Why not have more WW1 epics like this?
Or an over-the-top action movie done like Battlefield 1? I hope 1917 opens the floodgates.
shareFor whatever reason there just aren't a lot of WWI movies. I have a feeling it's largely because the Great War just didn't have a clearly-defined villain. It was more just a bunch of countries competing for their own interests.
Meanwhile, WWII had the Nazis and the Japanese, both of which are not only easily cast as the embodiment of evil, but both of which are also very colorful and cinematic.
But sure, more WWI movies would be nice. 1917 was good. War Horse wasn't bad.
Addressing your astute comment about WWI films not having a clearly defined villain, may I recommend both Joyeux Noel & Paths of Glory, each of which in its own way suggests that the villains were evenly distributed among the highest ranks of both the military & the politicians of all countries involved?
shareThanks for the recommendations.
I've actually seen Joyeux Noel and it's a good film. Every few years I'll throw it into the rotation during the Christmas season. It's a different kind of Christmas film but I enjoy it, and in fact I recommended it to my dad and he watched it and liked it as well.
Paths of Glory I'm aware of but I haven't seen it. Kubrick film, right? I will have to give it a look.
Yes, Kubrick, and a powerful film. I envy you your experience of seeing it for the first time eventually!
shareEh, I wasn't a fan of War Horse. And that's a fair observation. But one can get creative if they wanted. That lack of an obvious villain could make a great backdrop for a Hitchcockian or Nolanesque mystery-spy thriller a la the 39 Steps or that video game The Last Express.
share