TCTTS said:

---

Awesome, thanks. Will do.

---

And if want a sort of cliff-notes introduction so you get the most out of that book's details, turns out there is an Osprey on it.

https://www.amazon.com/Jutland-1916-Clash-Dreadnoughts-Campaign/dp/1855329921/ref=sr_1_20?keywords=jutland&qid=1579666538&sr=8-20

Do you have in mind a movie that would include any other actions (like `Midway' did) or would it focus on introducing characters that you would then "sail into battle with" and for Jutland for most of it?? Would it just be British or German characters also?

Exclusively Jutland. Basically starts at sea and ends at sea.

Done.

Finally saw it last weekend. I put this one only slightly behind Saving Private Ryan as best war movie I've ever seen. Exceptionally well done.

TCTTS said:

---

Exclusively Jutland. Basically starts at sea and ends at sea.

---

Ahhha...Sounds very interesting approach. Something like 1917 then. Not a bunch of politics or other before or after. Wow --that means about two hours or more of battle preliminary deployment the battle, and the break-out attempt of the High Seas Fleet in the night.

Be sure to start a thread when starting to put things together. I have actually done this kind of consulting in different venue of pacific and as the first book suggestion shows, can point to high detail aspects if useful.

Will do. It sounds like this board would be a wealth of knowledge. I've never written anything that takes place over only a day or two, but psychologically speaking, it doesn't seem nearly as daunting as having to track a story/characters over days/weeks/months like most movies. I also really enjoy assembling a story from existing materials, and there seems to be no shortage of material to draw from, for every last aspect of this movie. In other words, this might be a fun one to try myself. The only thing that seems challenging would be the period-accurate dialogue. Then again, 1917 didn't stand out as sounding particularly "of the time," and I wouldn't be too worried about getting the naval jargon right, with all the resources out there. We shall see...

Seeing 1917 tomorrow night.

Absolutely amazing movie and great concept. Though why Mendez didn't get Emmanuel Lubezki as his cinematographer the moment he decided on the continuous shot method is beyond me. Certainly the best movie I've seen in the last year and certainly one of the best war movies I've seen.

Saying that, I feel like I can make some criticisms that might be otherwise "nitpicky" but when you are dealing with greatness, I think there is some merit to the complaint.

First off, I felt a little slighted losing Tommen Lannister in such a trivial way. As soon as the camera showed the knife on the pilot's belt, I was saying in my mind "he better not get to kill one of them in a *****y way with that knife". Though I was thinking it would be Tommen's friend that would die. I really enjoyed their interaction together and felt it would have added more to the following scenes, but I get the emotional pull that it gives to Tommens friend to finish the job for him.

Now the nitpicking. Why did he not change out his gun's magazine before going into the house? He shot of like 8 rounds into the window as he approached. I also felt like that scene could have used some type of smart ploy to distract the sniper to get the beat on him rather than just making him a crappy sniper that can get out shot by a guy who has to pop out from stairs, turn around and make the shot.

Why did Tommens friend give up so easily when the German started shooting at him in the town? Why not shoot back or try to stab him with his knife instead of just turn and run when the guy was only steps behind him? There's a lot of storm trooper level bad shooting in this film.

Why didn't the commanding officer that let Tommens friend ride with them not send a soldier to help him complete his mission, knowing that he just lost his partner? Seems like saving 1600 soldiers in your army would warrant giving up one of your men for the time being.

Lastly, why was there no one watching the company's flank when Tommen's friend came up from the river? They were completely exposed on that side. Had Tommen's friend been a couple Germans with grenades or rapid firing guns, they could have taken out half the unit.

In the end, these are all just minor annoyances that keep this movie from being completely flawless but not enough to take away from its greatness.

I think he hit the sniper at least once before he entered the house, so i'll take it that the sniper was on the verge of dying already.

I know he hit him. But he didn't know if he was dead, or if other soldiers were in the house. He couldn't have had more than 1 or 2 bullets left, if any. Why not reload before going in?

That's what I meant by saying he got outshot by a guy on stairs. Not the stairs in the house, but the ones coming from the river.

Pure speculation, giving them the benefit of the doubt:

Quote:

---

First off, I felt a little slighted losing Tommen Lannister in such a trivial way. As soon as the camera showed the knife on the pilot's belt, I was saying in my mind "he better not get to kill one of them in a *****y way with that knife". Though I was thinking it would be Tommen's friend that would die. I really enjoyed their interaction together and felt it would have added more to the following scenes, but I get the emotional pull that it gives to Tommens friend to finish the job for him.

---

Worth it to get Richard Madden's response to losing his brother at then end.

Quote:

---

Now the nitpicking. Why did he not change out his gun's magazine before going into the house? He shot of like 8 rounds into the window as he approached. I also felt like that scene could have used some type of smart ploy to distract the sniper to get the beat on him rather than just making him a crappy sniper that can get out shot by a guy who has to pop out from stairs, turn around and make the shot.

---

I thought the same thing about the magazine, but maybe he didn't have that much with him? We didn't see them load up with spare ammo before leaving. That was another thing that surprised me that they didn't ask for spare food and ammo before leaving the English front. Or that he didn't raid Tommen's bag for useful items before leaving him behind.
We saw later in that town that the German's were drunk, so maybe he wasn't dealing with the A team.

Quote:

---

Why did Tommens friend give up so easily when the German started shooting at him in the town? Why not shoot back or try to stab him with his knife instead of just turn and run when the guy was only steps behind him? There's a lot of storm trooper level bad shooting in this film.

---

Again, maybe Tommen's friend was low on ammo. He did ditch his rifle soon after. He probably thought he had a better chance to run than to stand his ground against an unknown number of Germans. That sequence was in the dark with flares, so their eyes were adjusting in and out, so they couldn't see well. Also most of the shooting in that sequence was in the dark, while running, and from the hip.

Quote:

---

Why didn't the commanding officer that let Tommens friend ride with them not send a soldier to help him complete his mission, knowing that he just lost his partner? Seems like saving 1600 soldiers in your army would warrant giving up one of your men for the time being.

---

No good answer on this one.

Quote:

---

Lastly, why was there no one watching the company's flank when Tommen's friend came up from the river? They were completely exposed on that side. Had Tommen's friend been a couple Germans with grenades or rapid firing guns, they could have taken out half the unit.

---

That unit was preparing to go to the front shortly, so they probably felt safe behind the front line. I was surprised too there wasn't some guard spaced out at least.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

I know he hit him. But he didn't know if he was dead, or if other soldiers were in the house. He couldn't have had more than 1 or 2 bullets left, if any. Why not reload before going in?

That's what I meant by saying he got outshot by a guy on stairs. Not the stairs in the house, but the ones coming from the river.

---

I see. and I agree with the point about reloading. according to wiki, that rifle held 10 rounds. I counted around 7 shots, so yeah, he had max 3 bullets left.

I believe they were given extra food and supplies before they left. that's why he had all of that to give the woman with the baby.

Plus I don't recall seeing him reload since shooting the german pilot.

maybe he got someone else's gun while getting on and off and back on then off the truck.

Or reloaded in the house he walked through after his buddy died.

Chase McGuire said:

---

Or reloaded in the house he walked through after his buddy died.

---

was he off camera at that time? I don't remember that.

Ya, the camera went around the house showing all the soldiers peeing on the side and caught back up with him coming out of the house.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

Ya, the camera went around the house showing all the soldiers peeing on the side and caught back up with him coming out of the house.

---

ok, yeah, I guess the peeing distracted me from that being a good "cut" opportunity.

The bayonet was on his rifle as he entered the house. The camera panned across the exterior and showed the guys relieving themselves. He exited the house with the bayonet no longer on the rifle.

I watched for this on my second viewing. Totally plausible he removed it while passing through the house but not sure if it was purposeful or not.

What a great movie! Definitely well-suited for the big screen. Loved it. Glad that WWI is finally getting some screen time. People growing up now have to really go out of their way to learn much about it. It's glossed over, which is a real shame.

One particular part of the movie that I didn't see mentioned on this thread yet much is when the truck got stuck in the mud. I really liked how that whole scene played out, from the dialogue before and after, to the sheer will the main character was showing.

Excellent acting contributions from some big time actors as well. I thought Robb (I'll refer to him as Robb for the time being ha) was great. That interaction at the end and the walk off the main character had were very powerful and portrayed a great summary of not just this war, but war in general.

Love this version of Wayfaring Stranger (the song at the end):

Saw it yesterday with my sons. Amazing camera work. A little slow at times. The attention to detail on the uniforms and equipment/implement was top notch.

My only gripe, and I'll probably catch flak for this as it's a little on the shallow side, was this was a war movie with very little actual fighting. I mean, I guess that's the point in some ways but I was expecting more footage of trench warfare.


Question. With all the planes buzzing around wouldn't it have been a lot easier to just put the order from the general in a satchel and drop it over the Devonshire Regiment's position?


In doing a little light reading - interesting side note - the Devonshire Regiment was formed in 1685 and over the course of nearly three centuries fought in everything from the Napoleonic Wars, the Boer Wars, WWI, and WWII (including the D Day Invasion).

Saw it tonight... I think that might be the most stressed I've ever been during a movie. Enjoyed it tremendously!

TCTTS said:

---

Will do. It sounds like this board would be a wealth of knowledge. I've never written anything that takes place over only a day or two, but psychologically speaking, it doesn't seem nearly as daunting as having to track a story/characters over days/weeks/months like most movies. I also really enjoy assembling a story from existing materials, and there seems to be no shortage of material to draw from, for every last aspect of this movie. In other words, this might be a fun one to try myself. The only thing that seems challenging would be the period-accurate dialogue. Then again, 1917 didn't stand out as sounding particularly "of the time," and I wouldn't be too worried about getting the naval jargon right, with all the resources out there. We shall see...

---

TCTTS,

You and others into Jutland might find this a little interesting, just came up again while researching another wreck.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3219894/FOUND-Stunning-3D-scans-final-North-Sea-resting-place-German-flagship-scuttled-British-Navy-1916-Battle-Jutland.html

The book I mentioned earlier though has far more details on each ship's sinking and wreck at Jutland.

Awesome, thanks. Bookmarked.

Saw it tonight. Loved it. Was stressed out the whole time. Listening to TC's freind Dan Carlin's Hardcore History's episodes about WW1 give you an even more appreciation for the film.

Quote:

---

My only gripe, and I'll probably catch flak for this as it's a little on the shallow side, was this was a war movie with very little actual fighting.

---

The plot was for two soldiers to get a message from one unit to another and the setting was based entirely on their specific actions.

Avoidance of any large scale conflict was paramount to their mission.

Edit: I'm not giving you flack, but giving a reason for the lack of large action.

matureag said:

---

Why did not the general pass along his written"stand down" order, tie it to a rock, give it to a pilot and have him drop it on the Colonel in charge of the battalions about to be sacrificed? Either no movie or a different plot I guess.

---

This was at the very beginning of military aviation. They were learning techniques throughout the war. Messages were often attempted to be sent from line to line via airplane but they were largely inaccurate and unreliable. It was very difficult for them to even get photographs of the lines, let alone dropping objects accurately. The detailed level of intelligence obtained by airplane at the beginning of the film was pretty miraculous in and of itself.

Stupe said:

---

Quote:

---

My only gripe, and I'll probably catch flak for this as it's a little on the shallow side, was this was a war movie with very little actual fighting.

---

The plot was for two soldiers to get a message from one unit to another and the setting was based entirely on their specific actions.

Avoidance of any large scale conflict was paramount to their mission.

Edit: I'm not giving you flack, but giving a reason for the lack of large action.

---

understood. As I noted, it was a pretty shallow gripe on my part. It's just the more I think about it the more I am convinced this was a very well shot, well acted, well scripted, high quality film, with a really poorly thought out plot/story. Much of it makes no sense.

I finally got to see this yesterday.

There is a lot to like in this movie. From a technical perspective, it is a gorgeous movie to just look at. The photography is beautiful. The art direction, costumes, and props all are top-notch and seem to be accurate as to the time frame. The attention to detail is fantastic. Look in those trenches and you will find a wealth of detail that points to a whole bunch of stories, of a snapshot of the lives those soldiers lived in those trenches.

The story is simplistic, and I think that works to its benefit. It sets up for some serious tension. I did not expect either soldier to perish, but when I saw the knife in the downed German's belt, I knew someone was about to die. And I knew which guy it would be at that moment, as the sequence so prevalent in previews of the taller guy (sorry, I don't recall their names) running perpendicular to all the soldiers coming out of the trenches with shells exploding all around had not yet happened.

I loved the ending in its poignancy. First from meeting the brother and their exchange of words, the barely contained emotion in the brother's face from learning the fate of his little brother, and then, when the main character gets by himself behind the tree and pulls out those photos, with what I'm taking as his wife with the words "Come back to us" written on the back. That gave so much more information about that character, right at the end, than anything up to that point.

Finally got to see 1917 yesterday, really fantastic film. The fact that the story was incredibly compelling just following one or two characters was amazing, and technically it's absolutely phenomenal. Definitely a movie to see on the big screen.

That being said, Parasite is till my pick for Best Picture. But if this wins I won't be at all upset.

Hiring Dale Dye or someone similar as a military advisor would have quite possibly resulted in this movie being more than just a cinematographic masterpiece.