"They Shall Not Grow Old" Peter Jackson's WWI film

"They Shall Not Grow Old" Peter Jackson's WWI film

Author
Discussion

LoonyTunes

3,362 posts

76 months

Tuesday 13th November 2018
quotequote all
Halmyre said:
LoonyTunes said:
If the same conflict sprung up today I'd not fight in it. The working and middle classes are far more worldly wise today than they were back then and yes that also includes selfish as well.

I'm afraid I'd only fight a war against an aggressor with designs on acquiring my actual homeland and/or killing my family, friends and countrymen - I'm not going to some far-flung god-forsaken hell-hole to sacrifice my one-and-only lifetime in this cosmos killing foreigners in their own homeland because some politico tells me to - or says that it's patriotic.
The politicos of course will have persuaded you (if the tablods haven't) that the barbaric inhabitants of Whereverthefkitis have evil designs on your nearest and dearest and need to be stopped in their tracks.
Not so easy to do that anymore - especially after the "Iraq have WMD that can hit us in 45 minutes (or whatever the claim was)".

Wake me up when they are at Calais, armed to the teeth and waiting to board the ferry. biggrin

aeropilot

34,685 posts

228 months

Tuesday 13th November 2018
quotequote all
ash73 said:
Would have liked to see the Royal Flying Corps mentioned, with some footage.
I'm guessing that back in 196* when the BBC recorded those interviews, they didn't interview any RFC survivors, or RN, etc., and the whole purpose of this film was to make use of those historic recorded interviews and combine them with suitable, re-mastered footage as a back-drop.
This wasn't meant to be a encapsulating documentary of all aspects of WW1.


marksx

5,052 posts

191 months

Tuesday 13th November 2018
quotequote all
ash73 said:
I loved the way it transitioned from the old footage to the new, and then back again at the end.

I think I heard one veteran say during the attack only 1 in 6 survived the initial machine gun fire and those left had to fight hand to hand; bloody terrifying odds.

Would have liked to see the Royal Flying Corps mentioned, with some footage.
In the making of doc yesterday, PJ commented that he deliberately focused on the trench war, and on British soldiers rather than wider commonwealth. Can't remember his reasons though.

dieselgrunt

689 posts

165 months

Tuesday 13th November 2018
quotequote all
The footage of the German prisoners and British joking together, just tragic.

MBBlat

1,640 posts

150 months

Tuesday 13th November 2018
quotequote all
For those wanting a more in depth look at the conflict, including all the stuff going on away from the trenches, may I recommend The Great War onm YouTube - literally 1 12 minute episode covering each weak of the war, originally uploaded exactly 100 years later.

tobinen

9,239 posts

146 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
I stumbled across some short videos by BBC Teach on YouTube. Look for the 'I Was There...' series. There are some moving interviews with ex-WWI soldiers, presumably recorded in the 1960s or thereabouts.

joema

2,649 posts

180 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Rogue86 said:
I would argue that as a race we are more intelligent to some degree than we were 100 years ago. People are less likely to run 200yds into direct machine gun fire because someone told them to. I don't think that's particularly selfish or a bad thing. People are definitely more suspicious now than they were.

It's clear from watching the documentary that many of the men heading to combat had absolutely no idea what they were heading into and wanted to get there before it ended. The civilian population was heavily censored. They didn't sign up because of a sense of duty. They signed up because their friends were doing it and they wanted an adventure.

I would say absolutely nothing has changed. There are people much younger than you heading into worse odds in forgotten parts of the world as we speak. It might be 'trendy' to call them snowflakes but in 100 years, your sons will be talking about how brave they were compared to their own generation.
I agree. We are better educated than back then, we have more wealth and individual choice.
They had no idea what they were signing up for. Had they known maybe they would have thought otherwise. Because it happened we have an idea that blindly signing up for any war isn't a great idea. Whether another such war can exist is another argument for a pointless debate anyway.

And to think it didn't affect the generation as they were made of sterner stuff is nonsense. 250k were diagnosed with shellshock/ptsd as it known today. They all suffered.


I thought the whole program was really well done. With the voices, pictures, moving images it made for a powerful piece. It brought it more to life than I would have thought.

CrutyRammers

13,735 posts

199 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Saw it last night. An amazing bit of work, both technically and in the way it told the story.

There is definitely a tendency in Britain to focus on the Western Front, rather than the rest of the war - perhaps because some of the other campaigns were massive failures, and hence deliberately less spoken about. My grandfather was wounded at Gallipoli, and again a year later in Mesopotania while charging across 600 yards of no-mans land towards Ottoman trenches. Both were utter defeats for Britain, and information about them is much thinner on the ground.
Other battles such as Verdun mentioned above are barely mentioned because the Brits weren't there, despite being pivotal, and unmatched in scale and horror.

aeropilot

34,685 posts

228 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
CrutyRammers said:
Saw it last night. An amazing bit of work, both technically and in the way it told the story.

There is definitely a tendency in Britain to focus on the Western Front, rather than the rest of the war - perhaps because some of the other campaigns were massive failures, and hence deliberately less spoken about. My grandfather was wounded at Gallipoli, and again a year later in Mesopotania while charging across 600 yards of no-mans land towards Ottoman trenches. Both were utter defeats for Britain, and information about them is much thinner on the ground.
Other battles such as Verdun mentioned above are barely mentioned because the Brits weren't there, despite being pivotal, and unmatched in scale and horror.
This was an interesting article on the BBC website a few days ago........about the little known fact about some Scottish troops who had to fight on after the Armistice.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-46124567


Elderly

3,497 posts

239 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
ash73 said:
I loved the way it transitioned from the old footage to the new, and then back again at the end.

……….

Would have liked to see the Royal Flying Corps mentioned, with some footage.
I liked the moment of transition too, but - I felt that the whole programme would have been more powerful
left in black & white (but I did agree with altering the frame rate).

And WHY did the black and white footage put into a 'frame' at the start and the end, have to be reduced in size so much?
I see the rationale for the frame, but the size of the frame reduced the image size too much for me.

Likewise, after reading the end credits stating that the Oral Historians had recorded men from the RFC,
was there no footage shown?

Langweilig

4,330 posts

212 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
RC1807 said:
I'm driving back to the UK for a couple of days next month. I'm stopping, for the first time, in Ypres. I've driven past it more than a hundred times over the last 20 years or so, and I'm ashamed I've not stopped to acknowledge, let alone bow to the memorials.
I will make up for that on 13th December.

Edited by RC1807 on Tuesday 13th November 11:16
I'd recommend that you visit the Menin Gate Memorial with its 40,000 names of those who've no known grave. If you can, attend the Last Post ceremony at the memorial. The roads are closed to traffic and the ceremony is held every evening.




You could also visit the café/museum at Hill 62, Sanctuary Wood, Kemmel Hill, Ypres. I'll never forget my visit there in 1999. After I left the museum, I walked up a slight incline and the sight of the trenches - complete with authentic Flanders mud hit me in the face. I stood there thinking, "Dear God! Is this really what it was all about? How could any human being live in that filth for weeks on end? Yet with all, I couldn't overcome a strange compulsion to step down into the trench and stand in the mud. I discovered later that my grandfather (27495 L/Cpl James Henry Crozier. 10th Batt Royal Irish Fusiliers) and my great-grandfather (L/Cpl James Crozier. Winnipeg Fusiliers. Canadian Expeditionary Force) had both served there.




Take some time to visit Tyne Cot military cemetery. The world's largest military cemetery at Passchendaele. The number of burials and commemorations (four of them German) run well into five figures.


Edited by Langweilig on Wednesday 14th November 19:35


Edited by Langweilig on Wednesday 14th November 19:36

Bebee

4,680 posts

226 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Slightly OT but still relevant, does anyone know the best site to trace my ancestry, there seems to be a few, is there an extensive search site for the military? have you done one?

Langweilig

4,330 posts

212 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Bebee said:
Slightly OT but still relevant, does anyone know the best site to trace my ancestry, there seems to be a few, is there an extensive search site for the military? have you done one?
if you know of a relative who died in either the first or second world war, this is a good site for information.

https://www.cwgc.org/find/find-war-dead

Bebee

4,680 posts

226 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
thumbup

redrabbit

1,409 posts

166 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
LoonyTunes said:
Halmyre said:
LoonyTunes said:
If the same conflict sprung up today I'd not fight in it. The working and middle classes are far more worldly wise today than they were back then and yes that also includes selfish as well.

I'm afraid I'd only fight a war against an aggressor with designs on acquiring my actual homeland and/or killing my family, friends and countrymen - I'm not going to some far-flung god-forsaken hell-hole to sacrifice my one-and-only lifetime in this cosmos killing foreigners in their own homeland because some politico tells me to - or says that it's patriotic.
The politicos of course will have persuaded you (if the tablods haven't) that the barbaric inhabitants of Whereverthefkitis have evil designs on your nearest and dearest and need to be stopped in their tracks.
Not so easy to do that anymore - especially after the "Iraq have WMD that can hit us in 45 minutes (or whatever the claim was)".

Wake me up when they are at Calais, armed to the teeth and waiting to board the ferry. biggrin
Totally agree. It takes nothing away from the bravery of those who enlisted willingly or otherwise during WW1 to accept that we'd all be a lot more savvy than to march quite so readily onto troop ships to France today. It was still an era of low education, limited information, and a masters and servants society, which changed pretty quickly as a result. We should all be bloody grateful it wouldn't happen today.

Awesome documentary. Very sobering. Won't be complaining about my mobile reception or the price of petrol for a while. At least until next week anyway...

henrycrun

2,449 posts

241 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
just a reminder that the iplayer finishes this Sunday
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0brzkzx/the...

JackReacher

2,130 posts

216 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all
Interesting discussion about what would happen now. It’s easy to say that the general population is more wise to the world, better educated etc and unlikely to fight in the same situation.  However, look how propaganda has moved on since then, and look at the influence of social media influence and how it has impacted major events recently.  A well run government led propaganda campaign and fake news could see significant numbers of people signing up to fight.

 
And also, let’s not forget that WW1 and WW2 were not in some far flung part of the world overthrowing a dictator who we didn’t like to benefit some oil deal, the battle fields were just across the English Channel, and in the case of WW2 (and WW1 to a lesser extent) we were physically attacked from the air.  In the incredibly unlikely event that a similar war took place now, I don’t think they’d struggle to sign up recruits. But, it’s all a bit irrelevant as I don’t think a war like that could ever happen again.

Of course, trying to impose a hierarchical structure of leadership and discipline on today's young adults would be a massive challenge!

LoonyTunes

3,362 posts

76 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all
WW2 was a war against an expansionist aggressor threatening our land and lives. WW1 was not. Germany wasn't even part of the initial cause of WW1.

We got involved for reasons of 'honour' and Imperialist considerations.

This sums up WW1 quite neatly.

Over time, countries throughout Europe made mutual defense agreements that would pull them into battle. These treaties meant that if one country was attacked, allied countries were bound to defend them. Before World War 1, the following alliances existed:

Russia and Serbia
Germany and Austria-Hungary
France and Russia
Britain and France and Belgium
Japan and Britain

Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, Russia got involved to defend Serbia. Germany seeing Russia mobilizing, declared war on Russia. France was then drawn in against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Germany attacked France through Belgium pulling Britain into war. Then Japan entered the war. Later, Italy and the United States would enter on the side of the allies.

GipsyHillClimber

129 posts

95 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all
LoonyTunes said:
WW2 was a war against an expansionist aggressor threatening our land and lives. WW1 was not. Germany wasn't even part of the initial cause of WW1.

We got involved for reasons of 'honour' and Imperialist considerations.

This sums up WW1 quite neatly.

Over time, countries throughout Europe made mutual defense agreements that would pull them into battle. These treaties meant that if one country was attacked, allied countries were bound to defend them. Before World War 1, the following alliances existed:

Russia and Serbia
Germany and Austria-Hungary
France and Russia
Britain and France and Belgium
Japan and Britain

Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, Russia got involved to defend Serbia. Germany seeing Russia mobilizing, declared war on Russia. France was then drawn in against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Germany attacked France through Belgium pulling Britain into war. Then Japan entered the war. Later, Italy and the United States would enter on the side of the allies.
I read quite an interesting article a few years ago which queried whether the Central Powers would have won if they'd attacked France directly on their border rather than by through Belgium which dragged Britain and our navy in as you say. There's obviously a tonne of variables as there always is with 'alternate history' but interesting all the same.

coppice

8,629 posts

145 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all
Rogue86 said:
I would argue that as a race we are more intelligent to some degree than we were 100 years ago. People are less likely to run 200yds into direct machine gun fire because someone told them to. I don't think that's particularly selfish or a bad thing. People are definitely more suspicious now than they were.
I don't think there is any evidence to suggest people were any less intelligent but most were infinitely less well informed than we are . Actually , than we SHOULD be , as the level of ignorance about basic geography , let alone politics , in many people I encounter in 2018 is bloody shocking