Am I too harsh? Did I miss any movies? Let me know in the comment section below! Support HistoryLegends ✔ Patreon ► www.patreon.com/thehistorylegends ✔ PayPal ► www.paypal.me/historylegends ✔ Book ► www.thehistorylegends.com ► INSTAGRAM: instagram.com/historylegends2/ ► TIKTOK: www.tiktok.com/@thehistorylegends?lang=en
History Legends if you can get hold of the Comic “Charlie’s War” I highly highly recommend it I have all 10 editions released a few years ago it was originally published in the 70’s ? 80’s ?
French liberates Serbia, ,,😂🤣🤣🤣😭😚 Which Battle, the French betrayal the serbs in WW1 and they admit this many times, i have talk with many old man who witness this time, you should read a few french books about the Front on the Balkans....
Have you ever seen "La grande guerra"? It's a very good portrait of the italian front whit some of the better actors of all time: alberto sordi and vittorio gassman. I strongly suggest it to you ❤️
As an italian i can assure you that the scene in the movie Uomini contro where the austrians from the top of the mountains shouts to the italians 'italians stop attacking, don't let you kill so easily' really happened and was described by the veteran Emilio Lussi in his book 'un anno sull'altipiano'.
Something similar is reported from the Battle of the Nek in the Gallipoli campaign when an Ottoman officer came out of his trench to try to warn off the third Australian wave after the first two had just been shot down. The enduring tragedy of WWI is the breakdown of the civilized enlightened state of Europe that devolved into a dark age of genocide and total war that lasted for decades.
1917 isn't about being a ww1 movie. The movie was made according to a story of a soldier who fought in the war. It's more about the storytelling than the war itself
yes it is not and that is wrong in my opinion, even in the sense of making such an movie, that takes "war" as a backdrop to create a, exciting story . Its not a WW1 movie and even less an anti-war film. With its thriller characteristics, it misses the actual meaning of such a movie, which was supposed to portray the horrors of war and detter the watcher to get pleasure when watching war movies. I am sorry, it might sound harsh but
@@vincethaprince1179 its just based on Sam Mendes grandfathers stories to him as a child. His movie has no obligation to fit any of your preconceptions on what a world war one movie should be. Its his grandfathers story, not yours or some authors.
@@tthebean2 It is depicting an actual historical event and depicts it incorrectly whichever way you want to cut it. You can tell fictional stories within historical contexts, but they should still be accurate.
@@pats3071 I disagree. The goal should be to communicate the feeling and theme of the piece. The reality is that most audiences will not understand a very large amount of specific details we may dislike. In my opinion we need to be a lot more understanding of the fact the majority of people are not historians. These movies will often prioritize emotional impact over the minuta because those things are lost on them. Whether there's a rolling barrage before or not whats important is that you communicate the theme and message of it, something movies like 1917 do flawlessly. Audiences will not appreciate something like artillery before an assault. They will always hold onto the atmosphere and themes of a film. Thats the priority.
@@historylegends hello historical legends,can you do video on city of Vukovar,due to aneversety of the fall,I would like you making this and talking about vukovars 1.8k solders agents 30k JNA forces and thousands of tanks and arnord viechel,how vulovar lasted for 87 days
Very interesting topic and well done! 3 more films that would be interesting for your list: - Les monts en flammes from 1931 - The Silent Mountain from 2015 (both about Austrian-Italian war in the Alps) - Beneath Hill 60 (about the Australian tunneling Company on the western front).
I agree with 'Les monts en flammes', 'Mountains on fire' or 'Berge in Flammen' anybody interested should check out this scene to get an idea of the movie: ruclips.net/video/SUC_yLZsYq0/видео.html It is really a huge miss in this excellent review as it tells the rather different story of the warfare in the alps!
I'd have to argue with your thoughts on 1917. For starters due to the pacing, the movie plays out more as a recollection of memories recounted by a vet, similar to the ones you can listen to that were conducted by the IWM and Sam Mendes made that a point to comment on at the end of the film because it's inspired by the very stories his grandfather recounted to him when he was a child. So in other words its a very personal and intimate story rather than one that highlights a group experience. Secondly, the BEF was in fact an integrated fighting force during WW1. Although it absolutely had regiments made exclusively from the Empire's wide berth of nationalities, black Tommies were very much a thing and can be seen in numerous photos as members of predominantly white battalions. Thirdly, The movie leads the characters to come into contact with various units of the British 8th Division (notice the various shoulder flashes) which the 2nd Devon's were a part of. The BEF was conducting probing actions to figure out the new layout of the German lines, as the information was infact being discovered that the Germans had fallen back to the Hindenburg line, so realistically that very well could have involved a full battalion of men or less. Lastly, By 1917 the entirety of the BEF was also made up primarily of drafted men from all over the UK, and due to mounting casualties it was incredibly common to have seen English, Scots, Welsh, and Irish being mixed within battalions as replacements that had originally been made up of men from one specific region, so the scenes where you can hear men with different accents in the line or during the scenes involving the convalescents is completely plausible/documentable as well.
And keep in mind that even "originally" Battalions were NEVER actually Homogeneous :) As well, Sam Mendes's grandfather was born in Trinidad to Portuguese Creole parents, Alfred H. Mendes was not white.
The problem with 1917 is that if you've read books from the likes of Harry Patch or other WW1 material you'll see where Sam Mendes lifted his "personal" experience from. The film is visually stunning and has some strong performances but narratively is essentially one loosely connected mini story connected to another with a number of well acted cameos. Black Tommies were not "very" much a thing and cannot be seen in "numerous" photos. There would certainly have been a very, very small number of black soldiers, who living as part of Britain's tiny black communtiy >at that time< would have had the misfortune of serving. But your comments are very much an exaggeration as is Sam Mendes' depiction. Rerferring to the BEF as an "integrated" fighting force has very little meaning when 99.9% of the men serving in British battalions were white. But on this point let's also consider the depiction of the single Indian soldier speaking with an Indian accent. Which although far more accurate than the dozens of black tommies apparently serving in the 2nd Devons in 1917, is also quite insulting. Tens of thousands of Indian soldiers were killed on the Western front (in addition to the tens of thousands that died in other theatres). The best Mendes could do is portray one, ONE Indian soldier? If he wanted to draw attention to the untold stories of marginalised voices I'd suggest there was a better, less anachronistic way of doing it than simply recruiting from an acting pool reflective of modern British demographics in a wishful reimagining of an average British unit in WW1.
I do respect and understand your ranking of the 2022 adaptation of All Quiet on the Western Front. For me though, that move would’ve been an easy S and one of the best war movies ever made, it showed the friendship between a group of friends that slowly breaks apart due to the consequences of war and the traumatic experiences which are all mostly from Paul’s perspective. It might not accurately and truly show the experience of a soldier in the German Trenches but it does give off the excellent message of war = bad, the toll taken on people, and etc. Other than that though, love the video.
I think the new all quiet on the western front movie’s biggest flaw is the shoes it’s trying to fill. It tries to follow one of the most famous book and movie ever created, and that’s very difficult. The bar was set extremely high, and the movie didn’t really cross it. Most things the original movie does better, and also the 2022 leaves out imo one of the most important scenes, which is when Paul gets leave and goes home for a period of time, where he is appalled and shocked by the pro-war attitudes, and realizes he doesn’t fit in with civilian life anymore.
He only hates it because it's not like the 1930's version. His review just seemed like he was trying to find things wrong with it and just outright lying (Said hand to hand combat was "EXTREMELY RARE" and saying a huge number of people died from the shell attack when only like 20 died)
The message like "war is bad and water is liquid" should not come so flat and be taken for granted. A film should depict it. Otherwise we can just write down "war is hell" and do no more
@@razzledazzle8593 but the film sucks balls, doesn't it? Ridiculously lined up flamethrowers, characters as flat as cardboard and not revealed, "evil because they're evil" officers, poor decorations, wrong equipment, and the main hero without any feelings. He is a looter and murderer, why sympathise him? He doesn't even denounce the war, he is like "I'm tired, I wanna go home". His gang doesn't raise the question like "what the hell have we forgotten here? Why are we fighting? Why to kill each other? They just blindly follow orders, sexually assault french women and girls and steal from locals. Wow, what a story to watch, bravo
There is absolutely no way that 1917 belongs in the same tier as the movie that had freaking cactuses and palm trees in the background of one scene, and tried to pass it off as France.
Netflix's "All quite on the western front" is more about being an anti war film. I think it was made to show how even after all the horror the men faced they still had to be monsters until the very end. So ya, it's not super accurate but I think it gets that message across.
All ww1 often say anti war but the technic is different old movie ussuly have hidden message about the war and we study it what is it? But modern often trash just to make it too tragic
"Anti-war movie" is a meaningless phrase honestly because any accurate depiction of war should be enough to convince the audience that war is bad. If a war movie needs to dial the horror up to 11 instead of just showing what war is actually like, then it has failed at proving its anti-war thesis.
you can be anti war and show the horrors of it and be decently realistic and true to history, because ww1 was horror irl. or you can be netflix and "modern" and shit on history and physics and logic and just make a movie with good sound and camera and people with no clue of ww1 go: ooooohhh aaaaaah iiiiihhhhhh.
WW1 and the Korean War are easily and sadly looked over here in the States. I am glad to know about these movies and hope to watch them one day, thank you for doing this.
In terms of Australian ww1 movies when I was 12 years old history classes had us watching The Lighthorsemen (1987) and Gallipoli (1981). Watched Beneath Hill 60 on tv once too. From what I recall I enjoyed those movies.
Hahaha my history teacher was a world war 1 buff like me , but hadn't see lighthorsemen and I loan him a copy, on the condition if we could watch it in class sometime soon he said ,ok but let me watch it first, took it home that weekend ,come mon he slams it down on my desk saying "we're not watching that porn" Porn? I asked but he wouldn't answer anything more , confused when I got home from school, I rewatched it and finally found what he was angry at the scene where there playing handball naked with their horses after the first battle , you see a penis for 4 seconds ffs.......
My maternal great-grandfather served in the French army on the Balkan front during the First World War. From what I have been able to read from his military booklet, his personal diary, and the stories told by my grandmother, he took part in the battle in various campaigns in the Balkans, then in the battle of the Dardanelles. To finally be sent to fight the Bolshevik revolution in the Crimea and in the Odessa region. He was supposed to marry the daughter of a white Russian officer whom he had fallen in love with, but that didn't happen as he was repatriated with the rest of the French contingent before that happened. He couldn't take his beloved with him. In 1922, however, he received a letter from the daughter of this officer. The latter had managed to find his trace, and sought to reconnect with him. Along with said letter there was also a picture of a little boy, the son they had together. Unfortunately my great grandfather had already married my great grandmother shortly after his return from the war, he never replied to this letter. He then resumed his life as a simple worker at the Malaucène paper mill until 1939, when he was mobilized in a regional regiment to guard the arsenal of Avignon. After the debacle of 1940, he joined the resistance and was extremely active within the maquis Ventoux until the liberation. He died in 1947 in a car accident.
Anyway, thank you HistoryLegends for your video, it made me think back to this old family story. You also made me discover some good films that I did not know.
I was glad to see you came right out the gate with Raymond Bernard's Les Croix de Bois as it did not get the memory All Quiet or Westfront 1918 did. The camera work for 1932 was amazing, those low angle shots making you feel like you're going into that village with them. I would add, I really liked the 2017 Journey's End remake, though more for the superb performances(the 1930 version did have the better action shots). A weird outlier I think worthy on any WWI movie list is Abel Gance's 1937 version of J'Accuse. Though it is argued whether it counts as a war movie or horror film, it's presentation of PTSD(so much so the suffer's ghosts become quite real)was revolutionary for it's time. And Victor Francen's performance was unbelievably great!
I know it's not a "war movie" but the story of JRR Tolkien's life and his writing lord of the rings, that has some very powerful ww1 scenes in it. Not sure if this should be counted but if it's a loose categorisation then absolutely, it's a great movie.
I am Italian and I think there is a great film that tells the story of the First World War and how important this moment was for Italians, the political and social differences of people who participated in the conflict and who discovered themselves as Italians are very evident in this tragic event. It's called "La Grande Guerra" (The Great War) and was made by an important Italian director named Mario Monnicelli in 1959. I think it's a somewhat special film about the First World War because it actually takes a historical moment as a pretext to make it clear and profound as we Italians are made. It is not a canonical war film but I recommend it to all those who, in addition to wanting to see a film, want to receive a small lesson on what the First World War was like for an Italy that still had a very heterogeneous population and tied to regional traditions . If you want to capture these small nuances and the bittersweet irony of the film, it is recommended to see it in Italian.
You should watch the italian movie "La Grande Guerra" (the Great War), 1959, by Mario Monicelli. Is a comedy-drama movie. The fight scene aren't realistic (classic wave-frontal assaults, without much tactics) but they managed to depicts very well how life was for the italian soldier on the trenches, during that war. Great characters, lot of laughs, and a LOT of tears. It's one of the best italian film ever made and one of my favorite, despite not being realistic during the combat scenes.
Very glad you are doing this. I grew up with Maurice Genevoix's account, Jünger and others so I'm always looking forward to films that won't make me shrug at nonsense every five minutes and there are not too many. Now I have a few to catch up with :)
I think The Lost Battalion is pretty if you take into account that it is meant to be a TV movie. I didn't researched the actual battle, so I don't know how cold it truely was, but to me, the movie made sense, because: - Late October can still be pretty sunny - We don't really see the german 3rd line, where they are the most fortified, but the battalion didn't reach it in the film, they've got through the first two and stopped by the third in the forest - The battalion was stopped in the forest, we saw the signs of prolonged bombardment earlier, but they've broke through those lines pretty fast, that's why we don't linger there I also think they depict a couple of things we don't see in movies, which is great: - Issues with communication - Issues with bombardment And yes, the movie made the same silly mistakes every other movie does: - Running with bayonets fixed through everything in masses - Having high ranking officers in the front for the 'muricans and for Germans, even the lower ranking officer stays behind I think it deserves to be one category higher.
Thank you for this! As an American, it sometimes feels we have forgotten about WWI and mostly focus on WWII. My grandfather fought in WWI and I’m always looking for movies, books etc that focus on WWI.
The original All Quiet on the Western front is pretty hard to rank... On one hand the combat scenes and general feel of brutality is pretty good but not as good as the others, on the other hand however it's probably a perfect anti-war movie with great climate.
Sajjan Singh Rangroot is an inaccurate depiction of battlefield in WW1. But, it is an accurate depiction of Treatment of INDIAN soldiers in WW1. Because one of my friend's Great Grandfather had fought in WWI and had faced same level of Racism as Faced by main Protagonist in this movie. Moreover, it's not a BOLLYWOOD movie it is a movie from Punjabi Film Industry. BOLLYWOOD is a nickname for Hindi film Industry.
My great grandpa watched this in 80s as 90years old veteran of that battle (austrian side, bohemian regiment where he served his mandatory military service for 2nd year). He was really impresed by the movie, but always sayed there wasnt enough blood and corpses laying around are too intact. He remember how their own artillery killed a lot of his friends due friendly fire. How his own reserves didnt recognize them and start shooting them in the back. He always sayed: "The first attack on Serbia, it was comedy full of mistakes". He had some very bad comments to czech deserter scene (with a lot of curses), but it could be done by his very pro monarchy opinion. Other then that he liked the movie very much.
I disagree with your ranking of All Quiet (2022) The movie perfectly depicts the German War Machine and how it treated its men as disposable trash, whilst it doesn't necessarily fit the timestamps of 1917/18, the message of the movie is portrayed excellently. The biggest gripe I have with this movie is the usage of flamethrowers tho, that sucked, I get that they were trying to display some of the brutality in WW1, but gas would've been much more effective, and historically accurate. IMO All Quiet deserves a low A or at least a high B
You're missing a good one - they very first recipient of the academy award for best picture, "Wings" (1927). While perhaps not historically accurate, it's proximity to the conflict itself and the usage of real WWI era biplanes is stunning, with incredible aerial filming, and there are some very impressive large-scale action scenes involving some 3500 infantrymen as extras.
saw that recently after binging the TV series. Some people find it hard watching those old movies, but it was really well made and acted and touched the heart, especially the death scene.
I just finished watching Westfront 1918. It was truly amazing. At certain parts of the film, I forgot that I was watching a film. Its probably the most realistic depiction of war that movies can offer. It is a movie that no one can live without seeing.
I can recommend french film called "J'accuse!" - "I accuse" from 1919. Maybe one of the very first films about WW1, with very strong anti-war message (especially last about 45 minutes are remarkable). Really worth watching it, even if it might look pretty....."old" by today´s standarts!
At the risk of being lost in a sea of comments, I have some serious issues with how you present the history of a number of these films. So, to begin with, however - while I agree that the period of 1919-1939 saw many phenomenal films about the First World War be made, it's not really because of "veterans". For starters, "veterans" is not a singular, monolithic category and is too mono-casual of an explanation. It's much deeper and rooted in how various cultures see their First World War history - films are first and foremost pieces of art. Yes, they can (and do) influence how people think about the past, but we can not think of them as history lessons in and of themselves. The reason I say this is that many of the tropes that become associated with First World War films come from veterans themselves in their writings and sometimes pieces of history. One of the most influential figures in the English language historiography was Basil Liddell Hart, a veteran of the war, whom had very specific ideas about say the High Command (he wasn't a fan). He worked with A LOT of historians during his life and influenced a great deal of work, and he was a veteran! Being a veteran is not a claim towards being correct, it's simply someone who experienced the war as a combatant themselves in some fashion. It doesn't inherently give their view of the war more "truthiness" when looking at ex post facto sources like memoirs and oral histories. In short, "veterans" are a complicated bunch of many people with many views. "Veterans" don't make or break these films, but rather the tropes and visual imagery that they use do. The 1930 version of "All Quiet" is a great case in point because it's combat scenes AREN'T realistic, and the 2022 clearly draws a lot from both it and the 1979 version. Yet, All Quiet is first and foremost an anti-war artistic expression. I don't think it necessarily needs to represent "the truth" in order to do what it does (and this isn't to make a statement on the qualities of the 2022 one, artistically I can see its merits and detraction). After WWII, as views of the First World War begin to really change in a massive way, the way that WWI in films is represented changes with it and much of the "ahistorical" aspects of a lot of WWI films really take hold in this era, and get reinforced over and over again creating an image of the war that audiences expect. That's why, say, War Horse, has a completely ahistorical battle set in 1918 - because it's what audiences EXPECT WWI to look like now. Those expectations and tropes didn't exist (at least in the same way) from 1919-1939. Now, as to some of your more specific claims about films: 1917's black soldiers and Indian cavalryman: 1917 is set during "Operation Alberich", otherwise known as the Retreat to the Hindenburg Line in early 1917. It threw off some of the planning for the Arras offensive coming later that month. Put simply, there were black soldiers in the British army during the First World War, and even black officers (although the latter was prohibited by the King's Regulations, there were those who squeezed past them). It's not ahistoric to feature black men in the British army, and in fact for the units depicted (the Devonshires and East Surreys) had black men, and in fact Andy Robertshaw (one of the historical advisors for the film) has argued that they should have had MORE to be in line with the historic units. On this subject, I can heartily recommend Ray Costello's "Black Tommies: British Soldiers of African Descent in the First World War" (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2015). As well, do you know WHO Alfred H. Mendes actually was? That is, Sam Mendes's grandfather who inspired the film. Alfred H. Mendes was born in the 1890s to Portuguese Creole parents in Trinidad, earned a Military Medal in 1917 during the Battle of Poelcappelle during the Third Ypres Campaign, and after the First World War became an important and influential Trinidadian writer. He wasn't white. Now what of the Indian cavalryman? During Operation Alberich, Indian Cavalry was actively engaged in operations as an advance guard - screening and scouting. Sepoy Jondalar is found on a "Casuals Truck" (this is clearly stated by Captain Smith played by Mark Strong). A Casuals truck was a truck for assorted troops who got separated from their actual units for a variety of reasons, such as having been in hospital, and are making their way back to their actual units. This is an instance where you would find mixing like this. As for the language. Is it so hard to believe that at the VERY least, someone who has been in the BEF in France since 1914 (as Indian Cavalrymen had been) picked up English in that time? Or had learned it beforehand? Just because they were Indian doesn't mean they hadn't ever learned English. Yes, some wouldn't have. But others did! And some even wrote home in English! Sepoy Jondalar has every right to be there. And finally: No, "English", "Scottish", "Welsh", and "Irish" units were not homogeneous. While they might have a core coming from a specific region, significant percentages of each Battalion were made up of those from other parts of the UK. There are jokes about say, some Scottish units, being more Irish than Scottish because of this! So that's 1917 out of the way. As for your comments on Sajjan Singh Rangroot, I find it disappointing you don't discuss any of the cultural factors that went into the making of the film. I can't speak to the film's specific quality, as I have not seen it, but any analysis of the film is incomplete without understanding that it is the VERY FIRST Punjabi made film about the First World War (and the first ever War film from Punjab), and the various film industries in India all have their own contexts, specialties, audience expectations, etc... The Punjabi film industry, for example, makes a lot of comedies and romance films, not war films. This is important in order to properly contextualize the film and what it is doing, seeing it treated so blithely was disappointing. And on that note: British society was extremely racist towards Indians during and before the First World War. Someone from the UK did not have to have personally met an Indian to be racist towards them, anti-Indian racism permeated what we would call pop culture. I can't speak to the film's actual quality, but those aspects of its history are correct. Finally, your treatment of "The Great War" from 2019. I'll get it out of the way, it's not a well made film - and like with any of the rests of these my issue is not with where you placed them in your tier list - but your historical reasoning for doing so. The issues with "The Great War" do not include its premise, however. There were two combat divisions of African-American soldiers during the First World War. The most famous of these, and the one you reference as "Buffalo Soldiers" who fought with the French, was the 93rd Division composed of the following infantry regiments: 369th ("Harlem Hellfighters"/"Harlem Rattlers"/"Old 15th"/"Men of Bronze"), 370th, 371st, 372nd. These troops did in fact fight with the French. HOWEVER, The 92nd Division - also a black combat division - DID fight under the American flag as US Troops. This division was composed of the 365th Regiment, 366th Regiment, 367th Regiment, and 368th, and a whole boatload of Machine Gun Battalions, Field Artillery, Medical, etc... They even had black junior officers! They were first in the line in early August 1918, and participated in the Meuse-Argonne offensive. These men of the 92nd, 93rd and ALL the support units that black men were otherwise funneled into suffered not only German fire, but INTENSE racism from their peers and commanders. There were men LYNCHED in Europe. The 92nd went through hell, and yes, fought alongside white American units. To insinuate otherwise is a disrespect to their struggle and to the failures of the United States in eliminate Jim Crow before the Civil Rights Movement of the Cold War. Any movie about black troops during the First World War that DOESN'T deal with racism that those men faced is doing their memory a disservice. Some books I'd recommend on the subject: "Lost Battalions: The Great War and the Crisis of American Nationality" by Richard Slotkin is an excellent book about both the 92nd and 77th Divisions. "Harlem's Rattlers and the Great War" by Jeffery T. Sammons & John H. Morrow Jr., "Torchbearers of Democracy: African American Soldiers in the World War I Era" by Chad L. Williams, "Freedom Struggles: African Americans and World War I" by Adriane Lentz-Smith, and "The Unknown Soldiers: African American Troops in World War I" by Arthur E. Barbeau & Florette Henri are all EXCELLENT books about African-Americans during the First World War and will easily get you situated.
Not a WW1 movie but I would recommend you to watch an estonian WW2 movie of the eastern front, Tannenberg line "1944" by Elmo Nüganen. It has scenes of both the sides the estonians fought on.
Hi, i am Argentinian and i remember finding a DVD of this movie some years ago at a grocery store. Watched it ans was pretty amazed by it. Rare find, do not regret watching it at all.
My great great grandpa fought through the entire 2nd boer war and ww1, he was a rifleman in the boer war and a machine gunner in ww1, when he was at paeschendale he says that most times when he was walking he was touching either a dead body or a piece of shrapnel, and that the battlefield stunk
One of my personal favorites is Gallipoli (1981) with Mel Gibson and Mark Lee. Is it completely accurate? Not really but I hope you check it out some time. As a bonus I'll throw in Trench 11 and Deathwatch. They're just WW1 horror movies but if you find more of that sub genre of historical horror who knows? It could be a cool video. Keep up the good work.
I love your channel but I don't agree with your movie opinions.A few things you said about All quiet on the Western front were wrong .Are you telling me in the whole of the great war soilders were never buried inside a trench system like they were in the first bombardment of the movie . Complete bullshit they just recently found a bunker system with Germans in it buried alive .So you think German trenches never filled up with rain even those they had wooden running boards of course they did sometimes .The shot with the barb wire Infront of the trench could have been a shot of troops in a different position.The troops that got up and run were from a different part of the trench that's why there was no Wire Infront of them.The bridge over the French trench was how they got the tanks over there own trench.Lastly are you telling me German troops never got out of their trenchers and ran like they did in the movie ,sorry that rubbish of course they did .
Great ranking, congrats and thanks. By the way : the book "Les croix de bois" by Dorgelès is an absolute masterpiece, also from a litterary point of view.
I've seen Warsaw 44 thanks to the video you've made about it a while ago and I like it a lot (one of the best war movie I've seen) Thanks for that and for new ideas.
The film sergeant York (1941) actually popularized the barb wire on spikes because you can see many of them in that movie so paths of glory add it on to it years later
So glad you talked about Colonel Driant and his defence of the Bois de Caures, the sad fact is that if Driant had been listened to a year earlier the Verdun meat grinder may have been quite different. Sadly I have no idea where to obtain a copy of this film.
All Quiet 2022 portrayed so much that the other movies couldn’t do. The devolution of morale and humanity as the war dragged on for the unit. The emotional side of the movie for the soldiers that is rarely depicted in such a brutal and honest way is what shines. The bigger overarching elements of the movie like the German general ordering attacks before the end of the war and things like that are obviously inaccurate. But to throw the movie in a low tier because of that instead of addressing the huge amount of details in the movie is a bit ridiculous. You even mentioned in other parts of the video how soldiers would usually only be at the frontline for a week or more, well the movie depicts this aspect. It depicts mundane things on and away from the front like pailing water out of the flooded trenches, collecting dog tags, throwing lime on masses of coffins, peeling potatoes for the company, even using the bathroom lol. The fact is, all the inaccuracies I could harp on about the tactics or combat pale in comparison to the overall feeling and picture the movie paints, which is a great and immersive recreation of the war. I’m a weapons enthusiast so I get chuffed about the guns not producing recoil or the safety switches being half turned over, but I appreciate the detail in things like the Germans being issued K bullets to shoot at the French tanks (and them inevitably not working due to the advancement in the thickness of the allied armor) or the CO telling the men to grab the machine gun and ammo when they’re retreating, and when the soldiers drink the cooling jacket water because they as German soldiers in the late stage of WW1 are starving and exhausted all the time they’d even drink the nasty cooling water to even keep going. This stuff adds up for an authentic experience that a lot of these movies don’t even come close to making. The shell crater scene in the new version of All Quiet is soul crushing. The original movie adaptation for the time of course was just as moving but that was for the time, it wasn’t as realistic and was more stylized. The modern adaptation is sickening to watch because you know it really happened, more than we care to admit as humans. The acting is superb in general for the movie and that scene is up there for me higher than most of these other movies. There is a sense of real starvation, hopelessness, depression, and madness thru the performances that the other movies on this list cannot make you empathize with. The movie like I said isn’t perfect in historical accuracy but brings together many real things being portrayed to create an authentic period piece to immerse you in. It literally sucks you in and is unashamed in the brutality that was WW1.
You gotta do this for all wars. Also i would love to see you review a random movie called siege on firebase gloria i think you would get a kick out of that movie.
As others have said- you missed Beneath Hill 60- probably one of the best WW1 films of the last 50 years. Also The Silent Mountain, La Grande Illusion, and The Lighthorsemen. And by the way, where are the air combat movies!? Classics like Aces High, The Blue Max, Both Dawn Patrols, Richtofen and Brown, Wings, etc. These WW1 movies cannot be ignored!
Certainly not. The totally unrealistic drama surrounding the invented and idiotic big bad general character alone relegates it to the trash heap. What is he even general of? Where are his superiors and the orders he has to follow? Nobody knows. He just orders attacks left and right, free and unhinged. Read the novel instead if you haven't, and you might perhaps begin to realize how bad this latest rendition truly is.
I think it did a great job showing the moral conflicts and horror of war pretty well. I enjoyed the movie overall; it was more set up as a thriller than strictly sticking to historical accuracy. There were a couple scenes I did not care for though. Primary with the General/Officers and decision making, the kid scene was dumb filler and threw away a potential tragic death scene and the last attack scene was just stupid. The 79 film still has the best ending imo as far as emotional impact. The new one I was just like...Alright.
Putting warhorse above all quiet on the western front (new version) is ridiculous. Yea All quiet deviated from the book and may not have been historically accurate but it was way better than warhorse. I think all quiet deserved at LEAST a B
Waiting for the ranks of the Best WWII Movies. I like WWII settings, which weapons are more advance, but not advance enough to have computer guided systems, which makes skill still matters in the battlefield.
For the italian front, I was expecting to see A Silent Mountain too, I really enjoyed watching it, showing perspectives from both Austrian and Italian sides. Am not sure how realistic it was, as I'm not an expert (yet) in WW1 accuracies
Merci pour ce que vous faites, c'est toujours remarquable. Un (tout petit) détail : à un moment, en le comparant à un autre film, vous situez l'action des «Croix de bois» en 1915. Il est vrai qu'à bien des gards c'est ce qu'on penserait, mais les soldats sont équipés du casque Adrian, qui, si je ne m'abuse, n'est apparu massivement qu'en 1916. Me trompé-je?
Just when I've prepared long rant why should "March on the Drina" be included on the list I've took a closer look at it and be like "oooh". Movie has that '60's cinematography fun-to-watch vibe. It is concentrated about one artillery battery in the wihrlwind of much greater battle and portray drama of small soldiers, simple humans dragged into a big struggle. Also, there are a lot of funny moments provided by cartoonishly flamboyant infantry captain almost stellar opposite of his best buddy, artillery captain of the said battery who is calm and level headed.
@@JK-oq9cl it's on youtube, but unfortunately without subtitles. Here's a short clip with subtitle: ruclips.net/video/NiPHmw6yU6E/видео.html and another one :ruclips.net/video/qlkW414otPw/видео.html
Good recommendations for old movies to watch. I think you forgot "The Trench" (1999) Within the first 20 min. the camera never moves the sight out of the trench, and that's probably how oppressive it felt back there.
Couple comments from a fellow historian... 1-great video! 2- perhaps redundant but SO LITTLE said about 1930 All Quiet.. Definite "S" All Time classic. 3- was eager to hear your take on Uomini "armored infantry" scene. 4- Surprised NO Gallipoli (Mel Gibson) movie, though perhaps would have been redundant after your (unknown to me "newer" Gallipoli movie. 5- Though VERY disappointed with latest "All Quiet" scenes I have seen, (would raise its ranking IF did not profess to be All Quiet/just had an original title of its own.) Plus many silly combat scenes, especially absurd flamethrowers scene. 6- Think "maybe" little harsh on Lost Battalion; despite its many flaws, was a good depiction for its time. Overall great video, with 90% complete agreeance with you... keep up your great work
One movie I think you should check out is ‘The War Below’ about the British tunnelers on the Western front, quite an enjoyable film, not quite sure how accurate it is.
I think that there is another film you should watch. Its a documentary but it shows the true footage of ww1 called They Shall Not Grow Old. Peter Jackson really did well with this so maybe it would be a good idea to look into. Enjoy your vids. Can't wait to see the next one.
Based on your assessment of historical accuracy and realism, your ranking was flawless. I appreciate your efforts here. I know there are a ton of WW2 movies. And I could never expect anyone to comb through and rank them like you have done for WW1 films. There are only a handful of Korean War movies. There are some Korean depictions that are worth a watch but very few Western depictions. Have you encountered any forgotten or less known Korean War movies that you would rank high? Thanks
Hi, I am a big fan of your History Legends channel and always enthusiastically look forward to all your presentations and group forum exchanges as a host or as a highly sought guest on many other channels. I appreciate greatly your research and exceptional technique in presenting a balanced view and up to date facts as well as analysis of events current and historical. Great work of a high standard. It is understandable that you may have missed a few Australian World War 1 movies not on your list. These being: Gallipoli (1981) Gallipoli Peninsula campaign and the infamous futile attack at the Nek, Actors Mel Gibson & Mark Lee, The Light Horsemen (1987) Sinai-Palestine, Battle of Beersheba, 1917. One of the last modern cavalry charges in history against a well-fortified position under desperate circumstances, Beneath Hill 60 (2010), 1st Australian Tunnelling Company, Ypres Salient Messines Ridge, 1917. Capt. Oliver Woodard award MC and 2 bars. ANZAC Girls (2014) Six-episode TV mini-series ~6 hrs (2013) Australian nurses dedicated service Egypt, Gallipoli, and Western Front, ANZACS (1985) the epic mini-series of ~9 hrs had Aussies captivated every episode when it was released as it told the story of a previously a colonial possession of the British Empire evolving as new nation with a small population that was capable of taking on the might of old-world superpowers given the limited opportunity of its own commanders. A definite change in position on your table in my opinion to Row A or start of Row B. The Water Diviner (2014) Actor Russell Crow- Gallipoli Campaign 4.5/10, enough said. Keep up your great work. Fantastic every presentation. All the very best Cheers
as another historian I would have to agree with most of your selections - I too have read original documents - researched two textbooks and also find it difficult to accept some of the cliche's you see in Great War films - next time you go to your bookstore LOOK at the texts on the Great War - they are almost ALL uniform in their information and presentation - there is little new or exceptional published - most summarise in grand sweeping generalisations what occurred - regurgitating the book beside it - this is what happens in historiography as we move away from the actual event - over-generalization - my history text covered the life and death of ONE Canadian soldier whose grave marker I came across in northern France - I decided to discover the person buried beneath it and wrote two textbooks - over 600 pages on him - THAT is what is missing today - we lose the details and you end up with what you get in film - sameness
This was very interesting. many movies that I was not aware of. What about the 1981 movie Gallipolli? I saw that when I was in High School and was very impressed. My history teacher also used it.
It's rather disappointing the only wars about minorities/non-europeans fighting for the entente on the western front are terrible terrible movies. Their stories are some of the most interesting.
Thank you, HistoryLegends for doing this video! I've been waiting for this ranking video for a long time now. By the way if you had to watch either Sanjjan Singh Rangroot or The Great War (2019) for the rest of your life, which film would you've chosen?
Am I too harsh? Did I miss any movies? Let me know in the comment section below!
Support HistoryLegends
✔ Patreon ► www.patreon.com/thehistorylegends
✔ PayPal ► www.paypal.me/historylegends
✔ Book ► www.thehistorylegends.com
► INSTAGRAM: instagram.com/historylegends2/
► TIKTOK: www.tiktok.com/@thehistorylegends?lang=en
VIVA Long live the INDISPUTABLE greatest WARRIORS of our world; with the most powerful army on planet; RUSSIA!
History Legends if you can get hold of the Comic “Charlie’s War” I highly highly recommend it I have all 10 editions released a few years ago it was originally published in the 70’s ? 80’s ?
here’s a post for it ruclips.net/video/YRAwFb9D8-0/видео.html
French liberates Serbia, ,,😂🤣🤣🤣😭😚 Which Battle, the French betrayal the serbs in WW1 and they admit this many times, i have talk with many old man who witness this time, you should read a few french books about the Front on the Balkans....
Have you ever seen "La grande guerra"?
It's a very good portrait of the italian front whit some of the better actors of all time: alberto sordi and vittorio gassman. I strongly suggest it to you ❤️
As an italian i can assure you that the scene in the movie Uomini contro where the austrians from the top of the mountains shouts to the italians 'italians stop attacking, don't let you kill so easily' really happened and was described by the veteran Emilio Lussi in his book 'un anno sull'altipiano'.
Something similar is reported from the Battle of the Nek in the Gallipoli campaign when an Ottoman officer came out of his trench to try to warn off the third Australian wave after the first two had just been shot down.
The enduring tragedy of WWI is the breakdown of the civilized enlightened state of Europe that devolved into a dark age of genocide and total war that lasted for decades.
@@peterlynchchannel “civilized”
Is it possible to get this book in English? I've looked on the internet and have yet to find a translation, though I really want to read it.
@@salamanther The English translation is called "A Soldier on the Southern Front"
@@peterlynchchannel “civilized enlightened state of Europe”
1917 isn't about being a ww1 movie. The movie was made according to a story of a soldier who fought in the war. It's more about the storytelling than the war itself
yes it is not and that is wrong in my opinion, even in the sense of making such an movie, that takes "war" as a backdrop to create a, exciting story . Its not a WW1 movie and even less an anti-war film. With its thriller characteristics, it misses the actual meaning of such a movie, which was supposed to portray the horrors of war and detter the watcher to get pleasure when watching war movies. I am sorry, it might sound harsh but
was based on what Sam Mendes´ grandpa used to tell him about his experieence as a Royal fusilier member in WWI
@@vincethaprince1179 its just based on Sam Mendes grandfathers stories to him as a child. His movie has no obligation to fit any of your preconceptions on what a world war one movie should be. Its his grandfathers story, not yours or some authors.
@@tthebean2 It is depicting an actual historical event and depicts it incorrectly whichever way you want to cut it. You can tell fictional stories within historical contexts, but they should still be accurate.
@@pats3071 I disagree. The goal should be to communicate the feeling and theme of the piece. The reality is that most audiences will not understand a very large amount of specific details we may dislike. In my opinion we need to be a lot more understanding of the fact the majority of people are not historians. These movies will often prioritize emotional impact over the minuta because those things are lost on them. Whether there's a rolling barrage before or not whats important is that you communicate the theme and message of it, something movies like 1917 do flawlessly.
Audiences will not appreciate something like artillery before an assault. They will always hold onto the atmosphere and themes of a film. Thats the priority.
I think you should do mora tier lists, but about country's preformances in diferent wars or something like that
Upvote if you guys agree 👍
@@historylegends hello historical legends,can you do video on city of Vukovar,due to aneversety of the fall,I would like you making this and talking about vukovars 1.8k solders agents 30k JNA forces and thousands of tanks and arnord viechel,how vulovar lasted for 87 days
@@historylegends Napoleonic Wars and Seven Years War performance list
@@historylegends or somthing about croatian operations
@@historylegends you are amazing dude
Best game Historical when?
Halo seem pretty on point, imo😉
@@norskmann706 that's legit a joke but still you're right
Obviously Call of Duty Vanguard is S Tier
@@norskmann706 r/whoosh
Dayz
Very interesting topic and well done!
3 more films that would be interesting for your list:
- Les monts en flammes from 1931
- The Silent Mountain from 2015 (both about Austrian-Italian war in the Alps)
- Beneath Hill 60 (about the Australian tunneling Company on the western front).
I would add the red baron too
I agree with 'Les monts en flammes', 'Mountains on fire' or 'Berge in Flammen' anybody interested should check out this scene to get an idea of the movie: ruclips.net/video/SUC_yLZsYq0/видео.html It is really a huge miss in this excellent review as it tells the rather different story of the warfare in the alps!
Just watched Beneath Hill 60 yesterday after seeing some clips of it on RUclips for several years, really good movie.
I really thought silent mountain and hill 60 would be on here, especially hill 60
The Silent Mountain is really good from a storytelling viewpoint.
I'd have to argue with your thoughts on 1917. For starters due to the pacing, the movie plays out more as a recollection of memories recounted by a vet, similar to the ones you can listen to that were conducted by the IWM and Sam Mendes made that a point to comment on at the end of the film because it's inspired by the very stories his grandfather recounted to him when he was a child. So in other words its a very personal and intimate story rather than one that highlights a group experience. Secondly, the BEF was in fact an integrated fighting force during WW1. Although it absolutely had regiments made exclusively from the Empire's wide berth of nationalities, black Tommies were very much a thing and can be seen in numerous photos as members of predominantly white battalions. Thirdly, The movie leads the characters to come into contact with various units of the British 8th Division (notice the various shoulder flashes) which the 2nd Devon's were a part of. The BEF was conducting probing actions to figure out the new layout of the German lines, as the information was infact being discovered that the Germans had fallen back to the Hindenburg line, so realistically that very well could have involved a full battalion of men or less. Lastly, By 1917 the entirety of the BEF was also made up primarily of drafted men from all over the UK, and due to mounting casualties it was incredibly common to have seen English, Scots, Welsh, and Irish being mixed within battalions as replacements that had originally been made up of men from one specific region, so the scenes where you can hear men with different accents in the line or during the scenes involving the convalescents is completely plausible/documentable as well.
And keep in mind that even "originally" Battalions were NEVER actually Homogeneous :)
As well, Sam Mendes's grandfather was born in Trinidad to Portuguese Creole parents, Alfred H. Mendes was not white.
A real historian should know something like that
Great comment I agree and I think the film should be at the top of the list.
The problem with 1917 is that if you've read books from the likes of Harry Patch or other WW1 material you'll see where Sam Mendes lifted his "personal" experience from. The film is visually stunning and has some strong performances but narratively is essentially one loosely connected mini story connected to another with a number of well acted cameos.
Black Tommies were not "very" much a thing and cannot be seen in "numerous" photos. There would certainly have been a very, very small number of black soldiers, who living as part of Britain's tiny black communtiy >at that time< would have had the misfortune of serving. But your comments are very much an exaggeration as is Sam Mendes' depiction. Rerferring to the BEF as an "integrated" fighting force has very little meaning when 99.9% of the men serving in British battalions were white. But on this point let's also consider the depiction of the single Indian soldier speaking with an Indian accent. Which although far more accurate than the dozens of black tommies apparently serving in the 2nd Devons in 1917, is also quite insulting. Tens of thousands of Indian soldiers were killed on the Western front (in addition to the tens of thousands that died in other theatres). The best Mendes could do is portray one, ONE Indian soldier? If he wanted to draw attention to the untold stories of marginalised voices I'd suggest there was a better, less anachronistic way of doing it than simply recruiting from an acting pool reflective of modern British demographics in a wishful reimagining of an average British unit in WW1.
what is this lunatic modern blackwashing of European history?
I do respect and understand your ranking of the 2022 adaptation of All Quiet on the Western Front. For me though, that move would’ve been an easy S and one of the best war movies ever made, it showed the friendship between a group of friends that slowly breaks apart due to the consequences of war and the traumatic experiences which are all mostly from Paul’s perspective. It might not accurately and truly show the experience of a soldier in the German Trenches but it does give off the excellent message of war = bad, the toll taken on people, and etc. Other than that though, love the video.
I think the new all quiet on the western front movie’s biggest flaw is the shoes it’s trying to fill. It tries to follow one of the most famous book and movie ever created, and that’s very difficult. The bar was set extremely high, and the movie didn’t really cross it. Most things the original movie does better, and also the 2022 leaves out imo one of the most important scenes, which is when Paul gets leave and goes home for a period of time, where he is appalled and shocked by the pro-war attitudes, and realizes he doesn’t fit in with civilian life anymore.
Lol fr i loved that movie
He only hates it because it's not like the 1930's version. His review just seemed like he was trying to find things wrong with it and just outright lying (Said hand to hand combat was "EXTREMELY RARE" and saying a huge number of people died from the shell attack when only like 20 died)
The message like "war is bad and water is liquid" should not come so flat and be taken for granted. A film should depict it. Otherwise we can just write down "war is hell" and do no more
@@razzledazzle8593 but the film sucks balls, doesn't it? Ridiculously lined up flamethrowers, characters as flat as cardboard and not revealed, "evil because they're evil" officers, poor decorations, wrong equipment, and the main hero without any feelings. He is a looter and murderer, why sympathise him? He doesn't even denounce the war, he is like "I'm tired, I wanna go home". His gang doesn't raise the question like "what the hell have we forgotten here? Why are we fighting? Why to kill each other? They just blindly follow orders, sexually assault french women and girls and steal from locals. Wow, what a story to watch, bravo
There is absolutely no way that 1917 belongs in the same tier as the movie that had freaking cactuses and palm trees in the background of one scene, and tried to pass it off as France.
fr
which one was that
i mean 1917 does basically nothing historically correct... so, ya its trash
Both cacti and palms have no trouble growing in France.
@@busTedOaS They are not native scenery to northern france
Netflix's "All quite on the western front" is more about being an anti war film. I think it was made to show how even after all the horror the men faced they still had to be monsters until the very end. So ya, it's not super accurate but I think it gets that message across.
All ww1 often say anti war but the technic is different old movie ussuly have hidden message about the war and we study it what is it? But modern often trash just to make it too tragic
It's a wokeist crap-fest.
"Anti-war movie" is a meaningless phrase honestly because any accurate depiction of war should be enough to convince the audience that war is bad. If a war movie needs to dial the horror up to 11 instead of just showing what war is actually like, then it has failed at proving its anti-war thesis.
The director should have respected the book and the 1930 and 1979 films. He missed the point Remarque was trying to make.
you can be anti war and show the horrors of it and be decently realistic and true to history, because ww1 was horror irl. or you can be netflix and "modern" and shit on history and physics and logic and just make a movie with good sound and camera and people with no clue of ww1 go: ooooohhh aaaaaah iiiiihhhhhh.
WW1 and the Korean War are easily and sadly looked over here in the States. I am glad to know about these movies and hope to watch them one day, thank you for doing this.
i find ww1 more interesting then ww2
In terms of Australian ww1 movies when I was 12 years old history classes had us watching The Lighthorsemen (1987) and Gallipoli (1981). Watched Beneath Hill 60 on tv once too. From what I recall I enjoyed those movies.
Have to recommend the Gallipoli TV miniseries that was made in 2015. So unbelievably well done, and shot on location
Oh he mentioned it in the video, oopsie
Hahaha my history teacher was a world war 1 buff like me , but hadn't see lighthorsemen and I loan him a copy, on the condition if we could watch it in class sometime soon he said ,ok but let me watch it first, took it home that weekend ,come mon he slams it down on my desk saying "we're not watching that porn"
Porn? I asked but he wouldn't answer anything more , confused when I got home from school, I rewatched it and finally found what he was angry at the scene where there playing handball naked with their horses after the first battle , you see a penis for 4 seconds ffs.......
Beneath Hill 60 is one of my favourites. Looks right, feels right, has an impact.
My maternal great-grandfather served in the French army on the Balkan front during the First World War. From what I have been able to read from his military booklet, his personal diary, and the stories told by my grandmother, he took part in the battle in various campaigns in the Balkans, then in the battle of the Dardanelles. To finally be sent to fight the Bolshevik revolution in the Crimea and in the Odessa region. He was supposed to marry the daughter of a white Russian officer whom he had fallen in love with, but that didn't happen as he was repatriated with the rest of the French contingent before that happened. He couldn't take his beloved with him.
In 1922, however, he received a letter from the daughter of this officer. The latter had managed to find his trace, and sought to reconnect with him. Along with said letter there was also a picture of a little boy, the son they had together.
Unfortunately my great grandfather had already married my great grandmother shortly after his return from the war, he never replied to this letter.
He then resumed his life as a simple worker at the Malaucène paper mill until 1939, when he was mobilized in a regional regiment to guard the arsenal of Avignon. After the debacle of 1940, he joined the resistance and was extremely active within the maquis Ventoux until the liberation. He died in 1947 in a car accident.
Anyway, thank you HistoryLegends for your video, it made me think back to this old family story. You also made me discover some good films that I did not know.
I was glad to see you came right out the gate with Raymond Bernard's Les Croix de Bois as it did not get the memory All Quiet or Westfront 1918 did. The camera work for 1932 was amazing, those low angle shots making you feel like you're going into that village with them. I would add, I really liked the 2017 Journey's End remake, though more for the superb performances(the 1930 version did have the better action shots). A weird outlier I think worthy on any WWI movie list is Abel Gance's 1937 version of J'Accuse. Though it is argued whether it counts as a war movie or horror film, it's presentation of PTSD(so much so the suffer's ghosts become quite real)was revolutionary for it's time. And Victor Francen's performance was unbelievably great!
How could I watch Les Croix de Bois?
"Wooden Crosses" still looks incredible. Lessons to learn from a movie made 90 years ago.
Loving the video so far many great movies included
Means a lot coming from you brother 🙏🙏
I know it's not a "war movie" but the story of JRR Tolkien's life and his writing lord of the rings, that has some very powerful ww1 scenes in it.
Not sure if this should be counted but if it's a loose categorisation then absolutely, it's a great movie.
I am Italian and I think there is a great film that tells the story of the First World War and how important this moment was for Italians, the political and social differences of people who participated in the conflict and who discovered themselves as Italians are very evident in this tragic event. It's called "La Grande Guerra" (The Great War) and was made by an important Italian director named Mario Monnicelli in 1959. I think it's a somewhat special film about the First World War because it actually takes a historical moment as a pretext to make it clear and profound as we Italians are made. It is not a canonical war film but I recommend it to all those who, in addition to wanting to see a film, want to receive a small lesson on what the First World War was like for an Italy that still had a very heterogeneous population and tied to regional traditions . If you want to capture these small nuances and the bittersweet irony of the film, it is recommended to see it in Italian.
You should watch the italian movie "La Grande Guerra" (the Great War), 1959, by Mario Monicelli.
Is a comedy-drama movie. The fight scene aren't realistic (classic wave-frontal assaults, without much tactics) but they managed to depicts very well how life was for the italian soldier on the trenches, during that war.
Great characters, lot of laughs, and a LOT of tears. It's one of the best italian film ever made and one of my favorite, despite not being realistic during the combat scenes.
Very glad you are doing this. I grew up with Maurice Genevoix's account, Jünger and others so I'm always looking forward to films that won't make me shrug at nonsense every five minutes and there are not too many. Now I have a few to catch up with :)
Excellent post, congrats. A few missed but very well done. Please do a WW2 list!!!
I love watching this channel. Always looking forward to a new uploaded video or short.
I think The Lost Battalion is pretty if you take into account that it is meant to be a TV movie.
I didn't researched the actual battle, so I don't know how cold it truely was, but to me, the movie made sense, because:
- Late October can still be pretty sunny
- We don't really see the german 3rd line, where they are the most fortified, but the battalion didn't reach it in the film, they've got through the first two and stopped by the third in the forest
- The battalion was stopped in the forest, we saw the signs of prolonged bombardment earlier, but they've broke through those lines pretty fast, that's why we don't linger there
I also think they depict a couple of things we don't see in movies, which is great:
- Issues with communication
- Issues with bombardment
And yes, the movie made the same silly mistakes every other movie does:
- Running with bayonets fixed through everything in masses
- Having high ranking officers in the front for the 'muricans and for Germans, even the lower ranking officer stays behind
I think it deserves to be one category higher.
The Lost Battalion takes place in early October, not late :)
Cool video with many more ideas of film to watch... thanks and perfect ranking
I feel like all quiet on the western front (2022) should’ve been treated better
Although it wasn’t THE most realistic, it was an amazing movie
Thank you for this! As an American, it sometimes feels we have forgotten about WWI and mostly focus on WWII.
My grandfather fought in WWI and I’m always looking for movies, books etc that focus on WWI.
I thought I knew a lot about WWI, but Man, you rule! You turned me on to a lot here. Thanks!
Wondering if you ever saw australian WW1 movie Beneath Hill 60, and if so, what have you thought about it. Also, your list was pretty much on point !
I was wondering where the Beneath Hill 60 was as well. Pretty good movie if you ask me
Figured would check down here before making this comment.
@@abigailcollins8443 I wish he would revised it
Other movies: The Big Parade (1925)(silent), A Farewell to Arms (1957) and The Dawn Patrol (1938)
The original All Quiet on the Western front is pretty hard to rank...
On one hand the combat scenes and general feel of brutality is pretty good but not as good as the others, on the other hand however it's probably a perfect anti-war movie with great climate.
Sajjan Singh Rangroot is an inaccurate depiction of battlefield in WW1. But, it is an accurate depiction of Treatment of INDIAN soldiers in WW1.
Because one of my friend's Great Grandfather had fought in WWI and had faced same level of Racism as Faced by main Protagonist in this movie.
Moreover, it's not a BOLLYWOOD movie it is a movie from Punjabi Film Industry.
BOLLYWOOD is a nickname for Hindi film Industry.
I did not expect there would be March on the Drina reviewed here, once again you amaze me with every video I watch. Wonderful content brother!
My great grandpa watched this in 80s as 90years old veteran of that battle (austrian side, bohemian regiment where he served his mandatory military service for 2nd year). He was really impresed by the movie, but always sayed there wasnt enough blood and corpses laying around are too intact. He remember how their own artillery killed a lot of his friends due friendly fire. How his own reserves didnt recognize them and start shooting them in the back. He always sayed: "The first attack on Serbia, it was comedy full of mistakes".
He had some very bad comments to czech deserter scene (with a lot of curses), but it could be done by his very pro monarchy opinion. Other then that he liked the movie very much.
I disagree with your ranking of All Quiet (2022)
The movie perfectly depicts the German War Machine and how it treated its men as disposable trash, whilst it doesn't necessarily fit the timestamps of 1917/18, the message of the movie is portrayed excellently.
The biggest gripe I have with this movie is the usage of flamethrowers tho, that sucked, I get that they were trying to display some of the brutality in WW1, but gas would've been much more effective, and historically accurate.
IMO All Quiet deserves a low A or at least a high B
You're missing a good one - they very first recipient of the academy award for best picture, "Wings" (1927). While perhaps not historically accurate, it's proximity to the conflict itself and the usage of real WWI era biplanes is stunning, with incredible aerial filming, and there are some very impressive large-scale action scenes involving some 3500 infantrymen as extras.
saw that recently after binging the TV series. Some people find it hard watching those old movies, but it was really well made and acted and touched the heart, especially the death scene.
Congrats on putting March on Drina, greetings from Serbia :)
I just finished watching Westfront 1918. It was truly amazing. At certain parts of the film, I forgot that I was watching a film. Its probably the most realistic depiction of war that movies can offer. It is a movie that no one can live without seeing.
Did you watch wooden cross too ? How would they compare ?
King & country (1964) with mister Dirk Bogarde was the best WW1 flick.
I can recommend french film called "J'accuse!" - "I accuse" from 1919. Maybe one of the very first films about WW1, with very strong anti-war message (especially last about 45 minutes are remarkable). Really worth watching it, even if it might look pretty....."old" by today´s standarts!
At the risk of being lost in a sea of comments, I have some serious issues with how you present the history of a number of these films.
So, to begin with, however - while I agree that the period of 1919-1939 saw many phenomenal films about the First World War be made, it's not really because of "veterans". For starters, "veterans" is not a singular, monolithic category and is too mono-casual of an explanation. It's much deeper and rooted in how various cultures see their First World War history - films are first and foremost pieces of art. Yes, they can (and do) influence how people think about the past, but we can not think of them as history lessons in and of themselves.
The reason I say this is that many of the tropes that become associated with First World War films come from veterans themselves in their writings and sometimes pieces of history. One of the most influential figures in the English language historiography was Basil Liddell Hart, a veteran of the war, whom had very specific ideas about say the High Command (he wasn't a fan). He worked with A LOT of historians during his life and influenced a great deal of work, and he was a veteran! Being a veteran is not a claim towards being correct, it's simply someone who experienced the war as a combatant themselves in some fashion. It doesn't inherently give their view of the war more "truthiness" when looking at ex post facto sources like memoirs and oral histories.
In short, "veterans" are a complicated bunch of many people with many views. "Veterans" don't make or break these films, but rather the tropes and visual imagery that they use do. The 1930 version of "All Quiet" is a great case in point because it's combat scenes AREN'T realistic, and the 2022 clearly draws a lot from both it and the 1979 version. Yet, All Quiet is first and foremost an anti-war artistic expression. I don't think it necessarily needs to represent "the truth" in order to do what it does (and this isn't to make a statement on the qualities of the 2022 one, artistically I can see its merits and detraction).
After WWII, as views of the First World War begin to really change in a massive way, the way that WWI in films is represented changes with it and much of the "ahistorical" aspects of a lot of WWI films really take hold in this era, and get reinforced over and over again creating an image of the war that audiences expect. That's why, say, War Horse, has a completely ahistorical battle set in 1918 - because it's what audiences EXPECT WWI to look like now. Those expectations and tropes didn't exist (at least in the same way) from 1919-1939.
Now, as to some of your more specific claims about films:
1917's black soldiers and Indian cavalryman: 1917 is set during "Operation Alberich", otherwise known as the Retreat to the Hindenburg Line in early 1917. It threw off some of the planning for the Arras offensive coming later that month. Put simply, there were black soldiers in the British army during the First World War, and even black officers (although the latter was prohibited by the King's Regulations, there were those who squeezed past them). It's not ahistoric to feature black men in the British army, and in fact for the units depicted (the Devonshires and East Surreys) had black men, and in fact Andy Robertshaw (one of the historical advisors for the film) has argued that they should have had MORE to be in line with the historic units. On this subject, I can heartily recommend Ray Costello's "Black Tommies: British Soldiers of African Descent in the First World War" (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2015).
As well, do you know WHO Alfred H. Mendes actually was? That is, Sam Mendes's grandfather who inspired the film. Alfred H. Mendes was born in the 1890s to Portuguese Creole parents in Trinidad, earned a Military Medal in 1917 during the Battle of Poelcappelle during the Third Ypres Campaign, and after the First World War became an important and influential Trinidadian writer. He wasn't white.
Now what of the Indian cavalryman? During Operation Alberich, Indian Cavalry was actively engaged in operations as an advance guard - screening and scouting. Sepoy Jondalar is found on a "Casuals Truck" (this is clearly stated by Captain Smith played by Mark Strong). A Casuals truck was a truck for assorted troops who got separated from their actual units for a variety of reasons, such as having been in hospital, and are making their way back to their actual units. This is an instance where you would find mixing like this. As for the language. Is it so hard to believe that at the VERY least, someone who has been in the BEF in France since 1914 (as Indian Cavalrymen had been) picked up English in that time? Or had learned it beforehand? Just because they were Indian doesn't mean they hadn't ever learned English. Yes, some wouldn't have. But others did! And some even wrote home in English! Sepoy Jondalar has every right to be there.
And finally: No, "English", "Scottish", "Welsh", and "Irish" units were not homogeneous. While they might have a core coming from a specific region, significant percentages of each Battalion were made up of those from other parts of the UK. There are jokes about say, some Scottish units, being more Irish than Scottish because of this!
So that's 1917 out of the way.
As for your comments on Sajjan Singh Rangroot, I find it disappointing you don't discuss any of the cultural factors that went into the making of the film. I can't speak to the film's specific quality, as I have not seen it, but any analysis of the film is incomplete without understanding that it is the VERY FIRST Punjabi made film about the First World War (and the first ever War film from Punjab), and the various film industries in India all have their own contexts, specialties, audience expectations, etc... The Punjabi film industry, for example, makes a lot of comedies and romance films, not war films. This is important in order to properly contextualize the film and what it is doing, seeing it treated so blithely was disappointing.
And on that note: British society was extremely racist towards Indians during and before the First World War. Someone from the UK did not have to have personally met an Indian to be racist towards them, anti-Indian racism permeated what we would call pop culture. I can't speak to the film's actual quality, but those aspects of its history are correct.
Finally, your treatment of "The Great War" from 2019. I'll get it out of the way, it's not a well made film - and like with any of the rests of these my issue is not with where you placed them in your tier list - but your historical reasoning for doing so.
The issues with "The Great War" do not include its premise, however. There were two combat divisions of African-American soldiers during the First World War. The most famous of these, and the one you reference as "Buffalo Soldiers" who fought with the French, was the 93rd Division composed of the following infantry regiments: 369th ("Harlem Hellfighters"/"Harlem Rattlers"/"Old 15th"/"Men of Bronze"), 370th, 371st, 372nd. These troops did in fact fight with the French.
HOWEVER, The 92nd Division - also a black combat division - DID fight under the American flag as US Troops. This division was composed of the 365th Regiment, 366th Regiment, 367th Regiment, and 368th, and a whole boatload of Machine Gun Battalions, Field Artillery, Medical, etc... They even had black junior officers! They were first in the line in early August 1918, and participated in the Meuse-Argonne offensive.
These men of the 92nd, 93rd and ALL the support units that black men were otherwise funneled into suffered not only German fire, but INTENSE racism from their peers and commanders. There were men LYNCHED in Europe. The 92nd went through hell, and yes, fought alongside white American units. To insinuate otherwise is a disrespect to their struggle and to the failures of the United States in eliminate Jim Crow before the Civil Rights Movement of the Cold War. Any movie about black troops during the First World War that DOESN'T deal with racism that those men faced is doing their memory a disservice.
Some books I'd recommend on the subject:
"Lost Battalions: The Great War and the Crisis of American Nationality" by Richard Slotkin is an excellent book about both the 92nd and 77th Divisions. "Harlem's Rattlers and the Great War" by Jeffery T. Sammons & John H. Morrow Jr., "Torchbearers of Democracy: African American Soldiers in the World War I Era" by Chad L. Williams, "Freedom Struggles: African Americans and World War I" by Adriane Lentz-Smith, and "The Unknown Soldiers: African American Troops in World War I" by Arthur E. Barbeau & Florette Henri are all EXCELLENT books about African-Americans during the First World War and will easily get you situated.
^This. All of this.
Very fine analysis. Thank you for the sources.
Your comment should be pinned to the top
@@ChristheRedcoatupdoot to you good sir, you won the internet gold today holy heckenerinoo reddit man
Thanks!
Your welcome
Not a WW1 movie but I would recommend you to watch an estonian WW2 movie of the eastern front, Tannenberg line "1944" by Elmo Nüganen. It has scenes of both the sides the estonians fought on.
Hi, i am Argentinian and i remember finding a DVD of this movie some years ago at a grocery store. Watched it ans was pretty amazed by it. Rare find, do not regret watching it at all.
@@mr.ramixhardbass3331 yeah I would say it is pretty underrated and its not done on a huge budget like most of the war movies. Glad you enjoyed it
My great great grandpa fought through the entire 2nd boer war and ww1, he was a rifleman in the boer war and a machine gunner in ww1, when he was at paeschendale he says that most times when he was walking he was touching either a dead body or a piece of shrapnel, and that the battlefield stunk
I'm surprised you didn't include the Mel Gibson Gallipoli from 1981. Still, great video!
We need a review like this but for WW2 asap. Great work! 💪
As an aussie, I have always loved Gallipoli 2015, i'm glad to hear you talk about it.
Thank you for the ranking, very interessting, there were some movies i didnt know of. I will check out Capitaine Conan now! 👍
Question
Is Tolkien (The movie) technically a WWI film? And if it is what would it rank as?
F
S+
Kind of surprised you didn't review Stosstruppen 1917, considering how often scenes from the movie are mistaken for actual WW1 footage.
Part 2 ;)
The Blue Max (1966) is the best one.
One of my personal favorites is Gallipoli (1981) with Mel Gibson and Mark Lee. Is it completely accurate? Not really but I hope you check it out some time. As a bonus I'll throw in Trench 11 and Deathwatch. They're just WW1 horror movies but if you find more of that sub genre of historical horror who knows? It could be a cool video. Keep up the good work.
I really liked the new All Quiet on the Western Front. Agree on Wooden Crosses though.
I love your channel but I don't agree with your movie opinions.A few things you said about All quiet on the Western front were wrong .Are you telling me in the whole of the great war soilders were never buried inside a trench system like they were in the first bombardment of the movie . Complete bullshit they just recently found a bunker system with Germans in it buried alive .So you think German trenches never filled up with rain even those they had wooden running boards of course they did sometimes .The shot with the barb wire Infront of the trench could have been a shot of troops in a different position.The troops that got up and run were from a different part of the trench that's why there was no Wire Infront of them.The bridge over the French trench was how they got the tanks over there own trench.Lastly are you telling me German troops never got out of their trenchers and ran like they did in the movie ,sorry that rubbish of course they did .
I strongly recommend the Australian movie Beneath Hill 60, I’d love to see where you rank it. I’d personally give it an A.
Cheers
Excellent, Now Tier List WW2 films 🐥
Great ranking, congrats and thanks. By the way : the book "Les croix de bois" by Dorgelès is an absolute masterpiece, also from a litterary point of view.
by the way, congrats on your french accent, i even assume you can speak it
I believe he’s French-Canadian.
I've seen Warsaw 44 thanks to the video you've made about it a while ago and I like it a lot (one of the best war movie I've seen) Thanks for that and for new ideas.
The film sergeant York (1941) actually popularized the barb wire on spikes because you can see many of them in that movie so paths of glory add it on to it years later
So glad you talked about Colonel Driant and his defence of the Bois de Caures, the sad fact is that if Driant had been listened to a year earlier the Verdun meat grinder may have been quite different. Sadly I have no idea where to obtain a copy of this film.
You forgot "La Grande Guerra", about the italian front. A great masterpiece in my opinion
You should break more battleifeld V missions down. Love your videos man!
Would love to see one for WW2. Enemy at the Gate has given people such a distorted perception of the Eastern Front.
That video would be like 5 hours long
All Quiet 2022 portrayed so much that the other movies couldn’t do. The devolution of morale and humanity as the war dragged on for the unit. The emotional side of the movie for the soldiers that is rarely depicted in such a brutal and honest way is what shines. The bigger overarching elements of the movie like the German general ordering attacks before the end of the war and things like that are obviously inaccurate. But to throw the movie in a low tier because of that instead of addressing the huge amount of details in the movie is a bit ridiculous. You even mentioned in other parts of the video how soldiers would usually only be at the frontline for a week or more, well the movie depicts this aspect. It depicts mundane things on and away from the front like pailing water out of the flooded trenches, collecting dog tags, throwing lime on masses of coffins, peeling potatoes for the company, even using the bathroom lol. The fact is, all the inaccuracies I could harp on about the tactics or combat pale in comparison to the overall feeling and picture the movie paints, which is a great and immersive recreation of the war. I’m a weapons enthusiast so I get chuffed about the guns not producing recoil or the safety switches being half turned over, but I appreciate the detail in things like the Germans being issued K bullets to shoot at the French tanks (and them inevitably not working due to the advancement in the thickness of the allied armor) or the CO telling the men to grab the machine gun and ammo when they’re retreating, and when the soldiers drink the cooling jacket water because they as German soldiers in the late stage of WW1 are starving and exhausted all the time they’d even drink the nasty cooling water to even keep going. This stuff adds up for an authentic experience that a lot of these movies don’t even come close to making. The shell crater scene in the new version of All Quiet is soul crushing. The original movie adaptation for the time of course was just as moving but that was for the time, it wasn’t as realistic and was more stylized. The modern adaptation is sickening to watch because you know it really happened, more than we care to admit as humans. The acting is superb in general for the movie and that scene is up there for me higher than most of these other movies. There is a sense of real starvation, hopelessness, depression, and madness thru the performances that the other movies on this list cannot make you empathize with. The movie like I said isn’t perfect in historical accuracy but brings together many real things being portrayed to create an authentic period piece to immerse you in. It literally sucks you in and is unashamed in the brutality that was WW1.
You gotta do this for all wars. Also i would love to see you review a random movie called siege on firebase gloria i think you would get a kick out of that movie.
I have written a book called "Stories of the Great War" but never published I, I'm planning on it soon.
As others have said- you missed Beneath Hill 60- probably one of the best WW1 films of the last 50 years. Also The Silent Mountain, La Grande Illusion, and The Lighthorsemen. And by the way, where are the air combat movies!? Classics like Aces High, The Blue Max, Both Dawn Patrols, Richtofen and Brown, Wings, etc. These WW1 movies cannot be ignored!
Wasn’t all quite on the western front (the original) based on the book from a actual German?
2022 all quiet on the western front is still my top movie. I have seen many but it was a great movie and deserves a better ranking.
Certainly not. The totally unrealistic drama surrounding the invented and idiotic big bad general character alone relegates it to the trash heap. What is he even general of? Where are his superiors and the orders he has to follow? Nobody knows. He just orders attacks left and right, free and unhinged.
Read the novel instead if you haven't, and you might perhaps begin to realize how bad this latest rendition truly is.
@@somerandomvertebrate9262 "hurr durr movie bad because actors didn't die! Not realistic!"🤓🤓
@@somerandomvertebrate9262 you are a clown
It's not bad but it felt like it was missing something
I think it did a great job showing the moral conflicts and horror of war pretty well. I enjoyed the movie overall; it was more set up as a thriller than strictly sticking to historical accuracy. There were a couple scenes I did not care for though. Primary with the General/Officers and decision making, the kid scene was dumb filler and threw away a potential tragic death scene and the last attack scene was just stupid. The 79 film still has the best ending imo as far as emotional impact. The new one I was just like...Alright.
Putting warhorse above all quiet on the western front (new version) is ridiculous. Yea All quiet deviated from the book and may not have been historically accurate but it was way better than warhorse. I think all quiet deserved at LEAST a B
The lost battalion with my guy Ricky Schroeder was a good underrated world war 1 movie. It's worth a watch
Ok, like World War 1, this video deserves a WW2 sequel.
Waiting for the ranks of the Best WWII Movies. I like WWII settings, which weapons are more advance, but not advance enough to have computer guided systems, which makes skill still matters in the battlefield.
Umm ww2 had lots and lots of automatic weapons my dude
Stg44, mab38, sten, thompson never existed
@@liamsherlock7 Sorry, for automatic firing system, I mean automatic computer guided stuffs lol Like laser guided missile, AA missiles etc
The real issue was that the technology, artillery with hydraulic-recoil systems and machine guns, were ahead of the tactics, esp at start of the war.
Im so happy i found your channel.
For the italian front, I was expecting to see A Silent Mountain too, I really enjoyed watching it, showing perspectives from both Austrian and Italian sides. Am not sure how realistic it was, as I'm not an expert (yet) in WW1 accuracies
I have seen It and i found It really unrealisitic, very stereotipized
nice video, will wait for the ww2 version
HE POSTED AGAIN LETS GOOO
Merci pour ce que vous faites, c'est toujours remarquable. Un (tout petit) détail : à un moment, en le comparant à un autre film, vous situez l'action des «Croix de bois» en 1915. Il est vrai qu'à bien des gards c'est ce qu'on penserait, mais les soldats sont équipés du casque Adrian, qui, si je ne m'abuse, n'est apparu massivement qu'en 1916. Me trompé-je?
Just when I've prepared long rant why should "March on the Drina" be included on the list I've took a closer look at it and be like "oooh". Movie has that '60's cinematography fun-to-watch vibe. It is concentrated about one artillery battery in the wihrlwind of much greater battle and portray drama of small soldiers, simple humans dragged into a big struggle. Also, there are a lot of funny moments provided by cartoonishly flamboyant infantry captain almost stellar opposite of his best buddy, artillery captain of the said battery who is calm and level headed.
I have been to Serbia 2 times in my life, ome time at a petrol station I saw Marš na Drinu for a few dinari next to the checkout. Its a good old film.
@@JK-oq9cl it's on youtube, but unfortunately without subtitles. Here's a short clip with subtitle: ruclips.net/video/NiPHmw6yU6E/видео.html and another one :ruclips.net/video/qlkW414otPw/видео.html
Thanx for super interesting run down, I never heard about almost any of these movies. Thanx!
I wonder if he’s seen the young Indiana Jones tv series; that show entails a lot of WW1
there was a tv series? what is it called?
Man this is wonderful. I appreciate you bro ❤
The Australian movie "Gallipoli" staring Mel Gibson made in 1981 deserves to be on this list.
It is.
@@redford4ever No it's not he's reviewing the 2015 Gallipoli movie
@@sticksnstones5407 My bad!
@@redford4ever that's ok
He actually reviewed Mars na Drinu.
Films that still come to mind are,
Standschütze Bruggler (1936)
the silent mountain (2014)
Dolomites front
The Standard (1977)
Eastern Front - Vienna
Good recommendations for old movies to watch. I think you forgot "The Trench" (1999) Within the first 20 min. the camera never moves the sight out of the trench, and that's probably how oppressive it felt back there.
And maybe the Australian Gallipoli from 1981 with Mel Gibson.
I recently watched The Trench. It's by no means a masterpiece but the end scene is fairly profound and kind of redeems what comes before.
I imagine that hiring vets to reenact the worst time of their life did wonders for their mental health.
Again...."historian" is a bit of a stretch. Lol.
Couple comments from a fellow historian... 1-great video! 2- perhaps redundant but SO LITTLE said about 1930 All Quiet.. Definite "S" All Time classic. 3- was eager to hear your take on Uomini "armored infantry" scene. 4- Surprised NO Gallipoli (Mel Gibson) movie, though perhaps would have been redundant after your (unknown to me "newer" Gallipoli movie. 5- Though VERY disappointed with latest "All Quiet" scenes I have seen, (would raise its ranking IF did not profess to be All Quiet/just had an original title of its own.) Plus many silly combat scenes, especially absurd flamethrowers scene. 6- Think "maybe" little harsh on Lost Battalion; despite its many flaws, was a good depiction for its time. Overall great video, with 90% complete agreeance with you... keep up your great work
One movie I think you should check out is ‘The War Below’ about the British tunnelers on the Western front, quite an enjoyable film, not quite sure how accurate it is.
Not to be confused w/ WW2 submarine movie The Enemy Below
Thank you for making videos like this again
I think that there is another film you should watch. Its a documentary but it shows the true footage of ww1 called They Shall Not Grow Old. Peter Jackson really did well with this so maybe it would be a good idea to look into.
Enjoy your vids. Can't wait to see the next one.
Excellent documentary. Filmed on Location, the Western Front, 1914-1918.
Wonderful. Thank you. You could add the movie "La Grande Illusion". Very goos and the director was a veteran of WWI.
Based on your assessment of historical accuracy and realism, your ranking was flawless. I appreciate your efforts here. I know there are a ton of WW2 movies. And I could never expect anyone to comb through and rank them like you have done for WW1 films. There are
only a handful of Korean War movies. There are some Korean depictions that are worth a watch but very few Western depictions. Have you encountered any forgotten or less known Korean War movies that you would rank high? Thanks
Hi,
I am a big fan of your History Legends channel and always enthusiastically look forward to all your presentations and group forum exchanges as a host or as a highly sought guest on many other channels. I appreciate greatly your research and exceptional technique in presenting a balanced view and up to date facts as well as analysis of events current and historical. Great work of a high standard.
It is understandable that you may have missed a few Australian World War 1 movies not on your list. These being:
Gallipoli (1981) Gallipoli Peninsula campaign and the infamous futile attack at the Nek, Actors Mel Gibson & Mark Lee,
The Light Horsemen (1987) Sinai-Palestine, Battle of Beersheba, 1917. One of the last modern cavalry charges in history against a well-fortified position under desperate circumstances,
Beneath Hill 60 (2010), 1st Australian Tunnelling Company, Ypres Salient Messines Ridge, 1917. Capt. Oliver Woodard award MC and 2 bars.
ANZAC Girls (2014) Six-episode TV mini-series ~6 hrs (2013) Australian nurses dedicated service Egypt, Gallipoli, and Western Front,
ANZACS (1985) the epic mini-series of ~9 hrs had Aussies captivated every episode when it was released as it told the story of a previously a colonial possession of the British Empire evolving as new nation with a small population that was capable of taking on the might of old-world superpowers given the limited opportunity of its own commanders. A definite change in position on your table in my opinion to Row A or start of Row B.
The Water Diviner (2014) Actor Russell Crow- Gallipoli Campaign 4.5/10, enough said.
Keep up your great work. Fantastic every presentation.
All the very best
Cheers
Bruh really put 1917 and All Quiet on the Western Front on the bottom 💀 You should never be allowed to criticize movies ever again
They were trash 🗑.
Unfortunately, you grew in trash war-movie-ville and don't know any better
as another historian I would have to agree with most of your selections - I too have read original documents - researched two textbooks and also find it difficult to accept some of the cliche's you see in Great War films - next time you go to your bookstore LOOK at the texts on the Great War - they are almost ALL uniform in their information and presentation - there is little new or exceptional published - most summarise in grand sweeping generalisations what occurred - regurgitating the book beside it - this is what happens in historiography as we move away from the actual event - over-generalization - my history text covered the life and death of ONE Canadian soldier whose grave marker I came across in northern France - I decided to discover the person buried beneath it and wrote two textbooks - over 600 pages on him - THAT is what is missing today - we lose the details and you end up with what you get in film - sameness
I would higly recommand to you (if you haven’t read already) « Le Feu » , of Henri Barbusse, a memoir of the author’s ww1 experience.
Well, I’ve now got my movie list lined up for the next few months! Thanks ever so much!
This was very interesting. many movies that I was not aware of. What about the 1981 movie Gallipolli? I saw that when I was in High School and was very impressed. My history teacher also used it.
It's rather disappointing the only wars about minorities/non-europeans fighting for the entente on the western front are terrible terrible movies. Their stories are some of the most interesting.
Thank you, HistoryLegends for doing this video! I've been waiting for this ranking video for a long time now.
By the way if you had to watch either Sanjjan Singh Rangroot or The Great War (2019) for the rest of your life, which film would you've chosen?