Jump to content

New Russian Eastern Front movie


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think many people today tend to forget or not be aware of how afraid people were of Bolshevism back then.

Fear of "the red mass assault" and of being occupied by the Soviet Union was a great factor to why some unemployed young men and others who wanted a change and some adventures in their life, and weren't nazis, joined up for a couple of years in the Waffen-SS together with those young men who were nazis. Just like some young men who want a bit of adventure and change in their life are signing up for the French Foreign Legion today.

A good documentary on the similarities between Nazi Germany and Soviet Union is the one called The Soviet story which can be found on Youtube.

 

Edited by BornGinger
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BornGinger said:

Fear of "the red mass assault" and of being occupied by the Soviet Union was a great factor to why some unemployed young men and others who wanted a change and some adventures in their life, and weren't nazis, joined up for a couple of years in the Waffen-SS together with those young men who were nazis.

Books like "Bloodlands" also outline the vicious ethnic, race and religious hatreds prevalent amongst the nations' peoples of East Europe in the 20's and 30's that helped explain why and how so many millions were murdered.  What the book explains is that there was so much cruelty and mass death of maybe 10 million in the 20's and 30's that people had become hardened and callous - maybe mass PTSD.  As a result, the Nazis acts were not so shocking to those that had already lived through the death and destruction of the previous two decades.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is still a ww2 movie thread I think -- why do we expect a stupid movie to handle all these issues?  Russia seems to pump out  these war-action-patriotic movies by the dozen.  It's like asking why Rambo-genre movies don't explore the complexities of the Vietnam war from multiple perspectives with in depth consideration of atrocities by all sides.  Answer: because these are dreadfully stupid war-actio-patriotism movies that sometimes have really cool battles.  Why are we grading these things like history books?  If the gear looks good and the battles look realistic then I got my (free) money's worth.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Erwin said:

What the book explains is that there was so much cruelty and mass death of maybe 10 million in the 20's and 30's that people had become hardened and callous

I read a book in Spring about how the Special Branch were using microphones to listen in on German PoWs. And in the beginning of that book is mentioned how the Germans saw themselves and also the mindset when it comes to violence towards other people which apparently should explain why Germans treated their PoWs and the conquered people ths way they did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a huge fan of modern war movies. They tend to narrow the scope down, and turn up the drama. The film becomes just another soap opera (ie. White Tiger, Fury), rather than a depiction of events (ie. Liberation, Patton).

I guess if I have absolutely nothing to do, I may watch a bit on Youtube just for the vehicles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

This film was downloaded and watched yesterday. And just as I expected it was just like all the other boring Russian films about the war. The only difference is that they have tried to make it more updated and "krutoj" by adding a whole lot of slow motion. It's just that the slow motion is completely unnecessary and several years late.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BornGinger said:

This film was downloaded and watched yesterday. And just as I expected it was just like all the other boring Russian films about the war. The only difference is that they have tried to make it more updated and "krutoj" by adding a whole lot of slow motion. It's just that the slow motion is completely unnecessary and several years late.

Reminds me of that old joke on Garth Marenghi about using slo-mo to hit the required running time...

I find these threads interesting and it's a credit to the BFC community they don't become a slugging match on moral relativism, which I see somebody already tried. One has to be very careful judging the past through the lens of the present. Different times.

I remember visiting some Polish friends and being astonished at some very off colour jokes about Nazis and Communists, and realising there is a whole ethnic dynamic in these places an outsider does not understand.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there's subtext I'm missing somewhere, I don't think highlighting Stalin's atrocities automatically makes one an apologist for the 'other' side (Nazis, in this case). It's a rather large leap in logic. Typically, if you're against murder you're against it. End of. Nevermind that as time progresses onward and onward that these two men will presumably blur and we'll just be left with blips of abhorrence whose import will be left to the nerds and historians. I think Hitler's Vlad-like place in the history books is pretty well set in stone, but I am not so sure about Uncle Joe. I am all for reinforcing that Stalin was a monster, lest you end up with him being another Genghis Khan to the layman, great big statues built in his name, his appearance adorning video games and the like in positive light, and the absolute monster that he was buried in the long years that have passed. We know that simply 'winning' is well enough to rehabilitate one man's historical character.

 

As for Russian cinema, it is a boring and largely non-introspective snoozefest. But then again, that's not too dissimilar of the American media's "war movie" output. I find that the quality of movies in general has nosedived considerably the past twenty years. That or maybe I'm just getting old and cynical.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Khalerick said:

Unless there's subtext I'm missing somewhere, I don't think highlighting Stalin's atrocities automatically makes one an apologist for the 'other' side (Nazis, in this case). It's a rather large leap in logic. Typically, if you're against murder you're against it. End of. Nevermind that as time progresses onward and onward that these two men will presumably blur and we'll just be left with blips of abhorrence whose import will be left to the nerds and historians. I think Hitler's Vlad-like place in the history books is pretty well set in stone, but I am not so sure about Uncle Joe. I am all for reinforcing that Stalin was a monster, lest you end up with him being another Genghis Khan to the layman, great big statues built in his name, his appearance adorning video games and the like in positive light, and the absolute monster that he was buried in the long years that have passed. We know that simply 'winning' is well enough to rehabilitate one man's historical character.

 

As for Russian cinema, it is a boring and largely non-introspective snoozefest. But then again, that's not too dissimilar of the American media's "war movie" output. I find that the quality of movies in general has nosedived considerably the past twenty years. That or maybe I'm just getting old and cynical.

Well said, Khalerick. +1

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the rehabilitation of Stalin and Marxist/Leninism has been as fascinating as it is depressing. On social media, Nazis are apparently everywhere and communism is fashionable again. I think it is the politicization of schools and colleges, and a culture of not reading anything.

I'm a bit of a fan of TIK on YouTube, and he frequently battles revisionism on both sides of the narrative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of whether it's historically accurate or a whitewash, people love war movies... if it's a gripping story with decent action people will watch it and enjoy it.

Cross of Iron for example, I remember thinking how great it was to actually see a war film set on the Eastern Front... at the time I didn't think of the political reasons or the barbarism inflicted by either side, it was a new outlook and perspective of WWII I hadn't seen before.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

at the time I didn't think of the political reasons or the barbarism inflicted by either side, it was a new outlook and perspective of WWII I hadn't seen before.

Agreed.  Probably the reason that playing the German side was much more popular than the Allied until the late 90's was that for those of us of the "Baby Boomer" generation were fed a diet of anti-German propaganda that made the Germans with their sexy Hugo Boss designed uniforms seem to be the "underdogs" and the much more interesting to play vs the anonymous massed hordes of Soviets or even the WAllies.  Playing the Soviets felt like playing the evil hordes from "Lord of the Rings".  Of course that may have been encouraged by govts as we were supposed to be hostile to the Soviets until the 90's.

However, playing the WAliies was almost as undesirable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Playing the Soviets felt like playing the evil hordes from "Lord of the Rings".  Of course that may have been encouraged by govts as we were supposed to be hostile to the Soviets until the 90's.

And with good reason. Let's not forget that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...