MovieChat Forums > Zwartboek (2007) Discussion > THE WORST WWII MOVIE--EVER! WHY?

THE WORST WWII MOVIE--EVER! WHY?

posted 10 years ago by jinmo2010
10 replies | jump to latest

I am a WWII aficionado and have read a lot of related books and watched a lot of WWII movies. I say this: this is the worst WWII movie of all times, and proabably remain so for several decades hence. There are several that makes a WWII movie bad to watch: the movie's plot is preposterous; the timeline/equipments/uniforms are not historically accurate; too much gung-ho.
This movie is in the extreme range of the bad movies. (Even given that I find all of verhoven's movies somewhat childish.)Here are just a few examples:
1) The Germans PARTYING even after the collapse of the Western Front and when the end of war is only a few days away carrying on as if nothing is happening? Preposterous!!! Had there been such, they would have been shot. 2) During the Opertion Market-Garden, the Dutch railworkers had gone to stike--as punishment, Seys-Unquart ptohibited rail transport of food stuff by rail--as the result the un-liberated part of the Netherlands (which included most of the urban areas)suffered great hunger--many died of starvation. The relative gaiety and normalcy of the ambience as depicted in the movie is simply FALSE.3) An SS ranking officer making use of Kriegsmarine patrol boat (which he later ueses to 'escape' to Hamburg) and his subordinate Waffen SS solciers to ambush Jews and rip them off of their valuables for his own personal aggrandizement is simply unconceabable. 4) The British (actually Canadian) occupying force allowing the Germans to shoot one of them in order to honor the death sentence given before the capituation???? This is simply beyond preposterous--ALL military tribunal dispositions by the German army (not to mention SS) were nullified and the cases were reviewed afresh by the occupying forces! And the charge is no less than "colluding with Communist resistant members" (The Cold War had not eve started yet!!!)
This movie is a traversity--The Dutch should be ashamed of the fact that their country financed this movie and even went to theaters to see this movie.

[–] kmags84 9 years ago

A. You didn't understand the film... At ALL

B. Verhoeven is definitely a director who likes to push boundaries but he does so for a good reason here.

C. Cinematic Liberties are always taken if it allows the story room to move. That was the case here.

[–] mrw650 9 years ago

I do not agree. This film is from a survivor's perspective. I thought it was excellent and the plot twists at the end were quite good, and unexpected.

[–] hjtulp 9 years ago

Actually the firing squad is based on a historical event. One of those maddening espisodes war spawns.

A jewish(?) conscript of the Wehrmacht had deserted and was hidden by the Dutch Resistance. After the liberation he reported himself to the Allied Authorities. Which put him in a POW-camp. The Wehrmacht was allowed to police the camp themselves (under guard by the Canadians ofcourse) and set up a tribunal to try the deserter. Which was allowed by the capitulation-treaty. Then they killed him. Which was not allowed by the capitulation treaty but was administrative oversight by the Canadian commander.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hjtulp 9 years ago

Actually as written in this book (http://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Jewish-Soldiers-Military-Paperback/dp/0700613587) there were quite a few Wehrmacht soldiers with Jewish ancestry. Which is ofcourse logical given the level of integration and assimilation of the German Jews. A number of them were even officially 'arianised' for bravety.

He didn't report himself to the Allied Authorities out of a sense of loyalty to the Wehrmacht but because he was, deserted or not, a German soldier. If your country has surrendered it's your duty to report yourself to the authorities otherwise you are a criminal.

I don't know if you can read Dutch but this is a newspaperarticle about the case: http://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/de-laatste-duitse-schoten~a480104/

Here is a wikipedia article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13_May_1945_German_deserter_execution

Also, maybe take a chillpill?

[–] jinmo2010 9 years ago

Your thread is fallacious on several grounds:
"A Jewish(?) conscript of the Wehrmacht had deserted and was hidden by the Dutch Resistance."???-- There was absolutely nil possibility that there had been any Jewish landser--Nazis had combed Wehrmacht for anyone even remotely connected to Jews (even the Mischlinges) and demoted them and sent to concentration camps (it was the same case with Gypsies);
"The Wehrmacht was allowed to police the camp themselves (under guard by the Canadians ofcourse(SIC)) and set up a tribunal to try the deserter. Which was allowed by the capitulation-treaty. Then they killed him. Which was not allowed by the capitulation treaty but was administrative oversight by the Canadian commander"? I grant it had indeed happened, but in a prisoner of camp in Canada in 1943, not in over-run Germany in 1945!!!! (as an aside, there was no "capitulation treaty" when Germany capitulated--it was an "unconditional surrender," remember???? I understand that you might be Jewish, but please don't insult my (and other readers') intelligence! that's where I take offence about your manipulative-mindedness!

[–] hjtulp 9 years ago

Eh? First off I'm not Jewish (not that it matters one bit. Secondly, how about you actually Read my sources?

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] prplayer 9 years ago

that would be Pearl Harbor, no?

so many movies, so little time

[–] ktowny 8 years ago

"..the un-liberated part of the Netherlands (which included most of the urban areas)suffered great hunger--many died of starvation. The relative gaiety and normalcy of the ambience as depicted in the movie is simply FALSE...."

Did you miss the scene of the kids, who were presumably hungry, if not starving, fighting each other over the food? Of the scene where Ellie(?) takes takes a bite of the carrot being fed to the rabbit?

"Loves turned to lust and bloods turned to dust in my heart"