Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,532 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
1. Started slow but got better.

2. Music beds got much better and then went downhill toward the end in parts 4 and 5. Too much piano and cello. The spooky music beds for the episodes 3-5 were effective. The Foley artist were not too ispired..too many repeats of same battel sounds, especially smmal rounds bouncing off metal/armor.

3. Much unseen footage (at least by me). If this footage is as never-before-shown as promoted, what was the source and how did Ken Burns get it when many others before him could not? Most interesting.

4. Not nearly enough on the Eastern Front contributions to the whole effort--the Soviets made the biggest sacrifice of all in the "Great Patriot War".

5. Too many dead GIs shown and not enough dead Japs. Soem prety graphic potos of dead, altoug agins many repeated over episodes.

6. Played hands-off for the most part on the cultural aspects of post-war hate. Many still never will forgive Japs for what they did.

7. Burma/China mostly ignored. English in East mostly ignored. (Colonists defending their interests.) Italy got more than I expected.

8. Pandering to special interests not appreciated.

9. Too much of the Jewish girl/old lady in the Philippines camp. While the story is moving, and I have read of it before, it was not that significant in terms of the total effort.

10. Not enough, early enough, on the "final solution" and what lead up to it.

11. Not enough of the field leadership (should have roasted Monty for Market Garden--the limey idiot.)

12. I may have missed it, but nothing on the revolt of the Wiermacht on Hitler and various attempts to kill him.

13. Also may have missed it, but nothing on various underlings of Nazi and Jap leaders. (OK Rommel and Yamamoto got some coverage.)

14. Limited to the focus on 4 cities in US and not much focus on the contributions of other cities to the effort to produce (Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Birmingham, etc.)

15. No final "talley".

What might be your thoughts/critiques?
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
1,840 Posts
war

i am going to stick my neck out here not having seen the movie,but scanned the book. most recent popular WW2 stuff is as shyquestor said and too touchy feely and PC for what was really the deal then. the contribution of southern (and a lot of poor midwestern farm and "inner city" city families) is glossed over usually. we beat the japanese. the russians beat the germans-8+ million combat casualties according to their own studies. i didn't see it but i bet the contribution of george patton was glossed over as well as the fact that if he had been given freedoom of action the war in europe might have ended 3-10 months earlier. PC and concern for our "allies" again. no i don't think he could have made marching on moscow work. that would have ended up being our airforce against their army. probably the best of those two ever seen until the present day US military. the A bomb? my dad was a navy vet and i have gotten to speak to a few others over the years. they were totally freaked about the kamikazes over okinawa. a totally foreign,alien and unfathomable mindset to the average sailor/GI or commander then. our leader had what it took to end it before alot of bad/worse things happened. does this sound familiar in light of our experience in iraq and elsewhere in the middle east? we have the men (and women) to get it fixed. do our "leaders" have the will? NOT! sorry for the illiterate rant. just couldn't resist.
 

·
Moderator/Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
8,843 Posts
Again,this is a social history of WWII. By Ken Burns' own admission, this was WWII through the eyes and souls of men and women largely from four different locations in the U.S. By circumscribing his focus that clearly and that early on, I would never expect him to bring up any Ostfront stuff, or the machinations and intrigues behind the obvious command structures. No surprises here; I liked it.

Nice to hear some of the voices who contributed but were glossed over in previous accounts. Hell, it's just nice to see homage still paid to the Warriors in the P.C. nation in which most of us live...

Poot
 
G

·
WAY too PC.

Burns' 21st Century multicult agenda was enough to choke a horse, and very nearly drowned out the true stories of valor and sacrifice that characterized so many Americans' service during the war. All in all I'd say the first-person narratives were excellent and worthy of seeing again and again (and again).

Unfortunately, Burns' attempt to hijack American stories to serve a New Age purpose makes it unlikely that I will revisit the series again.

Overall grade: B -
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
My father, a twice wounded European theatre veteran, watched it and thought it was pretty good. The segment covering the Battle of the Bulge hit him hard as he said he couldn't sleep that night. That is rare that he would mention that as he is pretty even keel.
 
G

·
Since I watch and read anything I can get my hands on about the war this didn't do it for me. Mostly an overview for the younger folks who are ignorant to the historical significance of the era. For that it is a winner as they may now get an interest. Also I don't know if this was said on these boards but after the show was finnished Burns got a lot of flak from excluding the contibution of minorities. So he had to re edit which may of deleted some of your other battles and such.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Haven't seen 100%, but I did think there was a little too much of the emphasis on every ethnic group's particular niche. The tone should have made it more clear that it was a united effort and all groups played their role, just a they might have been expected to.

Humanistic, just as expected.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
Watched about 30 seconds of it. The narrators NPR baritone got on my nerves right away and all I heard was that "us troops were armed with rifles designed in 1903". Well gosh!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,070 Posts
PC aspect aside, I thought it was okay. Hearing the personal stories of some people, which I hadn't heard before, was good. Some of the photographs are new to me as well, since many of the WW2 books in my library re-use many of the same pics from the war. One of the pictures that really grabbed me was the picture of the hand of a corpse hanging out of an oven in one of the camps. A really striking image.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
504 Posts
For what is was, and what it set out to be...it worked. I will be buying the DVD set for the first hand accounts and nothing more. The footage I'd not seen before will just be gravy. It was not submitted as the be-all, end-all WWII retrospective, but it got the US side told about as well as it has yet been told.
Yes the producer had his own PC agenda this is true but I saw what I saw and I liked it. It deserves to be seen by as many who are willing to watch.
 

·
Diamond Member
Joined
·
6,834 Posts
Shyquestor, The first hand accounts were moving, but overall, I think your original title summed it up for me. Denny
 

·
Mr. Flashy Pants
Joined
·
7,377 Posts
Watched about 30 seconds of it. The narrators NPR baritone got on my nerves right away and all I heard was that "us troops were armed with rifles designed in 1903". Well gosh!
Which would make the design approximately 38 years old at the beginning of the war. Interestingly that's very close to the age of Stoner's design at the beginning of the current war.
 

·
Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
4,946 Posts
I have not watched any of it on purpose because I figure on buying it sometime and when I watched Band of Brothers after seeing it on TV I really got nothing out of the second time through. Just decided it wasn't going down that way this time. I haven't even read any of this post for that reason. Hope you all enjoyed it. Bill
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top