Sweetwater Forum

Sweetwater Forum

  • 29. März 2024 - 12:28:00
  • Willkommen Gast
Erweiterte Suche  

Neuigkeiten:

Autor Thema: historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm  (Gelesen 11812 mal)

0 Mitglieder und 1 Gast betrachten dieses Thema.

Angrist

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 1.171
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #30 am: 02. Oktober 2008 - 22:21:58 »

well the reports i read about enemy at the gates says that there was no evidence of any german super special sniper send to stalingrad

but it seems to depend on which report you read (they all tend to start wit \"newest researches have shown ....)
Gespeichert
Registriert euch bei http://www.spielerzentrale.de und sorgt dafür, das jeder Suchende einen historischen TTler in seiner Nähe findet.

Abrüstung mit Frieden zu verwechseln, ist ein schwerer Fehler.
Winston Churchchill

Axebreaker

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 2.458
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #31 am: 02. Oktober 2008 - 22:45:31 »

Only people who have a predjuice and don\'t like the idea of their best getting beat. ;) It\'s common knowledge that it happened.It\'s an a old story and only after the film did their emerge this new theory. :rolleyes: The film was wrong in how it actually happened.A bit less dramatic of course.They saw his scope lens and pow! end of story.You may believe what you wish,I choose to believe the first one.I\'m sure you can find some who don\'t agree.It\'s still a good film showing Stalingrad in my opinion. :)

Angrist

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 1.171
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #32 am: 02. Oktober 2008 - 22:49:16 »

Ok, let´s both have our opinion, won´t change the world very much ;)

but i think we drifted a bit away of this threads topic theme, so maybe we should end our little argument here :)
Gespeichert
Registriert euch bei http://www.spielerzentrale.de und sorgt dafür, das jeder Suchende einen historischen TTler in seiner Nähe findet.

Abrüstung mit Frieden zu verwechseln, ist ein schwerer Fehler.
Winston Churchchill

Axebreaker

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 2.458
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #33 am: 02. Oktober 2008 - 23:02:25 »

Fair enough, ;) but it\'s still fun to have some discussions.So,we agree to disagree. :)

Grenadier Christian

  • Fischersmann
  • ***
  • Beiträge: 517
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #34 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 10:06:52 »

Zitat
I have to disagree. :(
So do I! :D

Zitat
Troy is loaded with battles that try and show you what fighting was like at the time.I do like they way they humanized the people in the story.If they followed Homer the Characters would have been laughably godlike.It does carry alot of inaccuracies by portraying it more in the classical period and not earlier.Lets face it,the earlier period would have looked to funny on screen.so,in this case that can be overlooked.This also had a large impact in the wargaming world and in the general public drawing people in.At least they made it more believable then say 300! :puke:
I´m sorry, but the whole \"war\" affair in \"Troy\" is wrong, starting from equipment (which looks like souped-up classical greek stuff, but not late bronze age wargear ) to the vast armies arrayed - from what little is known about that era, it still was pretty much an age of heroic duels and warbands, but not tens of thousands advancing in a huge block of troops and retreating on a single word from their king! I´ve perceived \"Troy\" in a similar vein to \"300\" in that it recounts a fictionalised epic story, although \"300\" did a much, much better job of capturing that \"campfire\" or \"dining hall with a traveling bard\" feel.
Zitat
Gladiator was a fantastic film from start to finish. :pump: Again,there are inaccuracies but this was overcome by the story itself.This movie has had a massive impact in drawing people into this time period in television and in wargaming.The battle scene is first rate in showing how the romens fought.It was without doubt a very inspirational movie and must be viewed this way.
Again, this movie was neither a realistic depiction of Roman battlefield tactics nor Gladiator ritual (in effect) combat. The use of massed artillery in a field battle is almost totally unaccounted for (although Caesar, for example, used numbers of scorpiones to cover river crossings, and during sieges, of course). The disorganised charge of the legionaries is a bit strange as well. The Gladiator scenes are wrong from start (equipment, which was very rigidly formalised at that time) to finish (organisation of combats, I mean, depicting a ROMAN battle? Unheard of!) and everything inbetween (those ridiculous pylae in the colosseum arena). Overall, it IS a good movie due to the actors and the overall attention to detail and production values (which may be 80% wrong, but at least look totally nice).
Zitat
Enemy at the gates is based on fact.Of course they got a few things wrong but in essence they told a true story.There was a famous russian sharpshooter that stalked Stalingrad I have forgotten the name it began with a V(Valastsky?or something)and the germans did send their best sharpshooter to deal with him and he was killed.(of course in a different way then the movie.)This movie showed just how brutal the conditions were at Stalingrad and had good combat scenes.
Vasily Zaytsev was a historic figure, though I cannot comment on the \"German Master Sniper\" episode.

Zitat
Alamo is personal taste I guess,I just like the older version more. :)
It´s an American foundation myth, done as a labour of love of Mr. Wayne during the Cold War, so we´ll let it slide. :D Haven´t seen the new one, though.
Gespeichert
Hasta la Beuteltier siempre!

Axebreaker

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 2.458
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #35 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 11:52:56 »

Who do you disagree with,me or Angrist?

I do have a few comments on your view.

Troy

 

Zitat
but not tens of thousands
The film did not show tens of thousands,but rather thousands on each side. :whistling: This is possible and it showed them fighting shield to shield.This is also more then likely.The shields were large and in a rectangle,which many historians believe is correct for this time.Their armour we both agree was way off,but did look good at least.Nobody would want to see them in pyrimid armour even if it was more accurate.How the chariots fought is not well understood.They were probely to light to act as heavy chariots.More then likely they fought on the side in personal duels and peppering the infantry on the flanks.Of course the king didn\'t control his troops through voice,but probely a horn or something.Hollywood changed some things for drama and looks but did capture a feel for the story and try to give it a somewhat realistic account from Homer.(If that\'s even possible)

300 from a historical point of view was a complete joke. :puke: This movie was an action adventure movie and nothng else,and when viewed this way is quite fun.The special effects and combat was fun to watch,plus it had a few good one liners.From a historical point of view I was very disappointed and tried not to laugh.I don\'t think there is a need to point out what they got wrong here.

Gladiator

If the romens had time to prepare,scorpions were used.If they were used as mass artillery I can\'t say,but sure did look good in the film.As for the stone throwers(Onergers?)I do think they were only used in sieges if at all.Do you think when men charge that they can stay in a perfect line?If you do a sudden rush,it will be somewhat disorganized which is what is shown in the film.You can quick step and keep a pretty good straight line,but not a rush.

What happened in the arena may or may not have happened.You make it sound it was a rigid affair in the arena.They did alot of crazy things in there.Did you know they flooded an arena and had a mock ship battle at one time!The arena was the romens movie theater.They were always trying to think of new ways to impress the crowd.The equipment was pretty much standardized,but to say they would not get bored of seeing the same equipment beggers belief.I think they did change it up from time to time.As to how I cannot say,but why not how it was shown in Gladiator.Everything they showed in the arena in Gladiator was possible for them to do at this time.Therefore I think it wasn\'t that unrealistic.

Alamo

The Alamo did happen and the people who were killed there was a fact.Did hollywood add more drama and fiction?Of course they did,every film does!To tell any historical movie exactly would probely bore most people other then us history junkies. ;)

Grenadier Christian

  • Fischersmann
  • ***
  • Beiträge: 517
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #36 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 14:18:25 »

Zitat
Who do you disagree with,me or Angrist?
You. But it´s nothing personal, just with this movie reception.
Zitat
I do have a few comments on your view.
It´s a free country, after all, so fire away! :D
Zitat
Troy
Zitat
but not tens of thousands
The film did not show tens of thousands,but rather thousands on each side. :whistling:
Well, it DID go on the \"a thousand ships for a woman\" and the \"huge army\" schtick. Anyway, they showed huge armies in tight formation which I assume was more inspried by the popular image of the phalanx rather than any concept one would have of bronze-age Europeans...
Zitat
This is possible and it showed them fighting shield to shield.This is also more then likely.The shields were large and in a rectangle,which many historians believe is correct for this time.Their armour we both agree was way off,but did look good at least.
No problem with the shields, and it would make sense to employ them in such a manner. Nonetheless, I think the motion of fielding men in armies this huge on a battlefield is terribly anachronistic, at least for the greek.
Zitat
Nobody would want to see them in pyrimid armour even if it was more accurate.
I would, but does Hollywood care about me? No! Frickin´ buggers! :D
Zitat
How the chariots fought is not well understood.They were probely to light to act as heavy chariots.More then likely they fought on the side in personal duels and peppering the infantry on the flanks.Of course the king didn\'t control his troops through voice,but probely a horn or something.Hollywood changed some things for drama and looks but did capture a feel for the story and try to give it a somewhat realistic account from Homer.(If that\'s even possible)
Perfectly fine! But my main problem is, they tried to pass it off as a \"historical interpretation\" of the Iliad many times in interviews and marketing, and it failed completely in that.
Zitat
300 from a historical point of view was a complete joke. :puke: This movie was an action adventure movie and nothng else,and when viewed this way is quite fun.The special effects and combat was fun to watch,plus it had a few good one liners.From a historical point of view I was very disappointed and tried not to laugh.I don\'t think there is a need to point out what they got wrong here.
Yes, of course! But it was ALWAYS marketed as an action movie based on a comic book which was drafted as a heroic epic! I NEVER saw any mention of the producers, director or even Mr. Miller calling the 300 franchise \"historic\"! They were straightforward and honest that it was a big entertainment slugfest and an exercise in the artistic portrayal of the possibilites of a graphic novel. They did NOT say it was a \"history epic\" like they said with Troy, Gladiator and Alexander (which was, IMHO, the most accurate of the three).
Zitat
Gladiator

If the romens had time to prepare,scorpions were used.If they were used as mass artillery I can\'t say,but sure did look good in the film.As for the stone throwers(Onergers?)I do think they were only used in sieges if at all.
Apart from the fact that Onagers per se only came into use in the 3rd/4th century AD, that is correct. Those were far too immobile to be used in field battles.
Zitat
Do you think when men charge that they can stay in a perfect line?If you do a sudden rush,it will be somewhat disorganized which is what is shown in the film.You can quick step and keep a pretty good straight line,but not a rush.
And that´s why most historians agree, based on the historical sources, that a legionaries´ charge was no wild rush but rather a quickstep move in after throwing their pila. Breaking line would have been (and was frequently, judging from the [admittedly unreliable] historians of the time) punished to enforce the strict discipline. Wild charges were a \"barbarian\" thing.
Zitat
What happened in the arena may or may not have happened.You make it sound it was a rigid affair in the arena.
And yes, it was. From the middle of the 1st century BC to about the fourth century AD, Gladiator combat was very, very formalised. You only had a handful of \"gladiatorial types\", all with standardised equipment (although the look of their wargear could differ) and almost exclusively used in formalised pairings (as in, a heavily-armoured man fought a lighter-armoured one as was the case with the secutor/retiarius pairing). The venatio animal-hunts were less formalised, but also followed general consensus on equipment and tactics to provide a good show.
Zitat
They did alot of crazy things in there.Did you know they flooded an arena and had a mock ship battle at one time!
Naumachiae were usually held in natural basins or dugouts prepared for the event. There are only two recorded occasions on which the colosseum arena was flooded (considering it was rebuilt with subterranean tunnels in the late 80s and early 90s, flooding the arena would have been a messy affair after that).
Zitat
The arena was the romens movie theater.They were always trying to think of new ways to impress the crowd.The equipment was pretty much standardized,but to say they would not get bored of seeing the same equipment beggers belief.I think they did change it up from time to time.As to how I cannot say,but why not how it was shown in Gladiator.Everything they showed in the arena in Gladiator was possible for them to do at this time.Therefore I think it wasn\'t that unrealistic.
But the remaining sources and archeological findings only suggest the established canon. In that way, you could best describe it akin to modern sports events such as American Football, Soccer and the like - the \"kick\" was new players, seeing public favourites and the sheer number of pairings (usually, the size of ludes gladiatorii was described by the number of gladiator pairs that fought. Apart from that, there are some recorded extravaganzas, such as freakshows and slight variations of the established canon (such as men with two swords etc.), but nothing like the wild b*llsh*t they tried to pass off in Gladiator. They DID, however, do a good job to portray the \"public event\" that was a day in the amphitheatre. But the actual gladiatorial combat was nothing like that shown in the movie, especially considering the number of casualties (although you would allow for a nutcase like Commodus to allow munera sine missione from time to time). Gladiator games in the late republic to early empire were a bloody, but not necessarily lethal affair. Criminals et al made up the majority of ludes fatalities.

To sum up, a great movie with a considerable number of inaccuracies and errors which would not have been considered that bad HAD THEY NOT TRIED to convince people that it WAS an accurate depiction.
Zitat
Alamo

The Alamo did happen and the people who were killed there was a fact.Did hollywood add more drama and fiction?Of course they did,every film does!To tell any historical movie exactly would probely bore most people other then us history junkies. ;)
No, certainly. But I am more likely to cut the John Wayne movie some slack than a newer one in a time in which any production boasts with the number of historical and military advisors. Again, though, I have NOT YET seen the new Alamo (didn´t make it to cinemas here IIRC) so I may reconsider my position after that.
« Letzte Änderung: 01. Januar 1970 - 01:00:00 von 1223036763 »
Gespeichert
Hasta la Beuteltier siempre!

Axebreaker

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 2.458
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #37 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 15:04:33 »

I think I can simplify our disagreement.Almost all movies try and say their movie is historically accurate and seldom are they. ;) It\'s not good for the press to say your film is half right and almost correct.That will kill the film before it\'s out.Of course they say it\'s historically accurate,that\'s good for promotions.300 didn\'t need to do that for the reason that you already said. Most times if you do everything \"by the book\"the average movie Joe going to see it would fall asleep.(not us of course)Hollywood therefore adds a whole boat load of bs to make it more enjoyable.The real question is, does the movie capture the feel of the time and get people more interested in discovering what happened in the period.The result can often be good for us,because it draws more people into wargaming historical games. :thumbup:

As for me,I ask myself can I overlook the mistakes that were made if I feel the end result was possitive for the reasons I gave. :beer:

P.S.I hate Alexander which if anything had a total negative effect. :thumbdown:

Angrist

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 1.171
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #38 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 17:10:39 »

maybe it would be good, if we return the the topic of this thread?
users here see all hours a new post here in this thread, but ist just a discussion about movies that aren´t screened during the next days.
I also liked the discussion but maybe it would be good, to do this in an extra thread.
It would be sad if people missed good movies because they ignored this thread because they thought that there are no more tipps what to watch in tv


Meine Meinung zu des Königs Admiral von heute morgen ist:
Super Film, leider nicht akutelles Bildmaterial (das ist ein film der eine überarbeitungs des Bildmaterials dringend nötig hätte)
Von der Qualität des Inhalts war ich aber schon überzeugt als im Vorspann kam, das CS Forrester selbst am Drehbuch mitgearbeitet hat.
Bei diesen alten Filmen hat man ja für das Deutsche Publikum noch viel mehr gemacht als heute, zum Beispiel wurden ja die Briefe wenn sie abgefilmt wurden,
für das Deutsche Publikum nochmals neu gefilmt,eben in deutscher Sprache,  das war schon ein Service (auch wenn ich ihn jetzt nicht brauche)


noch 2 Tipps für die nächsten tage

samstag 0:25 rtl2 band of brothers  doppelfolge kreuzungen und bastgogne (Ich weis BOB mag ja seine negativen Seiten haben, aber all in all ist es ziemlich gut)

ebenfalls am samstag 0:10 auf Kabel 1  Tigerland, film der in einem ausbildungslager (das namensgebende \"Tigerland\")  für den Vietnamkrieg spielt und den Streit zweier Rekruten zum Thema hat

hab beides schon gesehen und kann es empfehlen.
Tigerland ist aber eben kein Kriegsfilm, es spielt nur im Trainingslager, wer also Vietnam erwartet hat Pech.
Gespeichert
Registriert euch bei http://www.spielerzentrale.de und sorgt dafür, das jeder Suchende einen historischen TTler in seiner Nähe findet.

Abrüstung mit Frieden zu verwechseln, ist ein schwerer Fehler.
Winston Churchchill

Grenadier Christian

  • Fischersmann
  • ***
  • Beiträge: 517
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #39 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 17:43:01 »

Zitat
Des Königs Admiral

Auf der DVD, die ich hab, wurde das Material digital überarbeitet, und man merkt es - wesentlich bessere Farben, weniger Rauschen... Allerdings hab ich auch gemerkt, wie gut man damals Filme synchronisiert hat. Den kann man sich ohne Bedenken auf Deutsch geben, obwohl die ganzen amerikanischen Schauspieler sich ganz toll Mühe geben, auch möglichst britisch rüberzukommen. :D
Gespeichert
Hasta la Beuteltier siempre!

Axebreaker

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 2.458
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #40 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 17:44:05 »

Your probely right ;) ,just start a new thread on the topic. :)

Angrist

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 1.171
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #41 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 23:30:48 »

Well I could do that but I wouldn´t know what to discute about, or better said, why

because your point of view is, that the overall impressions counts more than a lot of mistakes, and the Grenadier and I think that you have to look at the details and then decide whether they ruin the whole movie

between these ópinions there isn´t much to argue, because every mistake we find, won´t change your opinion of the \"overall impression\"

So because of this I won´t open a thread (also i wouldn´t know how to call the thread ;) private argument of angrist, axebreaker and grenadier christian  :D )

But of course feel free to open a thread if you wan´t do talk about sth

Considering the shipfights in the colosseum. Grenadier is right when he says that sth never happened. There were \"pools\" for that sort of entertainment which were used for sth (two of these were found by archaelogists but this knowledge ist 4 years old, maybe they found more since then), but ship fighting was far less popular then the gladiator games.

It wasn´t done in the collosseum, because of the obvios reason, that there was a wooden arenafloor with 3-5 floors below ground level which would have been flooded then
« Letzte Änderung: 01. Januar 1970 - 01:00:00 von 1223071963 »
Gespeichert
Registriert euch bei http://www.spielerzentrale.de und sorgt dafür, das jeder Suchende einen historischen TTler in seiner Nähe findet.

Abrüstung mit Frieden zu verwechseln, ist ein schwerer Fehler.
Winston Churchchill

Grenadier Christian

  • Fischersmann
  • ***
  • Beiträge: 517
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #42 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 23:45:04 »

Zitat von: \'Angrist\',index.php?page=Thread&postID=11841#post11841
Considering the shipfights in the colosseum. Grenadier is wright when he says that sth never happened. There were \"pools\" for that sort of entertainment which were used for sth (two of these were found by archaelogists but this knowledge ist 4 years old, maybe they found more since then), but ship fighting was far less popular then the gladiator games.

It wasn´t done in the collosseum, becaus of the obvios reason, that there was a wooden arenafloor with 3-5 floors below ground level which would have been flooded then
Well, according to Sueton, it was done twice, once during the reign of Titus for the opening celebrations of the amphitheatrum flavium, and once again under his successor (and brother) Domitianus. The underground section was added during the reign of Domitianus, not during construction in the 70s.

So you can´t say it DIDN´T happen, but the idea that the colosseum was regularly flooded to stage naumachiae is a misconception. Apart from the technical difficulties, battles on a lake could be far more impressive, and you actually had the option of manoeuvering (somehow).
Gespeichert
Hasta la Beuteltier siempre!

Grenadier Christian

  • Fischersmann
  • ***
  • Beiträge: 517
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #43 am: 03. Oktober 2008 - 23:46:30 »

Argh, Doppelpost. Wenn das ein Mod liest, bitte diesen hier löschen. Danke!
Gespeichert
Hasta la Beuteltier siempre!

Mehrunes

  • Bürger
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 2.007
    • 0
historische filme im aktuellen fernsehprogramm
« Antwort #44 am: 04. Oktober 2008 - 00:33:49 »

War nicht die Schlacht am Angrivarierwall Vorbild für die Eröffnungsszene von Gladiator, außer dass man sie halt in die Markomannenkriege transferiert hat?