Can't work out of this was sloppiness in the screenplay, or is it a figure of speech that I don't understand the significance of. Trenches were not a feature of WW2, so unless 'trenches' is used to suggest horror and futility of war, which is not clear, then this line really jarred and took me out of the film.
Loved the film otherwise, really moving.
Just because WW2 was generally a mobile war, doesn`t mean the soldiers/armies never at any time dug in. And pardon me for saying this, but if such a triviality can take you "out of the film", you must have a very, very hard time watching movies in general.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Nope, I don't have trouble watching movies, but sometimes something so incongruous smacks you in the face that it does make you sit up a bit.
I'm happy to be corrected but checking up does confirm what I'd thought - trenches were not a part of WW2 with the possible exception of an early attempt that proved woefully lacking in the face of the nature of that conflict - an early attempt that predated US involvement in the war. Trenches were a very specific strategy of WW1, not akin to digging in or similar.
Anyway, you're right - it is a minor detail. I was just interested in if people had thoughts as to whether it was a scripting oversight, or meant something more than I picked up on.
I just watched a documentary called The True Glory, released in 1945, and one of the soldiers actually did refer to the dug-outs the troops temporarily sought protection in, during the campaign after Normandy, as "trenches". So it appears that in informal language at least, this term was used.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Fair play, thanks for the update. I stand corrected.
shareThey usually called them fox-holes though. See or read Band of Brothers.
shareWhat kind of war in the world history didn't have at least one trench dug? OP is stupid
shareGee, thanks. I missed your constructive post when it came in, apologies for overlooking it.
I never really considered myself as particularly stupid, with a degree, post grad qualifications, professional membership of associations and having successfully run my own business in technical consultancy and research for the last 15 years, but if by stupid you mean "OP has a small gap in his knowledge relating to a small detail of events outside his direct experience, and is happy to be put right on his incorrect assumptions", then yes, I hold my hands up to being stupid. Guilty as charged.
Of course there are other things that may be considered as indicative of stupidity, such as people's aggressive and judgmental mode of interaction with complete strangers on various social media platforms, but I'll leave it to you to judge where the term is best applied here.
xxx
trenches as we all know are akin to WW1 but anyone who lived in the era of WW2 would have used this term for anything that resembled a trench, the term is of the time..today we may use foxhole some use trench if its extensive.
There were trenches during WW2. the most famous one was The Maginot Line, even if it was never actually used for warfare. you can read some more about them here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_warfare#World_War_II
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
Hahh, yes, I had the same immediate reaction. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard that line. Trench warfare was WWI territory, as everyone knows, and so I couldn't believe that anyone could be that ignorant as to make a mistake like that, and so I just assumed that someone who wrote the film's dialogue knew more about the second war than I did. After all, if you were there, I'm not going to argue with you about it. However, from everything I've been able to read, I can find nothing suggesting that trench warfare had a role in WWII, certainly nowhere where an American would have been fighting in Europe.
Anyways, didn't really affect my viewing experience -- I thought the film was mediocre overall, but not because of that line.
Gee I just said I'm off to the Trenches and I'm not even in a war or the army. I'm at a college. I guess people might say that when referring to a war zone.
shareIt could've been a writer's mix-up between WWI and WWII. It certainly sounded like that to me.
But it could also be a mix-up with the notion of troops being "down in the trenches," in a general sense, too. The phrase probably took off historically from WWI, but has been used for all sorts of situations ever since, both in war and out of it.
FYI, from my past military training, digging out a tiny little trench around your hooch (commercial tent or improvised shelter) to keep the ground water from flowing right up to you was always called a "trenchline" too. This certainly goes back as far as WWII in military manuals and such. It probably goes back even further in colloquial communications.
Trenches (fighting holes, slit trenches, etc) were indeed used in World War II by all major combatants. Their main purpose was to provide fighting cover for troops on the front line from enemy fire.
share