats in the Reichstag and made the Nazis the second-largest political party in Germany. His leading campaign message, to unite Germany and make it strong again, resonated with voters in the midst of the Great Depression. Hitler, believing that treasonous Jewish-Marxist revolutionaries at home were to blame for Germany’s defeat in the Great War, proposed tearing up the Treaty of Versailles and ending war reparations to the Allies. This “stabbed in the back” theory was historical nonsense, but allowed workaday Germans to place blame elsewhere for the conflict that took an estimated 3 million lives, military and civilian, an easy sell that undermined the Weimar Republic.

 

All Quiet on the Western Front may have been the first runaway international bestseller, but its utter lack of pro-German propaganda and honest, downbeat look at war made the book a Nazi target. As Hitler’s power grew, Remarque’s critically acclaimed novel (which would be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1931) became a proxy for Nazi rage over its portrayal of German infantrymen as dispirited and disillusioned. Hitler refused to believe Teutonic soldiers could be anything but a magnificent fighting force, a nationalistic historical rewrite that took hold amongst the battered German citizenry.   “One of the great legacies of World War I is that as soon as the Armistice is signed, the enemy is war itself, not the Germans, Russians, or French. The book captures it and becomes the definitive anti-war statement of the Great War,” says Dr. Thomas Doherty, professor of American Studies at Brandeis and the author of Hollywood and Hitler, 1933-39. “The movie has the same depressing tone, the hero doesn’t achieve battlefield glory. He dies in the famous scene reaching for the butterfly. It’s an extraordinary film, the first must-see of the early sound era not starring Al Jolson. Unfortunately, the premiere was an animating moment in the history of Nazism, reclaiming the World War I memory not as meaningless slaughter, as Remarque says, but as a glorious noble German enterprise.”"

- Smithsonian Magazine

 

 

The Film Itself

 

The Story

 

"This is an English language film (made in America) adapted from a novel by German author Erich Maria Remarque. The film follows a group of German schoolboys, talked into enlisting at the beginning of World War 1 by their jingoistic teacher. The story is told entirely through the experiences of the young German recruits and highlights the tragedy of war through the eyes of individuals. As the boys witness death and mutilation all around them, any preconceptions about "the enemy" and the "rights and wrongs" of the conflict disappear, leaving them angry and bewildered. This is highlighted in the scene where Paul mortally wounds a French soldier and then weeps bitterly as he fights to save his life while trapped in a shell crater with the body. The film is not about heroism but about drudgery and futility and the gulf between the concept of war and the actuality."

 

Critic Opinion

 

"All Quiet on the Western Front is the definitive World War I motion picture, the best of a surprisingly small class of movies. Despite being overshadowed in history by the conflict of the late 1930s and early 1940s, The Great War was the subject of many films produced between the two massive conflicts, most of which were serious, epic endeavors. It's no coincidence that two of the first three Best Picture Oscars (those awarded in early 1929 and at the back end of 1930) went to war films. Although Wings is still watchable and enjoyable today, All Quiet on the Western Front has stood the test of time marvelously. The battle scenes in particular are as credible and powerful as anything committed to film before or since. Director Lewis Milestones's attention to detail is so exacting that it's impossible to tell that the images in the mud and trenches were captured in California, not near the border between Germany and France.

 

All Quiet on the Western Front is unambiguously anti-war. The text and subtext both make this clear. In one scene, a number of characters engage in a lively debate about who wants the war. The Kaiser, to establish his place in history? The leaders, whose egos may have been bruised? The manufacturers, who make money? Certainly not the soldiers, who fight and die. There are sequences in which offensive pushes and counter-offenses occur, hundreds of men are butchered, and neither side advances its position. The brutal, bloody, pointless nature of trench warfare is italicized during instances like this. So much is sacrificed for so little - a few yards of muddy ground purchased by the lifeblood of thousands.

 

The film is also about disillusionment - that the "glory" of war is nothing but a sham. The lead character, Paul Baumer (Lewis Ayres), returns home on a furlough to find himself disconnected with the life he once led and the people of his home town. His experiences on the front lines have ruined him for a "normal" life. Elder gentlemen with makeshift "war maps" patiently explain that the war will be won when Paris is taken. Young students can't wait to be old enough to join the army. Paul sums it up like this: "We live in the trenches out there. We fight. We try not to be killed, but sometimes we are.""

- James Berardinelli

 

BOT User Opinion

 

"Not a grade high enough for this movie. Amazing that it got so much play in America but pre-Code movies especially show you that people back then were more cynical and perfectly capable of handling less sanitized themes than the forties and fifties' studio movies generally let on.

 

I remember hearing there was going to be another remake of this but that was a few years ago. I wish the old/B&W thing wasn't a dealbreaker for so many movie fans." - @BoxOfficeFangrl

 

Factoids

 

All Quiet on the Western Front was directed by Lewis Milestone.  It received 52 points and 7 votes.

 

 

Countries Represented: Algeria (1), Austria (2), Belarus (1), Brazil (1), England (1), France (2), Germany (2), Israel (2), Korea (1), The Ocean (2), Poland (1), Japan (3), Scotland (1), Spain (1), United States (16), Vietnam (1)

 

Time Periods Represented: 16th Century (1), 17th Century (2), 18th Century (2), 19th Century (5), 1920s (1), 1930s (3), 1950s (2), 1960s (6), 1990s (1), 21st Century (2), Classical Period (2), Middle Ages (2), World War 1/1910s (2), World War 2/1940s (7)

 

Cross Section of Times and Countries: 18th Century - Austria (1), 18th Century - United States (1), 19th Century - The Ocean (1), 19th Century - United States (4), 21st Century - United States (2), 1920s - United States (1), 1930s - Germany (1), 1930s - Korea (1), 1930s - United States (1), 1950s - Algeria (1), 1950s - United States (1), 1960s - Brazil (1), 1960s - United States (4), 1960s - Vietnam (1), 1990s - United States (1), Classical Period - Israel (2), Middle Ages - England (1), Middle Ages - Scotland (1), Sengoku Period - Japan (1), Tokugawa Shogunate - Japan (2), World War 1 - France (2), World War 2/1940s - Belarus (1), World War 2/1940s - Germany (1), World War 2 - The Ocean (1), World War 2/1940s - Poland (1), World War 2/1940s - Spain (1), World War 2 - Austria (1), World War 2 - United States (1)

 

Directors Represented: Park Chan-Wook (1), Francis Ford Coppola (1), Kevin Costner (1), Andrew Dominik (1), Stanley Donen (1), David Fincher (2), John Ford (1), Milos Forman (1), Bob Fosse (1), Mel Gibson (1), Anthoney Harvey (1), Terry Jones (1), Philip Kaufman (1), Gene Kelley (1), Elem Klimov (1), Masaki Kobayashi (1), Stanley Kramer (1), Akira Kurosawa (1), Michael Mann (1), Penny Marshall (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Adam McKay (1), Steve McQueen (1), Theodore Melfi (1), Sam Mendes (1), Lewis Milestone (1), Wolfgang Peterson (1), Gillo Pontecorvo (1), Martin Scorsese (2), Steven Spielberg (2), Oliver Stone (1), John Sturges (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Peter Weir (1), Robert Wise (1), William Wyler (1)

 

Decades Represented: 30s (1), 40s (1), 50s (2), 60s (6), 70s (3), 80s (6), 90s (4), 00s (6), 10s (9)

 

 

[CoolioD1]

51 minutes ago, terrestrial said:

that is BS

no trust me it means "the butt". i see it says your location is Germany so i feel like you should know this.

[cannastop]

[MrGamer]

8 hours ago, Cap said:

Look, at least the Patriot has Jason Issacs deliciously hamming it up for the screen.