I watched this over the last couple of nights and it was a pretty slow movie. The global events cartoons that were inserted into the storyline was odd. Was this movie made to illustrate how clueless and ineffective English "gentlemen" were on the battlefield? Nobody showed initiative except the junior officers and the senior officers were all about blaming each other when things fell apart. It really painted senior British officers as clueless, pompous, prideful and noble idiots.

Watching the junior officers try to light a fire up the senior officers asses was almost like watching "Not Sure" trying to reason with everyone in Idiocracy.

Anyway, glad it was free on Amazon Prime and I didn't spend any money on it.

Tony.

If you are talking about the 1968 version, it was made at the height of the Vietnam 'conflict' as an allegory and anti-war film, showing the incompetence of senior officers and the cost paid by the lower ranks for poor decisions and conflicting orders.

"C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre. C'est de la folie"

Classic version of "fake news" , or "media" creating new truth and re-wringing history in the process. Just shows there's nothing new under the sun. A bungling military screw from a simple misunderstanding which leads to a slaughter, then Tennyson writes a poem and viola, suddenly the world remembeds a brave heroic military action.

Okay, so it's anti-war propaganda.

Thanks.

Tony.

quote:

Originally posted by benny6:
Okay, so it's anti-war propaganda.

Thanks.

Tony.

The one with Niven and Flynn together with Olivia de Havilland (1936) was more of a 'Hollywood' epic, although the historical inaccuracies are many - including transposing the site of the charge from Crimea to India, making the 'Hero' cavalry regiment the 27th Lancers instead of the 11th Hussars and adding in the siege of Cawnpore from the Indian Mutiny.

All good fun though.