354 replies to this topic

[mjh]

With a long held interest in The First World War, and as someone who works in the industry, I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed this film which I saw this evening. I haven't seen the play, so I can not base my review on that or make any comparisons. For sure, it is a story wrapped up in a certain amount of hollywood schmulzh, and the occasional inaccuracy but I very much doubt that any other film with such high production values will be made about WW1. For this reason alone, I would say that it's worth seeing on the big screen, rather than from the comfort of your armchair.

I also look forward to the remake of All Quiet On The Western Front , being filmed this year. Anything that may stimulate interest in the great war can only be a good thing, in my opinion. It strikes me that whilst this forum is full of many passionate, knowledgeable experts , keen to share their interest with others, it also has a small share, of what I would term grumpy old cynics, for whom any attempt at bringing the subject matter of WW1 into the mainstream is often met with scepticism and derision. The Hollywood attempt at WW1 might not be everyone's cup of tea, but if you think you can do better, then arm yourself with with a video recorder, a group of re-enactors, and give it your best shot.

What should also be remembered is that this film was responsible for creating a fair nummber of jobs here in the UK. It was shot entirely on location and in studios here, and the post-production was done here, all utilising a fair amount of British actors, technicians, crew and talent. Surely this is a good thing. And no, I didn't work on the film myself, but would have loved to have done so !

[Steven Broomfield]

Today's Matt cartoon from the Tottygraph has a contemporary take

Attached Files

•  Totty.gif   17K   2 downloads

[Marshal Ney]

mjh post 151 I agree with your comments 100%.
And here is my penny worth.

I have just seen War Horse today with an open mind and enjoyed the film.. As it is a 12 rating many youngsters may watch it. Youngsters who probably most are only just aware of WW2, as most of that generation have now passed on. So it is great that some poetic insight into WW1 is presented and the youngsters may become interested, who we need to carry on knowing the significance and conditions of WW1.
Some psychological moments were expressed, one being the lad told to remain in the trench to shoot returners. Wether this is history or not, the NCO recognised the lad had lost his bottle and gave him a back door to remain rather than shoot him as a coward if he did not go over the top with his comrades in arms. Poetic licence maybe, but I got it. The other of course the barb wire Horse scene between the Allies and German trench. How could this situation of compassion evolve considering how many horses were treated and how men could become so hard and callous through no fault of their own ,namely WAR. Well there are many examples when the good side momentarily shows it's face and this was one, fair doos with the film.
Another point of psychology was in Schindlers list where the little girl in the red coat kept appearing on the black and white film, she, being the little girl who wore red at Auschwitz, significant again.


Regards MN

[Pighills]

I went to see the film last night with my family (4 in total).

I have seen the stage play which I thought was breathtaking and was determined not to compare the two as they could never compete.

All four of us (mostly) enjoyed the film.  There were odd moments when the music was OTT and an odd time with the horse which I didn't believe would happen in real life, although my daughter assures me her friend's horse would indeed do that sort of thing (when the Germans have both horses and want the black one to pull the gun but is too ill/worn out and Joey bravely gallops forward to put himself first - c'mon!!) can anyone say if horses do behave in this way?

When the gas went off, that was a stunning moment for me.  I always had this image of the gas gently blowing in on the wind - again, can anyone confirm for me how gas bombs disperse the gas (in the film it explodes and the gas envelopes everyone in miliseconds).  All I could think of when watching that scene was Richard's wonderful title: The Quick and the Dead; I could understand why that saying came to be now (I'd already read the explanation in the book but still thought it blew in gently on the wind).

When the men were enlising and marching off to war amidst bands and waving well wishers .......... (lump in throat time - sorry)  ............. and again when Albie and Joey came home.

The scenes of no-man's land were very humbling and if they were anywhere near true to life (as I suspect they were) then I can only thank those who worked on them for giving people some sort of realistic idea of how things were.

The scene of Joey (the horse) running through no-man's land and getting entangled in the wire was heart wrenching. By looking at the other scenes of how the horses were worked to death and their conditions, I thought the film tried to give a good view of what horses had to endure, although I accept I'm no expert and things may not have been 100% right, I'm sure they must have been pretty close.

And this is what I think the original book was about.  Not about making a film for WWI buffs, or adults.  But a book for children about what horses went through during the Great War.  For that I think it's a brilliant portrayal and the 'actors' they used really were the stars (both real horses and puppets).

I said I wouldn't compare the two (film and play) and I won't.  Because I don't think you can.  They are both different beasts and both to be enjoyed for themselves.  I'm glad I went!

PS:  Some started clapping at the end of the film.  Yes it was good.  But no!  Why clap in a cinema?  Can the actors etc hear you?  Why do it?  I don't understand it myself.  This is the second time I've witnessed clapping in the cinema and it's not something I'm fond of - my bah humbug moment I'm afraid.

PPS:  Why don't they supply tissues in films like this?

[anneca]

Hi, I was interested to read your post as I have not yet seen the film (going on Saturday) but have just finished reading the book.  When you mention the gas, I was not aware of gas actually being mentioned in the book although it is referred to as follows " When I woke it was dark and the guns were firing once more all around me.  No matter where I looked it seemed, the sky was lit with the yellow flashes of gunfire and intermittent white glowing lights that pained my eyes and showered daylight briefly on to the countryside around me. Whichever way I went it seemed it had to be towards the guns.  Better therefore I thought to stay where I was.  Here at last I had grass in plenty and water to drink.  I had made up my mind to do just that when there was an explosion of white light above my head and the rattle of a machine-gun split the night air, the bullets whipping into the ground beside me."......."To begin with I found the mists hovering only in the depths of the craters I passed, but after some hours I found myself increasingly surrounded in a thick, smoky, autumnal mist through which I could see only the vague shades and shapes of dark and light around me.  Almost blinded now I relied totally on the ever more distant roar and rumble of the bombardment, keeping it all the time behind me and moving towards the darker more silent world ahead of me."   It sounds like the film follows the book quite closely in the scene of the horse running through no-man's land.  I was particularly taken with the writing in this chapter.

I totally agree with you that this book for children is about what horses went through during the Great War rather than being about the Great War and I am looking forward to seeing the film.  Thanks by the way for the tip about the tissues!!!

Pighills, on 19 January 2012 - 01:39 PM, said:

When the gas went off, that was a stunning moment for me.  I always had this image of the gas gently blowing in on the wind - again, can anyone confirm for me how gas bombs disperse the gas (in the film it explodes and the gas envelopes everyone in miliseconds).  All I could think of when watching that scene was Richard's wonderful title: The Quick and the Dead; I could understand why that saying came to be now (I'd already read the explanation in the book but still thought it blew in gently on the wind).

The scene of Joey (the horse) running through no-man's land and getting entangled in the wire was heart wrenching. By looking at the other scenes of how the horses were worked to death and their conditions, I thought the film tried to give a good view of what horses had to endure, although I accept I'm no expert and things may not have been 100% right, I'm sure they must have been pretty close.

And this is what I think the original book was about.  Not about making a film for WWI buffs, or adults.  But a book for children about what horses went through during the Great War.  For that I think it's a brilliant portrayal and the 'actors' they used really were the stars (both real horses and puppets).

PPS:  Why don't they supply tissues in films like this?

[Pighills]

Hi Anneca!

I haven't read the book (although we have it in the house   ) so don't know how closely it follows the story - hence why I referenced how true it was to the play.  I suspect from what you say it follows the book closely (I don't seem to remember the young girl dying in the play though, but she does in the film - how does that compare to the book? - just the odd thing not quite matching up, but they probably need to 'pad the story out').

Evem when you know the story, you still need tissues (at least one, even if you're 'hard') - historical facts/schmaltziness aside it is good and you will feel it!

Enjoy and report back  

[Deerhunter]

I watched it at the weekend with my 15-year-old daughter.  She loves horses, I have a passion for Great War history, so it seemed the thing to do.  While loaded with a fair charge of emotional energy (like "The Champ", "Lassie Comes Home" and "Saving Private Ryan" all rolled into one) it was a good, if unconvincing yarn.  Let's face it, it's not a documentary, so there will be a few inaccuracies in dress, conditions, and military protocol, but that's not the point of the film.  It was an excellent piece of fantasy and entertainment, and a good story.  

As my daughter was watching it I casually reminded her when the cavalry charge on the German position at Gheluvelt was shown, that she had actually been there on a few occasions - which she recalled.  She then understood my deliberation and descriptions of the Ypres Salient and, at that moment, had a picture in her mind.  That's the value of the film from, I think, our perspective.

Yes, all that, plus I blubbed like a girl (no offence).

[Tom W.]

Pighills, on 19 January 2012 - 01:39 PM, said:

When the gas went off, that was a stunning moment for me.  I always had this image of the gas gently blowing in on the wind - again, can anyone confirm for me how gas bombs disperse the gas (in the film it explodes and the gas envelopes everyone in miliseconds).  All I could think of when watching that scene was Richard's wonderful title: The Quick and the Dead; I could understand why that saying came to be now (I'd already read the explanation in the book but still thought it blew in gently on the wind).

They used gas clouds that were released from cylinders and blew in on the wind, and they also used gas shells that exploded and enveloped the target immediately.

The Germans and Italians also used flamethrowers to spray gas.

[Dragon]

Deerhunter, on 19 January 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

As my daughter was watching it I casually reminded her when the cavalry charge on the German position at Gheluvelt was shown, that she had actually been there on a few occasions - which she recalled.  She then understood my deliberation and descriptions of the Ypres Salient and, at that moment, had a picture in her mind.

I would ask whether the people who come out of the cinema are the same people who went in. If the answer is no, then I think a film has achieved something.

It might be as basic as, "It must have been awful being in the trenches" or "I didn't realise that they used horses like that." It might be an element of learning, like your daughter now understanding your descriptions. It might stimulate a spirit of inquiry: "I want to find out more." It might be insight into human behaviour. It might be something as complex as crying. We don't go into a film (or read a book or a poem, or see a painting or a photo) as impassive, passive observers; we get involved.  A creative work should change us in some way. To me that is a measure of its power, its quality (depth) and its success.

I suspect what is happening here in this thread (or the other one) is the tension between the formal, factual response and the stimulated, imaginative, empathetic response. If I go to see 'Warhorse', I will turn down the former.

Gwyn

[Stoppage Drill]

Mmm. Lets see how long it takes for somebody to answer this withour Googling (you're on your honour ! )


Where was the Old War Horse Memorial Hospital and when was it opened ?



I, for one, am a regular contributor to the charity which still exists.

[Pighills]

Dunno, but it's a good question.  I wonder if the knowledgeable Mr Broomfield knows?

Dragon, on 19 January 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

I suspect what is happening here in this thread (or the other one) is the tension between the formal, factual response and the stimulated, imaginative, empathetic response. If I go to see 'Warhorse', I will turn down the former.

Gwyn

I think you'd be wise and suspect that's the ONLY way to watch it (any other may drive you (people in general) potty).

[izzy]

Took my three children to see the film anything to get them an intrest in the Great War is good by my standards.I know its not everyones cup of tea but not a bad way to while away a couple of hours.

[Siege Gunner]

Brooke hospital in Cairo, early 1930s ...

[Stoppage Drill]

Pighills, on 19 January 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

Dunno, but it's a good question.  I wonder if the knowledgeable Mr Broomfield knows?

I like you ! Now you can Google - but don't come back

[Stoppage Drill]

Siege Gunner, on 19 January 2012 - 09:02 PM, said:

Brooke hospital in Cairo, early 1930s ...

Well done. 1934. Lady Dorothy Brooke started it. Now, why would she do that ?

[Pighills]

Stoppage Drill, on 19 January 2012 - 09:04 PM, said:

I like you ! Now you can Google - but don't come back

What - ever?    

[BIFFO]

WD

[Steven Broomfield]

Stoppage Drill, on 19 January 2012 - 09:07 PM, said:

Well done. 1934. Lady Dorothy Brooke started it. Now, why would she do that ?

Eccentric Englishwoman, horrified at the conditions horses cast by the British post-war were being forced to live in

Mind, there's an Animal War Memorial Clinic closer to hand, just off Kilburn High Road (nearly opposite Kilburn Tube)

http://www.rspca.org...al War Memorial)%20Clinic/Who%20we%20see/461/

[Jim Clay]

BIFFO, on 19 January 2012 - 09:46 PM, said:

WD

LOL   

[squirrel]

WD40?

[Stoppage Drill]

Those who either loved or hated the film might like to know that Sir Jack Seely's 1934 book "My Horse Warrior" has just been republished by the Racing Post.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, they have opportunistically retitled it as "Warrior:The Amazing Story of a Real Warhorse" but that's a minor subjective niggle.

£14.99. Take it from me, it's a dead cert.

[louvain]

Stoppage Drill, on 21 January 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

Those who either loved or hated the film might like to know that Sir Jack Seely's 1934 book "My Horse Warrior" has just been republished by the Racing Post.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, they have opportunistically retitled it as "Warrior:The Amazing Story of a Real Warhorse" but that's a minor subjective niggle.

£14.99. Take it from me, it's a dead cert.

Available from Amazon, don't forget to order through this forum though if you're going to buy it  

[brucehubbard]

There are times when one would be foolish not to take the sage advice of the Queen of the Figgists.

Take some tissues with you!!!

Bruce

[Pighills]

Ahh, you've been then Bruce!  

[Bob B]

I have just got back form watching the film. A month ago I saw the play.

I started to compare the two but after a short while thought that's unfair and sat back and watched an exceptional film. It may have its inaccuracies, but it's still exceptional.

I have already posted my comments on the brilliant play.

Both are interpretation of the book, which I have not read. The film is aimed at a mss audience and is tailored to suit. The plays audience is currently limited to the lucky few who can get to the West End.

I feel very privileged to have seen both.

Bob