Band Of Brothers - First Impressions

[Rambo John J]

I've heard it gets it's first airing on BBC2 as it's classed as leaning towards a "niche" audience and not really general viewing enough to warrant a primetime slot on BBC1.

Seeing as the series was made for TV anyway and US TV guidelines do tend to be stricter than here in the UK, I'd say it's pretty unlikely it's been cut, same as Pooch, but I'd be interested in any info anyone comes up with.

I thought it was great stuff. Bring on the rest of the series post haste.

Sorry here is the direct link www.dvddebate.com/viewtopic.php?topic=1135&forum=2&start=0

[Juzminator]

Hmmmn...interesting choice of cuts by all accounts - why they needed to cut anything in a work of this nature is beyond me, though.

I particularly enjoyed one poster's comment that:

"They didn't cut David ****ing Schwimmer out did they?"

Lol

I have to admit, that (to me, at least) Mr. Schwimmer seems to be an utter one trick pony of an actor, with no discernible difference between Captain Sopel(?) and Ross....blatant miscasting IMHO.

[Rambo John J]

I believe he'll be making his unwelcome return just in time to drop into Arnhem (or Eindhoven, or where ever it was the Yanks hit during Operation Market Garden).

[Juzminator]

Hopefully, he'll be taken out by some "accidental" friendly fire....heh heh

Well folks,it looks like I am going to put a cat amongst the pidgeons!
Band of brothers to me was a huge letdown-yes it looked authentic(..if you like that jerky camera style!).
I didn`t care about any of the characters,there was no continuance with any of the characters,it was formulaic.(especially the scene at the end with the laundry-I mean was this supposed to be sad?-As I said,you couldn`t remember any of the names anyway!)
The story was absolute pants(Private Ryan but more boring...)
But what did i expect from the master of formulaic-Speilberg,and the king of corn-Hanks?
In fact p.ss poor!
Doug

[PoochJD]

HI,

Doug quaid wrote: "Well folks,it looks like I am going to put a cat amongst the pidgeons!
Band of brothers to me was a huge letdown."
1) How can you say this, when you've only seen 3 hours, out of a total of 10?!

"There was no continuance with any of the characters."
2) Please could you expand on that. Again, you do need to bear in mind that you've only seen 3 out of 10 parts, so things could drastically change.

"It was formulaic.(especially the scene at the end with the laundry-I mean was this supposed to be sad?"
3) Formulaic?! Interesting! However, no film can be totally original, and bearing in mind that both Hanks and Spielberg did make "Saving Private Ryan" together, there was always going to be comparison between the two. Maybe you shouldn't do that. BOB was made for TV, and SPR was meant to be seen at the cinema!

"As I said, you couldn`t remember any of the names anyway!"
4) Fair enough, but in most war films, it's very rare that you can name most of the characters. Maybe you aren't meant too?!

"The story was absolute pants."
5) How can you say this, when you've not seen the whole series?! You're judging the show on less than a third of the whole.

"But what did i expect from the master of formulaic-Speilberg,and the king of corn-Hanks?"
6) Errr, do you really want me to answer that?! Hanks has made some good stuff in the past, however I agree that not everyone likes his work. As for Spielberg, it seems odd that you almost slate the same director who made "Saving Private Ryan", "Schindler's List", "Jaws", "Raiders Of The Lost Ark", "Close Encounters Of The 3rd Kind" AND "E.T."!

Maybe you'd care to tell us all, what you would have done instead, to improve the story, characters, etc.

I don't deny that you are entitled to your own opinion, regardless of how different it may be to others, but you do appear to be judging the book by it's cover and contents page, and not seeing the whole picture. If you still feel the same, after watching all 10 parts, then fair enough, but at the moment it feels like a little bit of an unfair attack.

Pooch

[calibos]

I think thats part of the point, that you don't really get to know many of the characters. I think that there is only meant to be two of three characters appearing in all 10 eps. The rest die and are replaced by new characters throughout the 10 episodes. Like the real Easy company probably. I'd say there was probably very few members of Easy company left at the end of the war that were there when the 101st airborne were formed.

As for all the British giving out about Hollywood re-writing history again with SPR and B. of B., Give me a break. These stories were about Yank soldiers and Yank landing beaches and Yank Airborne para troops. They're not trying to claim they won the war single-handedly. They just happen to be telling stories about their own guys and not yours. The one thing they should have done in both stories maybe was had some yank characters come into contact with British troops and have some interaction between them or fighting side by side to acknowledge that there were probably as many Brits there and that they were winning as many battles as the yanks. But then again some Historians might say that British and American troops might never of met because the were fighting in different areas of Normandy or France as a whole, in which case the producers would be factually correct in not showing them though maybe they should have anyway to give a balanced view of D-Day.

[gwbailey]

Originally posted by calibos:
<STRONG>The one thing they should have done in both stories maybe was had some yank characters come into contact with British troops and have some interaction between them or fighting side by side to acknowledge that there were probably as many Brits there and that they were winning as many battles as the Yanks.</STRONG>

"you're having a bath, if you think you're half inchin that"

[SILVERBACK]

i have to agree with doug a little here spielberg has gone a bit suspect.in the list pooch produced all the films are very old an doug is bang on the money about hanks.while where on the subject of it being to american has anyone seen enigma yet as i believe its a british film about the brits doin the business for a change unlike private liar oh sorry ryan.an yes i am sick to death about the amount of american ww2 films that portray the brits as soft as wet dogs.hit an that they did all the work.

[calibos]

Your point Graham?
I'm not familiar with the quote or its inference.

[ 15-10-2001: Message edited by: calibos ]

[ 15-10-2001: Message edited by: calibos ]

[calibos]

Now this could be complete b*ll*x but a mate told me that the British had a cheek giving out about American portrayals of the war when there was no mention of the fact that most of the decryption groundwork or most of the decryption as a whole(cant remember which he said) was done by Polish Brains rather than British and the only Polish person in Enigma is portrayed as a traitor.Cheeky!!

I can see your guys point on this subject of rewriting WW2 history with regard to U-572 but not with SPR or Band of Brothers.

[Juzminator]

I can't wait to see Tom Hanks in a later episode playing a "British Officer"...his son's in it too.....

Don't forget Errol Flynn in "Objective Burma"

He single handedly rids the whole country of pesky Japs. Not a mention of the British and other common wealth troops that toiled in the jungle for over three years.

If you want an accurate potrayal of any countries contribution to the war effort then don't bother watching any film made in the last 40 years co's none of them will be particularly objective.

I know theres other channels(duuuhhhh!!)..i know we have different opinions-dont be so shocked,isnt that why we come in here to talk?
Christ theres some donuts about!!!