1917

Welcome to the Leverguns.Com Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here ... politely.

Moderators: Hobie, AmBraCol

Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.

Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Post Reply
Message
Author
spurgon
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:27 pm

1917

#1 Post by spurgon » Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:44 pm

Had anyone seen the movie 1917. I liked it a lot.

User avatar
2ndovc
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7473
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:59 am
Location: OH, South Shore of Lake Erie

Re: 1917

#2 Post by 2ndovc » Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:05 pm

I went with our oldest boy yesterday. I really enjoyed it. It's a pretty decent look into life in the Trenches. No movie is perfect and there were some things I just couldn't hear, but that's me. Thirty plus years of power tools have done a number on my hearing. It's not a complicated story and didn't really need to be. Most of us don't know a time when you could only communicate face to face. It reminded me a lot of the movie Gallipoli. I thought they did a pretty good job on the technical side with arms and uniforms. Not perfect, but good enough for people that don't have a room full of Webleys and Endfields. If you're a WWI buff it was good to see some of the story being told. Now if we could get a three hour epic on the Battle of the Somme, that would be something! :D

jb 8)
jasonB " Another Dirty Yankee"


" Tomorrow the sun will rise. Who knows what the tide could bring?"

spurgon
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:27 pm

Re: 1917

#3 Post by spurgon » Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:32 pm

Yeah, I hope to see more productions from the ww1 epic .
It seems to be a period that has not been as well represented as WW2 in cinema. I don't know enough about the weaponry of that time to notice the discrepancy.

User avatar
6pt-sika
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7924
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: 1917

#4 Post by 6pt-sika » Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:45 pm

I’ll wait until it’s on satellite or DVD . I’ve not been in the movie theater since Tintanic came out .
Parkers , 444 Marlin , 6.5mm's , Sika Deer and my family in the Philippines !

Go Manny Pacquiao !

"GO HARD or GO HOME" D.E. Sr.

User avatar
6pt-sika
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7924
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: 1917

#5 Post by 6pt-sika » Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:46 pm

Did you see any of those big German Anti Tank Guns ? They were Mauser but looked as if in steroids !
Parkers , 444 Marlin , 6.5mm's , Sika Deer and my family in the Philippines !

Go Manny Pacquiao !

"GO HARD or GO HOME" D.E. Sr.

spurgon
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:27 pm

Re: 1917

#6 Post by spurgon » Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:39 pm

I didn't notice the anti tank guns. I stopped out for pop corn.
What scene were they in. I missed the lead guy crossing the river on the blown bridge.

User avatar
2ndovc
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7473
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:59 am
Location: OH, South Shore of Lake Erie

Re: 1917

#7 Post by 2ndovc » Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:43 pm

6pt-sika wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:46 pm
Did you see any of those big German Anti Tank Guns ? They were Mauser but looked as if in steroids !
I didn't spot any. There's not a lot of heavy weaponry, mostly infantry type stuff. Lots of Enfields and Mausers. Those really get me going. :D

jb 8)
jasonB " Another Dirty Yankee"


" Tomorrow the sun will rise. Who knows what the tide could bring?"

spurgon
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:27 pm

Re: 1917

#8 Post by spurgon » Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:01 pm

The movie really made the craters and the mud believable. The tangle of barbed wire they crossed was something else

spurgon
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:27 pm

Re: 1917

#9 Post by spurgon » Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:16 pm

Were the anti tank guns the ones with the muzzels split
by the retreating Germans.

User avatar
6pt-sika
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7924
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: 1917

#10 Post by 6pt-sika » Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:27 pm

spurgon wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:16 pm
Were the anti tank guns the ones with the muzzels split
by the retreating Germans.
In WWI the Jerrys had sone anti tank guns that were of Mauser design I believe and looked like a Mauser but were about 20-30 pounds in weight . Wooden stock bipod type deal I think they were like 13mm cartridge .
DEF292C5-6C97-4AB0-8574-D8E2F30C0F1A.jpeg
1EF9AA3A-8268-49C7-A192-B9E916D1B9CC.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Parkers , 444 Marlin , 6.5mm's , Sika Deer and my family in the Philippines !

Go Manny Pacquiao !

"GO HARD or GO HOME" D.E. Sr.

User avatar
6pt-sika
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7924
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: 1917

#11 Post by 6pt-sika » Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:29 pm

RIA or Morphys had one of those German 13mm things for sale in auction in the last 3 or 4 years .
Parkers , 444 Marlin , 6.5mm's , Sika Deer and my family in the Philippines !

Go Manny Pacquiao !

"GO HARD or GO HOME" D.E. Sr.

DocRock
Levergunner 1.0
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 8:06 pm

Re: 1917

#12 Post by DocRock » Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:53 pm

My review is under the WW1 thread.

Other than the cinematography, which was excellent, I found the movie sophomoric, at best. The simplistic and utterly implausible story, the rank inaccuracies, the anhistorical "inclusion" to placate snowflakes, and the ridiculous discontinuities, like the field hospital on flat ground 30 yards behind a "front line" trench that couldn't have existed based on the absurd story line.

As an art/fantasy film set against the WW1 backdrop, the cinematography might have carried it. As a film allegedly about WW1, it was insulting in its stupidity.

And a question. The SMLEs all sported brass buttplates. I would have thought they would have been steel. Any experts about to provide color commentary?

spurgon
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:27 pm

Re: 1917

#13 Post by spurgon » Mon Jan 13, 2020 12:08 am

I guess i just enjoyed it from an entertainment stand point.
Most movies get souped up , even those based on true stories, so given my lack of knowledge about all the details
I guess i accepted too much poetic license.

User avatar
2ndovc
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7473
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:59 am
Location: OH, South Shore of Lake Erie

Re: 1917

#14 Post by 2ndovc » Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:21 am

DocRock wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:53 pm
My review is under the WW1 thread.

Other than the cinematography, which was excellent, I found the movie sophomoric, at best. The simplistic and utterly implausible story, the rank inaccuracies, the anhistorical "inclusion" to placate snowflakes, and the ridiculous discontinuities, like the field hospital on flat ground 30 yards behind a "front line" trench that couldn't have existed based on the absurd story line.

As an art/fantasy film set against the WW1 backdrop, the cinematography might have carried it. As a film allegedly about WW1, it was insulting in its stupidity.

And a question. The SMLEs all sported brass buttplates. I would have thought they would have been steel. Any experts about to provide color commentary?
The vast majority of Endfields had brass butt plates the steel versions are uncommon. I go to the occasional movie to be entertained. If you need a documentary there are other options.

jb 8)
jasonB " Another Dirty Yankee"


" Tomorrow the sun will rise. Who knows what the tide could bring?"

spurgon
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:27 pm

Re: 1917

#15 Post by spurgon » Mon Jan 13, 2020 10:35 am

I have been irritated with movies in the past that made technical mistakes regarding details. I wonder , what is the duty/extent to which a film maker adheres the "facts".
Probably a marketing decision about their intended audience. There will be more casual viewers that buy tickets vs technical experts. Sometimes i can overlook the demands for my focus on the details presented in the story, sometimes not. For me the biggest distraction is when current phrases are used that would not have been in-play during the time portrayed by the movie. Luckily for me i focused on the overall story in 1911 and not the details.

DocRock
Levergunner 1.0
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 8:06 pm

Re: 1917

#16 Post by DocRock » Mon Jan 13, 2020 12:28 pm

2ndovc wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:21 am
DocRock wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:53 pm
My review is under the WW1 thread.

Other than the cinematography, which was excellent, I found the movie sophomoric, at best. The simplistic and utterly implausible story, the rank inaccuracies, the anhistorical "inclusion" to placate snowflakes, and the ridiculous discontinuities, like the field hospital on flat ground 30 yards behind a "front line" trench that couldn't have existed based on the absurd story line.

As an art/fantasy film set against the WW1 backdrop, the cinematography might have carried it. As a film allegedly about WW1, it was insulting in its stupidity.

And a question. The SMLEs all sported brass buttplates. I would have thought they would have been steel. Any experts about to provide color commentary?
The vast majority of Endfields had brass butt plates the steel versions are uncommon. I go to the occasional movie to be entertained. If you need a documentary there are other options.

jb 8)
Thanks for the Enfield SMLE info.

Do you have shares in the film? Buddy of Sam Mendes? Why so touchy about my critique of the film. I too go to be entertained, rather than insulted. If you need to vent on whatever issues you have, there are other options.

User avatar
Rusty
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9201
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: Central Fla

Re: 1917

#17 Post by Rusty » Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:58 am

I haven't seen it yet but I'd like to. With my son and I our two favorite movies around here are THE LOST BATTALION and SGT.YORK. I had a great uncle that was killed in the Argonne, listed as MIA. I was never entirely sure how that could happen in such a heavily populated battlefield till I was watching a documentary about WWI and they talked about men that would be sucked down into the mud by simply stepping off the wooden boardwalk never to be seen again.
As for the brass butt plates, I have a friend that collects SMLEs and I know at lest 2 or maybe 3 of his rifles have brass butt plates as he is looking for different variations.
If I ever get the right ticket with all the right numbers I'd like to go see the monument that has my uncles name on it.
If you're gonna be stupid ya gotta be tough-
Isiah 55:8&9

It's easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled.

User avatar
2ndovc
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7473
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:59 am
Location: OH, South Shore of Lake Erie

Re: 1917

#18 Post by 2ndovc » Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:22 pm

Between my dad's collection and mine, of about 75 No.1 MKIIIs, No. 4s, No.5s and a couple of No.7s, most have brass plates. The No.5s all had stamped steel cups with a really nasty rubber "pad".

jb 8)
jasonB " Another Dirty Yankee"


" Tomorrow the sun will rise. Who knows what the tide could bring?"

User avatar
Ysabel Kid
Moderator
Posts: 24904
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA
Contact:

Re: 1917

#19 Post by Ysabel Kid » Mon Jan 27, 2020 2:54 pm

My paternal grandfather was in the "war to end all wars". I'm looking forward to seeing it. Will wait for Y2K to come back from college some weekend. He is about to start his final semester. Time flies... :shock:
Image

User avatar
2ndovc
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7473
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:59 am
Location: OH, South Shore of Lake Erie

Re: 1917

#20 Post by 2ndovc » Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:06 am

That's great!! What's his major?

jb 8)
jasonB " Another Dirty Yankee"


" Tomorrow the sun will rise. Who knows what the tide could bring?"

User avatar
Ysabel Kid
Moderator
Posts: 24904
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA
Contact:

Re: 1917

#21 Post by Ysabel Kid » Mon Feb 03, 2020 5:25 pm

2ndovc wrote:
Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:06 am
That's great!! What's his major?

jb 8)
Business Finance. Thinking about law school, perhaps the Navy; he's just not sure. I was the same way at his age. Heck, 34 years later and I still don't know what I want to do! :wink:
Image

User avatar
2ndovc
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7473
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:59 am
Location: OH, South Shore of Lake Erie

Re: 1917

#22 Post by 2ndovc » Mon Feb 03, 2020 6:51 pm

Ysabel Kid wrote:
Mon Feb 03, 2020 5:25 pm
2ndovc wrote:
Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:06 am
That's great!! What's his major?

jb 8)
Business Finance. Thinking about law school, perhaps the Navy; he's just not sure. I was the same way at his age. Heck, 34 years later and I still don't know what I want to do! :wink:
Dude, I get that! Some days I want out of the construction world and go back to graduate school, and other days I love my job.. :D
There are a lot of days where I'd joined the military, but in the mid '80s there was nothing going on. If I was 18 now, I'd say sign me up.


jb 8)
jasonB " Another Dirty Yankee"


" Tomorrow the sun will rise. Who knows what the tide could bring?"

Pop Watts
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: 1917

#23 Post by Pop Watts » Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:06 am

Hi DocRock,
I have a Lithgow made No1 Mk III made in 1916 and issued to a soldier from the 3rd Military District (The state of Victoria in Australia). It has a brass butt plate, and all Australian made rifles of WW1 vintage that I have seen have brass butt plates. But. The soldiers portrayed in the movie would have been using British made rifles.
As for the movie.
I am about 95% with you.
I do not agree with you on the cinematography being great, just because of the out of focus shots. I am sure it was done to focus attention on the main part of the story, but it annoyed me.
The story was way too unrealistic, main character took too much of a beating and the plot was weak.
Good point on the field hospital.
My wife and I are on holidays at the moment, and we went to see the movie while we were in Kuala Lumpur. It only cost us $5 each for a ticket and that’s about all the movie was worth - in my opinion.
In summary - I found it more annoying than entertaining.
Regards.
Pop.

DocRock
Levergunner 1.0
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 8:06 pm

Re: 1917

#24 Post by DocRock » Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:31 pm

Pop Watts wrote:
Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:06 am
Hi DocRock,
I have a Lithgow made No1 Mk III made in 1916 and issued to a soldier from the 3rd Military District (The state of Victoria in Australia). It has a brass butt plate, and all Australian made rifles of WW1 vintage that I have seen have brass butt plates. But. The soldiers portrayed in the movie would have been using British made rifles.
As for the movie.
I am about 95% with you.
I do not agree with you on the cinematography being great, just because of the out of focus shots. I am sure it was done to focus attention on the main part of the story, but it annoyed me.
The story was way too unrealistic, main character took too much of a beating and the plot was weak.
Good point on the field hospital.
My wife and I are on holidays at the moment, and we went to see the movie while we were in Kuala Lumpur. It only cost us $5 each for a ticket and that’s about all the movie was worth - in my opinion.
In summary - I found it more annoying than entertaining.
Regards.
Pop.
As an aside, we lived in KL 2001 - 2004. My son was born there. We've been back a few times, most recently in 2015. Sure has changed a lot.

User avatar
Carlsen Highway
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 8:23 am
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand

Re: 1917

#25 Post by Carlsen Highway » Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:24 am

I am of two minds about the film. I enjoyed it while I was watching, and I am pleased they made it, but afterwards it faded in the memory quickly. I felt it also to be unrealistic, regarding the mission they were given. It looked right to me though, and for a movie that counts for a lot. But the story was so simple, it needed more character to work completely. That was also the same problem with Dunkirk. They both felt a bit shallow afterwards, and too easily forgotten.

I cant fault the rifles - 90 % of the Lee Enfields I have ever seen had brass butt plates, and the ones that didn't were not from the WW1 era.

Personally, the 1980 film Galipoli was a better movie. They used to play it every ANZAC day on TV. They still should.
A person who carries a cat home by the tail, will receive information that will always be useful to them.
Mark Twain

User avatar
vancelw
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3623
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:56 pm
Location: 90% NE Texas and 10% SE Montana

Re: 1917

#26 Post by vancelw » Thu Feb 13, 2020 11:31 am

I haven't seen 1917 yet but just watched Journey's End on DVD the other day.
In the out takes, the historical advisor said his job was to advise the director, not to be the historical correctness police.

I enjoy a good movie, but gross inaccuracies are distracting.
"Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure that there is one less scoundrel in the world." - Thomas Carlyle

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests