Printable View
Quite a bit of footage is not appropriately dated for the sequence that its shown. Also a good bit is "colorized" a'la Ted Turner and not real original color film.
For things that are just "wrong", of particular note are the Pearl Harbor Japanese carrier shots used in the Marianas Turkey Shoot sequence, and 1943 B17 footage shown in the 6 June 1944 sequence. Its OK viewing but its not of exact historical accuracy. Beware!
In some of the Pacific landing scenes it looked like a high percentage were carrying Carbines. Anyone else get that impression?
The point is that it is horribly easy to loose the forest for the trees, ie. miss the point of the whole effort, the protection of freedom, because of the cost. In this case, the point is being lost in each program as they primarily focus on the cost.
Bob
The jumping back and forth from the PTO to the ETO gets a little aggravating at times.
I find myself looking at the weapons more than listening to the facts.
There are plenty of carbine views though.
Seeing the burnt up family while trying to eat dinner didn't set well.
Charlie
dnikkor,
I wonder if those charts take into account the number of deaths due to production accidents on the home fronts.
Charlie
I agree, Charlie, with the confusion caused by the constant switching between the TO's. Run to the kitchen for a glass of water or another beer and the whole game has changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by painter777
I'll be curious to see if the DVD set has things laid out in a more understandable way or at least a guide to let us know what we're going to be seeing next. Glad to see it isn't just me!
Phil
Good question. I would bet not but I assume the workers killed by bombings or other military action were included in the estimates. And though those type of deaths and disfigurements from industrial accidents were tragic, I would imagine that they were only a drop in the bucket. The loss of life from this decade of destruction was so horrific that it boggles the mind that the various experts can't even narrow down the total number killed within 10-million.Quote:
Originally Posted by painter777
I didn't mean to be "snarky" towards Bob, but if the intention of the producers was to emphasis the terrible cost and sacrifices of war, then that is surely their right as filmmakers. WWII was so enormous and such a pivotal period in history that even a project as large as this one cannot be all things to all people and cannot be the definitive all-encompassing study of the war. It takes many different treatments from many different voices to put everything in perspective.
Fighting The War in the name of freedom sounds nice and it worked out pretty well for us, but we should remember that so many others were locked behind an Iron Curtain and still others had their vision of freedom suppressed by the restoration of colonialism by the various "winners." WWII was unsuccessful in implementing the agreed upon lofty goals if one considers the wars and the wants that followed.
That said, I wouldn't even be here if WWII didn't make it possible for a Kansas farm boy in the Army and a Denver city girl to meet each other. And I probably wouldn't have been here either if Truman hadn't dropped the bomb. My Dad was training for the invasion of Japan after he returned from fighting the Germans. I believe they estimated that invasion would have cost us a million casualties, dead and wounded.
You can't change history, you can only learn from it...or ignore it at your own peril.
It's not really HD either. I have a 40" Mitsubishi (of Zero fame) HDTV and the HD Dish network. The actual footage looked blurred and washed out
You have to remember that a lot of that footage was shot using very slow and grainy film available at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeagleEagle
Advertising it as HD was a marketing ploy. None of the old films will ever be HD without a whole bunch of artificial manipulation.
That is great you can watch the bombing of the Mitsubishi Factory 65 years later on your mitsubishi TV. We have really come full circle.