The Pacific (1 Viewer)

[Josh Dial]

Not to verge further off-topic, but The World at War isn't specifically told from the British point of view. In fact, it goes out of its way to cover as many aspects of the conflict as possible (without becoming hundreds of hours long, of course). Sure, a lot of the *footage* is British in origin, but to be honest, it's pretty absent of many of the tell-tale signs of British historical bias you see in most BBC docs.

As a military historian, I consider it about as balanced as a doc. from the 70s could be. Interviews come from German soldiers, Japanese officials, British officers and historians, American historians, Prime Ministers, Generals, Admirals, even Himmler's adjutant. Given the era and the target audience, the production goes out of its way to avoid picking a true point of view.

If anything, I would say it's more accurate to say The World at War focuses on the Eurpean *theatre,* not the European viewpoint. This was mostly due to a lack of proper primary sources from the Pacific Theatre. I honestly think that if this doc. was remade today, it would be twice as long, with about-equal attention paid to both continental war zones.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

In fact, it goes out of its way to cover as many aspects of the conflict as possible

Oh, I didn't mean to suggest that it doesn't. But the fact remains that it was written, produced and edited by British subjects and this fact had to inform their approach to the subject matter and I think it does. To suggest otherwise would be to suggest that the filmmakers were something more (or less) than human. I think they strove mightily for a "European" approach (to ensure foreign sales in addition to nobler reasons), and for objectivity, but don't forget that the U.K. has had at least as ambiguous a relationship with the idea (and reality) of "Europe" as it has had with France and Germany. ("Fog closes Channel. Continent cut off." )

Regards,

Joe

 

[Josh Dial]

When you said "British point of view," I took that to mean a strong bias, not towards their side of the conflict, but rather their *interpretation* of the events. Quite clearly it is impossible to escape a degree of bias in history (unless you are simply listing dates of "one damn thing after another"). However, people sometimes use the term "point of view," in reference to a historical document, to mean "beware, as some of the facts might not be as they are portrayed."

Some reviews of The World at War say it largely ignores the Pacific theatre, and they literally mean that that is like saying the Pacific wasn't important. This isn't the case.

What I am saying is that the doc. is mostly free of biased interpretation of events. Biased selection of which events to focus on? Definitely.

 

[Douglas Monce]

7 of the 26 episodes of The World at War specifically focus on the Pacific theater. Other episodes may bring up the Pacific as it relates to the war in Europe. However remember that even those planning the war, IE Roosevelt and Churchill, felt that the European theater should take precedence over the Pacific, at least early in the war.

I think the documentary does tend to be biased toward the British point of view because it was made by Brits. Just as American documentaries are biased toward the American point of view. There is nothing wrong with that I and personally find it interesting to see that view point.

Doug

 

[Jose Martinez]

Back to "The Pacific" the second episode was so freakin' intense!!!!!!!

 

[mattCR]

This series is definitely more personal then "Band of Brothers", but that's not good or bad, it's just different. I have to say, the pacing in this show is very good. The way they play the entire shore leave sequences was very good.

 

[Spero D]

Agree. From an Aussie perspective, great realism.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Loved part two much more than the first.

Had my audio system cranked and the subwoofer had
my room rumbling loudly during the jungle bombing crusade.

Really enjoying this series. Looking forward to part three
which looks like it will be taking place mostly stateside.

 

[Josh Dial]

This episode was stellar. It really served to show the effects the war had on non-combatants, even those who didn't even have loved ones in the war. It's important to remember that the Marines spent more time in Australia than Easy Company did in Europe in Band of Brothers (D-Day was June 6 1944, final episode was around May 1945, if I recall). They were on leave for a long time--December 1942 until September 1943. The effects this had on new girlfriends, wives, mothers-to-be, and the soldiers, can't be stressed enough.

 

[Yee-Ming]

It sounds like I may be in a minority here, but so far I prefer Band of Brothers. Don't get me wrong, The Pacific is great, just that BoB was better. The way BoB was structured, to start off with their initial training, moving to England and preparing for D-Day, before D-Day itself and the campaigns thereafter, seemed to work better in character development, and in allowing us to learn something about them before seeing them face mortal danger, thereby making us more invested in their survival (or not). In contrast, with The Pacific we were thrown in the deep end in Ep 1, even deeper in Ep 2, before Ep 3 finally allowed us to catch up a bit, especially with Leckie and his 'entanglement'.

Also, I suppose BoB just set such a high bar that anything new and unfamiliar was bound to be viewed differently. I'll have to review this opinion again once The Pacific is done.

Otherwise, I agree with Josh, Leckie's doomed-from-the-beginning affair with Stella was heartbreaking. I hope for their sakes he ultimately made it back to Melbourne and married her (I know, read the book, get the answer immediately. I'm avoiding spoilers... )

Basilone a Medal of Honor winner? That has got to annoy Jon Seda-hating Dave... but seriously, nice to see Basilone get recognition, yet still want to do goofy stuff when out on the town, with his buddy having to rein him in from stealing the MP's jeep -- what a bone-headed thing to want to do for any sergeant, never mind a MOH winner.

As an aside, Dick Winters in BoB probably should have won an MOH as well, but back then they had some sort of 'quota' of only one MOH per unit per action (not sure what size unit, maybe even division), and someone else won it. There's an online campaign to have Winters' decoration retrospectively upgraded to MOH.

 

[Josh Dial]

Originally Posted by Yee-Ming
As an aside, Dick Winters in BoB probably should have won an MOH as well, but back then they had some sort of 'quota' of only one MOH per unit per action (not sure what size unit, maybe even division), and someone else won it. There's an online campaign to have Winters' decoration retrospectively upgraded to MOH.

This is actually the case. They basically tried to keep the quota to one per army group, per major campaign/battle/et cetera, though of course there were exceptions.

Regarding the romance, this is one of the rare occurances where the show (BoB included) just flat-out made something up. Leckie, as far as anyone could tell, never had a lengthy romance with a Greek Aussie women--at least he never wrote about it in his memoirs. My feeling is that because the story of a foreign romance in places like Melbourne is so important, and yet often never told, Spielburg/Hanks decided to transplant one of those stories to Leckie. He did write that he basically slept around for a year, so he probably wouldn't have minded them giving a name and face to one of the girls.

 

[Garrett Adams]

Originally Posted by Yee-Ming

...As an aside, Dick Winters in BoB probably should have won an MOH as well, but back then they had some sort of 'quota' of only one MOH per unit per action (not sure what size unit, maybe even division), and someone else won it. There's an online campaign to have Winters' decoration retrospectively upgraded to MOH.

That's correct, Eisenhower ruled no more than one MOH per division. Maxwell Taylor, the division commander did recommend Winters for the MOH, but in the end a captain leading an assault was awarded the medal posthumously.

 

[Yee-Ming]

Originally Posted by Josh Dial

Regarding the romance, this is one of the rare occurances where the show (BoB included) just flat-out made something up. Leckie, as far as anyone could tell, never had a lengthy romance with a Greek Aussie women--at least he never wrote about it in his memoirs. My feeling is that because the story of a foreign romance in places like Melbourne is so important, and yet often never told, Spielburg/Hanks decided to transplant one of those stories to Leckie. He did write that he basically slept around for a year, so he probably wouldn't have minded them giving a name and face to one of the girls.

Dangnabbit, that's a spoiler, since we can expect Leckie to never see Stella again! (j/k)

I suppose if the real-life Leckie slept around, then extrapolating his experience into a full-blown doomed romance isn't that huge a stretch, since it does serve a dramatic purpose: to show that the war also impacted the 'locals' in a personal . BoB hinted at this slightly when the washerwoman was wondering about some of the soldiers who hadn't picked up their laundry, and therefore hadn't paid her for her work; they had actually been killed and never returned to England. Not quite the same, though.

 

[Kevin Hewell]

This mirrors what the Marines went through. They were thrown right into combat at Guadacanal and then spent a year in Australia where they stayed before they were shipped off for more combat.

Quote:
In contrast, with The Pacific we were thrown in the deep end in Ep 1, even deeper in Ep 2, before Ep 3 finally allowed us to catch up a bit, especially with Leckie and his 'entanglement'.

 

[Josh Dial]

"Sellin' bonds and dickin' blondes."

The funniest line I've heard on TV in a long time

 

[collins1]

They are all brand new unlocked FROM UNITED KINGDOM with the complete accessories in original factory sealed box 100% original and comes with 12 months international warranty .

APPLE IPHONES:

Apple iphone 3gs 32gb.......400usd
Apple iphone 3g{16gb}---$300USD
Apple iphone 3g{8gb}----$250USD
Apple Iphone 4GB........... $200USD.
Apple Ipod Touch 16GB.......... $180USD
Apple Ipod Touch 32GB......... $200USD.

Nokia E90 Commnuicator at $270USD
Nokia N95 Black 8GB at $290USD
Nokia N82 - black at $220USD
Nokia N81 8GB at $200USD
Nokia N78 at $200USD
Nokia N96 16GB at $330USD
Nokia N97 32GB at $360USD
Nokia 8800 Sirocco at $260USD
Nokia 5800 XpressMusic at $280USD

Includes original box and original accessories:

-- Cradle of coupling
-- USB cable connection
-- Ear-microphone
-- Original instruction manual
-- Clean cloth
-- Charger wall stylish europe teeth


NOTE: These phones is 100% UNLOCKED and can be used with any SIM card. No activation required

(check carrier frequency requirements) Insert Your SIM CARD and start using the phone.

Shipping Method: FedEx / DHL

Delivery time: within 3 working days

Please contact us for more information and purchase inquiries:

MR collins terry (MARKETTING MANAGER)
EMAILS :[email protected]

 

[todd s]

Just curious how long were the Marines in Melbourne? I assumed it was a few weeks. But, reading the above post...Could have it been almost a year?

With regards to part V. Nice cameo by Anna Torv...And we see her in action.

 

[Josh Dial]

Originally Posted by todd s

That specific stay in Melbourne was from December of 1942, to September of 1943.

 

[todd s]

Originally Posted by Josh Dial




That specific stay in Melbourne was from December of 1942, to September of 1943.

Wow..That was a long time. That explains that Leckie's pretty serious relationship with the Greek girl.

 

[Brett_M]

I guess I'm in the minority here but I think the Pacific is a very poor follow-up to BoB. I know it's different in almost every way in terms of the story and it's structure and that is not a bad thing. What is bad is the fact that I care nothing about these characters because I don't know who they are. The show reminds me a lot of The Thin Red Line, which is a hardship for me to watch. I've seen it twice and the second time was because I thought I was too hard on it the first time. Nope, it sucked again. They have one similarity: they have some excellent sequences but the parts down't add up to much. The show is a lot like real war -- boring stretches punctuated by moments of sheer terror.
The production values are good and it was nice too see Anna Torv in something besides Fringe. I guess I prefer a more linear story structure. I like BoB more for that reason.