Wish I had Netflix so I could watch this. The trailer looks really good.

That does look like it's been done well. I don't have Netflix either, so I'll have to wait until it's hopefully available somewhere else.

Thank you for the heads up.

0-0

Would like to see. I’ve seen the other 2 I know about. Terrible, The war to end all wars.

Well, we do have Netflix. I’m looking forward to this. Tks for the heads up.

Yeah, I just set aside 2 hours and some bourbon.

Thanks for posting this. I read the book in junior high, like Sigfest watched the English-language movies I knew about, and now-- with a little bit of "free time" soon on my hands-- am digging back into WW history.

If you liked the book I would suggest the follow up “The Road Back”. As a veteran I enjoyed it more the All Quiet on the Western Front.

So it's a remake of the original. Perhaps it will be good.

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:
So it's a remake of the original.

No, it's a more modern adaptation of the novel.

A "remake" use the prior film itself as the basis. But a film that adapts the same source material (book/fable/comic/etc.) as a prior film is not a "remake".

quote:

Originally posted by Valpo Fz:
If you liked the book I would suggest the follow up “The Road Back”. As a veteran I enjoyed it more the All Quiet on the Western Front.

If you liked reading "All Quiet On The Western Front", I'd also suggest Ernst Junger's "Storm of Steel". They're very similar, both being based on the German soldier's experience on the Western Front of WW2, except SoS is a nonfiction memoir of the author's WW1 service, compared to AQotWF that's a novel based on the author's WW1 experience.

Wrong.

https://www.collinsdictionary....%20is%20a%20movie,...

A remake is a movie that has the same story, and often the same title, as a movie that was made earlier.

The modern version of The Hobbit was not a remake of the 1977 animated The Hobbit. They were both adaptations of the even older original novel.

The new It film was not a remake of the older It tv miniseries, they were both adaptations of the even older original novel.

The new Batman film is not a remake of the Nolan Batman films, or the older Burton/Schumacher Batman films. They were all adaptations of the even older Batman comic series.

There are dozens of films of various Shakeshearean works. The new versions are not remakes of the older versions; they're all adaptations of the original plays.

Etc.

Compare to something like Seven Samurai and Magnificent Seven. Or the Swedish and American versions of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. Or The 1968 and 1990 Night of the Living Dead. Or the 1960 and 2001 Oceans 11. Those are all remakes, with the newer films being made based on the prior films, not any earlier other medium.


The only time that there's any gray area is when a newer film is deliberately basing itself on a prior film adaptation and not the original source book/story/etc. For example, a new Snow White film is not automatically a remake of the old Disney cartoon, instead being separate adaptations of the original fairy tale. However, the upcoming live action Snow White film from Disney is specifically a remake of their older animated film.

Thanks for the heads up, looks like it might be well done.

This drops Friday I believe. Looking forward to it!

New trailer.

On my phone so can't embed.

https://youtu.be/hf8EYbVxtCY

Spoiler-free, I thought it was really good.

Watched it and enjoyed it.

Was there even the slightest hint of early 21st Century Political Correctness? I am always on the lookout for this in modern war films, although this is a European production.

I watched it last night. There could have been some P/C but I didn't notice it. Maybe I'm becoming normalized to that stuff. Overall, pretty good at telling the story.

In any case, I didn't see the earlier versions, just read the book decades ago and had forgotten the specifics other than it was dark and somewhat depressing. Like the movie would need to be to be true the history and the book.

One thing that seemed a bit strange to me and took away a bit, the actors all seemed to have a British accent, not German. Later when I quickly saw the names in the credits, they appear to all be German or Germanic names.

Otherwise it did get the point across that this was a terrible loss of life in the worst conditions that would end up for nothing. They also seemed to paint the German diplomats as the only decent guys in the room when they were a major cause of it starting in the first place.
Not to mention that everyone knows that the conditions to end it became a major reason the next one happened too (not part of the picture here).

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
One thing that seemed a bit strange to me and took away a bit, the actors all seemed to have a British accent, not German. Later when I quickly saw the names in the credits, they appear to all be German or Germanic names.

Sounds like you watched it with the dubbed British English audio track turned on, instead of the original German.

Yes, seriously. There are multiple audio tracks. You can click on the little speech bubble icon within the movie/show to pop out the menu to change audio languages, or on some platforms there's an Audio & Subtitles submenu available for a title before you start playing it.

It's a German production, made with German actors speaking German. So the original audio track is in German (as noted within the audio menu), with English subtitles available.