🚀 go-pugleaf

An excellent anti-war film is _La Legionne de dannati_/_Battle of the
Commandos_ by Umberto Lenzi and starring Jack Palance and Curd Jurgens.
Dario Argento co-wrote the screenplay.

While on the subject of Lenzi, can anyone see the parallels between
_Cannibal Ferox_ and _The Cook The Thief His Wife & Her Lover_ pointed out
by Phil Hardy?  I've only seen the latter, and considering what Video
Watchdog said (and showed) about _Cannibal Ferox_, I don't think I want
to, een though it sounds interesting enough in structure.

Scott

On Sun, 20 Sep 1998, Rick Moody wrote:

> Alright, since some brave souls had the audacity to suggest they "hated"
> the
> somewhat overly-praised SPR, lets deal with it.  I agree that
> there is really no reason why anyone could "hate" SPR...however, it is
> irritating that many critics are tending to label it the greatest WWII film
> ever and berate prior efforts made by filmmakers WHO ACTUALLY HAD BEEN IN
> THE WAR as fluff.  While the first forty-five minutes is harrowing stuff,
> the other two hours is basically two episodes of "Combat!" edited together.
>  Not bad, but certainly not original.
>         Too, there is a more elemental problem.  While many of us older film
> students are aware of the fact that men involved in war were perhaps
> "numbed" by the day-to-day struggle to survive due to insufficient sleep
> and constant tension and the constant loss of comrades, the movie itself
> does not delineate this state of affairs for the unenlightened.  I
> sincerely doubt whether the rising generation would understand these
> people.
> Take, for example, the aftermath
> of the Omaha Beach incident.  These men have just been through literal
> "hell," and understandably stagger away, but then seem to snap back into
> line as if they were unfeeling automotons.  Moments later the only residual
> manifestation of this trauma is Tom Hanks' trembling hand.  Are they
> kidding?  Surely someone would have started crying, shaking, cracking up,
> etc. I mean I don't expect a freak-out on the scale of Ken Russell, but
> some upset....?
>
> ----------
> > From: Joshua Redmond <lerein@IBM.NET>
> > To: SCREEN-L@UA1VM.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: Translating Private Ryan
> > Date: Monday, September 14, 1998 1:34 PM
> >
> > Robert J Vest wrote:
> > >
> > > Scott Hutchins <sahutchi@IUPUI.EDU> on 09/14/98 12:04:41 PM
> > >
> > >> The obvious reason to hate the film is Private Ryan the all-American
> > >> soldier boy that keeps the film from being a truly an anti-war film,
> as
> > >> do other aspects of the film.
> > >
> > > I must have been seeing a different movie. What possible reason could
> you
> > > have for 'hating' this movie? (I know you are not the original poster,
> but
> > > I used your response to reply to the list) The 'all-American soldier
> boy',
> > > 'a truly anti-war movie'? I may deft here, but I don't get these
> comments.
> > > Reply off-list if you would like, but I thoughthe movie was a veritible
> > > masterpiece.
> >
> > You're right, Bob.  SPR was a masterpiece that no one could reasonably
> > deem to be pro-war.  Anyone's reasons for thinking otherwise will be
> > amusing.
> >
> > - Josh
> >
> > ----
> > Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
> > University of Alabama.
>
> ----
> Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
> University of Alabama.
>

----
Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite
http://www.tcf.ua.edu/screensite