tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post5509668786951403863..comments2024-03-25T18:56:22.992+11:00Comments on The Tactical Painter: What irks me about A Bridge Too FarThe Tactical Painterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04980190745315043364noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-49406743372857723762020-04-26T09:07:18.563+10:002020-04-26T09:07:18.563+10:00Thanks Brendan. It’s one reason I find it hard to ...Thanks Brendan. It’s one reason I find it hard to enjoy so many war films. So many directors choose a war theme or a military theme because it’s a suitable vehicle to convey their anti-military, anti-establishment or political views. The military history side of the story or the actual facts are far less important. The films are dramatic fictions set during a historical period to lend them some sort of authenticity or legitimacy. Ironically I’ve always thought Marxist film criticism has the best phrase for expressing this, they refer to films that try to look real and so convey the impression they are telling a ‘truth’ as bourgeois illusionism. In other words a con trick, cinematic sleight of hand to fool the audience into thinking what they are watching is real. We often mistake what looks realistic with what is real. This makes all our cultural artefacts open to interpretation by both sides of politics and audiences need to approach everything critically. I’m always telling my kids, everything comes from something, it’s important to understand what that ‘something’ is.The Tactical Painterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980190745315043364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-66986795827473686962020-04-20T23:02:43.838+10:002020-04-20T23:02:43.838+10:00Sorry being so late to the party (think of me as t...Sorry being so late to the party (think of me as the XXX Corps of commentators!). Another factor to take into account re. Borwning's culpability is that, afterwards, he took full responsibility for the failure of the Arnhem part of Market Garden - a fact that "Dickie darling" Attenborough conveniently ignores. Compare this to the American commanders falling over each other to claim "I did my bit, it was you losers who let us down". The sad fact is that the UK film and tv industry is overrun with people with leftist views - in fact, it's hard to think of anyone with alternative views who has ever had a decent career in the industry. And whilst it is all very well saying we can allow for this, the fact is that if it is the only view you ever get, and that even centrist views are excluded, it becomes next to impossible to teach people genuine history, or to acknowledge nuance and context. A classic case in point is the (in)famous Falklands War radio play, showing (shock, horror!) Margaret Thatcher giving an all-too-human reaction to the losses at Goose Green (a well-documented fact). It was banned for decades, despite the author (Curteis) being a very well respected playwright whose previous efforts for the BBC had ALL been made into programmes. Subsequent revelations showed that the BBC had (a) tried to alter the depiction of Thatcher, and (b) had lied about the reasons for it being "held back". Meanwhile, the anti-Thatcher/anti-Army drama "Tumbledown" (which contained several fallacies, some of which led to the writer being sued) was not only continued with, but the BBC even tried to show it during the 1987 election. Sadly, this is what happens when you allow just one political view to be presented in the media.Baron von Wreckedoftenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01625953409547293251noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-90705910493403359732020-04-09T22:15:20.619+10:002020-04-09T22:15:20.619+10:00Thank you for a very interesting piece in the fir...Thank you for a very interesting piece in the first place and thanks to those who have taken the trouble to respond so constructively.<br />It's been a very rewarding read.Keith Masseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05545338095727516353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-8709802003474636462019-10-03T01:38:17.748+10:002019-10-03T01:38:17.748+10:00"the real problem is that the whole operation..."the real problem is that the whole operation was doomed to fail simply because the objectives it set were always going to be impossible to achieve, both militarily but also politically."<br /><br />I disagree. The operation was not inherently unwinnable. The Allies made mistakes in planning and execution.Dexterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07748293799490877339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-29115394302631403492019-10-02T01:22:34.134+10:002019-10-02T01:22:34.134+10:00Yes, that makes perfect sense. No film on this hug...Yes, that makes perfect sense. No film on this huge scale is ever going to be a reliable source of evidence, because of the sheer complexity and the many simultaneous stories unfolding. I have pretty much finished Beevor's book now, and I think that he brings out aspects of the operation that I don't remember from Ryan's book. I think that from a historical perspective, the failure to fully support XXX Corps by VIII Corps and XII Corps really need to be brought into the analysis to a much greater degree. Of course, there were perfectly rational explanations why that never happened, but the delays exposed XXX Corps to attacks all along Club Route that could possibly have been avoided. I think that you are right. The history and analysis is far from complete. Perhaps it will always remain so?Carolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17068889968857575433noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-17894960113774429302019-09-30T11:49:53.142+10:002019-09-30T11:49:53.142+10:00Funny was just about to mention 'Theirs is the...Funny was just about to mention 'Theirs is the Glory'<br />Top stuff - although I don't mind ABTF - but this is the reality - can be found here<br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiFeYxlPYy4Truscott Trotterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13085299179943095488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-879085968696197502019-09-29T23:49:19.076+10:002019-09-29T23:49:19.076+10:00"Theirs Is The Glory", filmed in '45..."Theirs Is The Glory", filmed in '45, released in '46. A good mix of footage taken during the battle and scenes shot with troops who had been there (not always playing themselves).TamsinPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11759947520907448060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-44255300672975022462019-09-29T10:35:06.703+10:002019-09-29T10:35:06.703+10:00Theirs Was The Glory is what I think you are talki...Theirs Was The Glory is what I think you are talking about.<br />Kevin Rounsavillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04049406965375493704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-78470844637476824222019-09-29T04:25:37.281+10:002019-09-29T04:25:37.281+10:00Rely after the war a film of this was made and fea...Rely after the war a film of this was made and featured the actual men who fought there. Cannot remember the name sorryNagromborhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00327657567052533104noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-5753554531887784582019-09-28T12:26:30.119+10:002019-09-28T12:26:30.119+10:00Thanks Tamsin, that's a very considered reply....Thanks Tamsin, that's a very considered reply. We are more fortunate than Attenborough or Ryan as we enjoy considerably more research, scholarship and debate around MG than was available back in the 1970s. As with any event mired in controversy no one will be completely satisfied with the interpretation and when you consider that this is all in a mainstream Hollywood feature film it's little surprise those historical issues aren't addressed in a satisfactory way. I've seen just as many documentaries on MG that I would also take issue with, so little surprise ABTF struggles.The Tactical Painterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980190745315043364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-62184807339357854902019-09-28T12:09:55.789+10:002019-09-28T12:09:55.789+10:00The film goes into great detail to explain certain...The film goes into great detail to explain certain decisions such as those over the intelligence, but it entirely skips over others. Some of this is to do with sticking to Cornelius Ryan's book and some is to do with conscious decisions about what storylines to keep in the film. To be honest we expect too much of a film whose main aim is to make loads of money at the box office and where the bulk of the audience was happy to see big name actors performing in spectacular action sequences.The Tactical Painterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980190745315043364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-26884925522297116842019-09-28T12:01:11.305+10:002019-09-28T12:01:11.305+10:00You're dead right, I've just watched it ag...You're dead right, I've just watched it again and I don't know why I thought he had a northern accent. I think it's the slightly nasally whine he has in his voice that had left that impression. Good call.The Tactical Painterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980190745315043364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-39489022358126544372019-09-28T10:35:02.489+10:002019-09-28T10:35:02.489+10:00Good appraisal of an excellent film and I'm so...Good appraisal of an excellent film and I'm sorry, but there's no way the Fuller character has a "Northern English accent". It's generic, English "posh".TIWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723235843548373098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-25270797510593567382019-09-28T09:49:14.950+10:002019-09-28T09:49:14.950+10:00Thanks Sidney for those great comments. I tend to ...Thanks Sidney for those great comments. I tend to agree with you on how a film can help a viewer understand military events, or not as is more usually the case. As I said to Carole the film is probably best viewed as a drama set 'during' Market Garden rather than a film 'about' Market Garden. Occasionally a dramatic treatment can get it right and I think a few episodes of Band of Brothers manage to convey the mechanics of tactical level combat quite well, but generally that's not what war films are about, it's the human drama that drives them. Finding the right balance between the history and the drama is never easy and when you throw in the need to make money at the box office and the personal viewpoints of the director and writer it's often a miracle we get a cohesive story at all!The Tactical Painterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980190745315043364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-17242527172183933682019-09-28T09:42:33.129+10:002019-09-28T09:42:33.129+10:00Carole thanks for taking the time to make such a c...Carole thanks for taking the time to make such a considered response. I was partly inspired to write the piece by the number of times I hear people in podcasts and other discussions make reference to the film, on some occasions almost using the film as the reference point rather than the actual history. Much is surrendered to the film narrative and this I completely understand (I have worked in the film industry for over twenty years, so understand much that drives a production). Of course, as you note, the history of Market Garden is still being written and much remains controversial and debatable, which makes the treatment of it in film of great interest. If people saw it as a drama film set during Market Garden that might be a better way to look at it rather than see it a film about Market Garden, if that makes sense.The Tactical Painterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980190745315043364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-25879287074897937732019-09-28T08:24:59.593+10:002019-09-28T08:24:59.593+10:00A fantastic appraisal of a fantastic film about a ...A fantastic appraisal of a fantastic film about a fantastic part of ww2. I agree entirely that the film exudes an anti war anti establishment sentiment. As an aside this continued in print form with Charleys War in the weekly Battle comic of the 1970s and 80s. Great story telling with THE best comic artist of all time Joe Colqhoun, presented a mouth watering visual banquet with a subversive anti war undertone. Ironically it led to me joining the Parachute Regiment. Go figure.71Tonkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10847491914354665860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-11661969104405488782019-09-28T07:21:01.641+10:002019-09-28T07:21:01.641+10:00Sorry Grave Bridge Lol!
Sorry Grave Bridge Lol!<br />johny hophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04504776636947234619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-28471800053215974022019-09-28T07:19:54.174+10:002019-09-28T07:19:54.174+10:00Yup I would agree with you about the general tone ...Yup I would agree with you about the general tone of the film which in a way is subliminal and pushing the writers own beliefs. Having done Ginkle Heide with Col John Waddy when I did a painting of the drop of the 4th Brigade for him I had the chance to discover and go over the whole battlefield. I did 'Hells Highway' a few weeks ago. As you say the element of surprise was lost as units were dropped to far from the objective. The only bridge taken immediately was grace because they were dropped with in easy reach. Interesting the film does not go into the issue of why the American Airborne units sat down for two hours when confronting German blocking forces near the Son Bridge. They failed to take Son Bridge and then delayed getting to Nimeigen Bridge. The RAF take some blame as they would not drop forces near the objectives. There are those who say it easy to say in hindsight but most of the British Airborne officers were not happy about it at all. Surprise is the key and they should have dropped much closer to the objective.johny hophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04504776636947234619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-91814888050987057322019-09-28T04:08:18.325+10:002019-09-28T04:08:18.325+10:00An interesting post. There were definitely some od...An interesting post. There were definitely some odd choices made about incidents to include, which in hindsight do fit in with the film having a (somewhat) anti-war premise, the Sgt Dohun sequence being one. <br /><br />The telling of the story definitely suffers from having to compress into three hours a week of planning and nine days of the operation, with about 60,000 allied and 30,000 German ground troops involved. Obviously many things couldn't be represented and some things had to be merged (particularly characters).<br /><br />Did Browning come off badly in the film? Yes. Was it unfair? Yes and no. On his dismissal of intelligence about Bittrich's 2nd SS Panzer Corps being present in the area he can't really be blamed fully as he wasn't aware of confirmatory evidence - Bletchley Park had passed ULTRA intelligence to Monty confirming their location and status, but he had dismissed it; the intelligence was never passed on to Browning. However, he doesn't appear to have warned Urquhart that there might be SS Panzer troops in the area; had he done so the division might have put a greater priority on taking anti-tank weapons then they did.<br />In the film, he does get off very lightly over his treatment of Sosabowski whom he (along with Horrocks and Thomas) chose to scapegoat for the failure before the remnants of 1st Airborne were evacuated from the Oosterbeek pocket.<br /><br />As for Gavin and the Nijmegen bridges, there are many issues that deserve to be addressed. Was he to blame for not prioritising their capture? Yes and no. His Operational Orders from browning specified 3 primary objectives - the Grave ridge, the Nijmegen bridges and the Groesbeek heights, plus a number of smaller crossings as secondary objectives along with securing a much longer stretch of the road than the 101st (and with less troops than them in the first lift). He was also guided by the intelligence reporting German Panzer Divisions in the Reichswald area near to Groesbeek (probably Bittrich's corps which was actually around Arnhem). I suspect that is why he focused so much of his force on securing the heights. There is certainly debate about whether he had issued verbal instructions before the jump to Lindquist to send a battalion to capture the bridges - Lindquist has contradicted himself. If the battalion had been sent to do the job as soon as they landed, they would almost certainly have captured the bridges. However, they probably couldn't have held them when Grabner's unit arrived and when elements of 10th SS Panzer Division joined them.<br /><br />I still enjoy watching the film, possibly more so these days for spotting the inaccuracies. It's still much more accurate than the 1946 "Theirs Is The Glory".TamsinPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11759947520907448060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-31776063319041990632019-09-28T03:26:05.670+10:002019-09-28T03:26:05.670+10:00"or how disastrous Frosts’s curious personal ..."or how disastrous Frosts’s curious personal reconnaissance was" - do you mean Urquhart rather than Frost? If so, his decision to leave his HQ to see what was going on with 1st Parachute Brigade was certainly very odd and had serious consequences especially as he left within minutes of summoning Freddie Gough but not leaving any message for him (mind you, that did mean that some Recce men did make it to the bridge).TamsinPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11759947520907448060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-59711815975363812662019-09-27T22:32:29.080+10:002019-09-27T22:32:29.080+10:00One thing about Gavin and his (in)action during Ma...One thing about Gavin and his (in)action during Market-garden to follow up on. Criticism of Gavin pretty much only became widely discussed in the narrative after his passing, just as with Bradley. At the time of both the book and the film, Gavin's decision making had not yet been subjected to much scrutiny. I think Geoffrey Powell in his "The Devil's Birthday" ca 1984 was the first author to raise some criticisms re the US command decisions but that was still pretty veiled. Once Gavin had passed, the critical analysis became more trenchant. Certainly by the turn of the century, it was something that drove many Market-Garden studies from the outset.Petehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05776500699334014788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-3679355584735558292019-09-27T21:51:09.427+10:002019-09-27T21:51:09.427+10:00Really interesting post – thank you! I very much ...Really interesting post – thank you! I very much enjoyed reading it, and the comment by Carole. You wrote: “ I don’t believe Attenborough wanted to make a film that helped people understand the military events that led to and occurred during Operation Market Garden”. I’m not sure I completely agree, because that depends on what you think of as being the “military events”. I agree in part with your point – because a number of the events in the campaign are folded and bended to fit the narrative which Attenborough creates. And you have spotted skilfully where Attenborough’s narrative was heading in the timeline of the 1960s and 1970s anti-establishment theme! But there are also some clear signs that the narrative being followed in the film (and Ryan’s book) is at least a plausible narrative of historical events, even if that narrative is being re-told through a pacifist lens. <br /><br />Could I also play ‘Devil’s Advocate’ a little bit, please? Which war film does help a viewer understand military events? Not just human experiences of war, but military events in and of themselves? I’m not sure many do. It’s hard enough deciding what the key elements of military success, or failure, are (Geography & terrain? Logistics? Finance? Command?), without them showing them dramatically on the screen. I know that’s not quite your point - but if Attenborough’s film had been more “accurate” (and, as you know, that’s a subjective term), would it have been a better film to watch? It might have led people to understand more about what Gavin might have been doing (or not doing) at Nijmegan, or how disastrous Frosts’s curious personal reconnaissance was – but would giving more detail of those events, important though they are, have made the film more dramatic, more enjoyable? <br /><br />I think any film has a narrative intent, and war films are no different. Part of the fun of watching is figuring out the unstated intention of the director – and then you can see if you like that point of view or not. And, yes, you spotted Dickie Attenbourgh’s intent very well in “A Bridge Too Far”! <br /><br />One great point you make – which I completely agree with – is that the more realistic the film ‘looks’, the more you tend to trust it. Like all great reviews, you also made me want to watch the film again – and there’s no higher praise for any review!<br />Sidney Roundwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03440705981976797774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-22835272783732214092019-09-27T20:43:42.613+10:002019-09-27T20:43:42.613+10:00An interesting and thought provoking post indeed!
...An interesting and thought provoking post indeed!<br />Thanks<br />MattThe Wargames Tablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09454593374321456477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861229654080360536.post-36866264487621449042019-09-27T18:18:54.368+10:002019-09-27T18:18:54.368+10:00Funnily enough, I am currently reading Sir Antony ...Funnily enough, I am currently reading Sir Antony Beevor's book on Arnhem, and so far, he is setting up the undoubted tensions between the British and the Americans pretty well. His opinion of Montgomery appears to tally pretty well with other accounts of how the man behaved, especially when it comes to his rivalry with the American generals, as well as his hugely egotistic opinion of himself. Much has been made over the years about the uncharacteristic nature of Market Garden as a Montgomery operation, and I think that this is the elephant in the room when it comes to the film version in A Bridge Too Far. However, as you say, the film is there as a dramatic tale based upon actual events, and in that sense it is a triumph, but I always feel that one should never look to the silver screen to understand history. Liberties are always taken in the interests of the narrative. There is a telling point made early on in Beevor's book, right at the end of the first chapter. He writes that "Montgomery refused to acknowledge what almost all other senior British officers had understood. Britain was now the junior partner in the alliance.........", going on to say that "The idea that Britain remained a first-rate power was a fantasy that Churchill desperately tried to promote, even though he knew in his heart that it was not the case."<br /><br />Perhaps that is the real, harsh light in which we need to see and understand Market Garden? It is certainly a view that chimes with Attenborough's filmic version of events. Browning is definitely portrayed as the villain of the piece, but the real problem is that the whole operation was doomed to fail simply because the objectives it set were always going to be impossible to achieve, both militarily but also politically. It is significant that it was 1st Airborne stuck at the end of the road, because, as Beevor makes plain, politically the Americans were never going to let a US Airborne division be the victims of a botched British operation with little real chance of success.Carolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17068889968857575433noreply@blogger.com