'The stupidest thing humanity ever did to itself': Sam Mendes and Colin Firth on 1917

by Catherine Shoard

 

War of nerves: George MacKay as Lance Corporal Schofield in 1917. Photograph: François Duhamel/AP

 

When Sam Mendes was small, he would laugh at his grandfather’s habit of forever washing his hands.

 

His father took him to one side.

 

“It’s because he remembers the mud in the trenches,” he said, “and never being able to get clean.”

 

Sam stopped laughing. 

 

Full Story: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jan/03/the-stupidest-thing-humanity-ever-did-to-itself-sam-mendes-and-colin-firth-on-1917

Contrary to what a lot of Brits think, it was never unavoidable or unthinkable for Britain to not get involved in WWI.

Sadly ''The War to end all Wars'' didn't end anything !

4 minutes ago, trainman34014 said:

Sadly ''The War to end all Wars'' didn't end anything !

Not while America keep interferring with other countries, since they became an Independent in 1776 country have been free of war for only 17 years. 

Humanity are like docile sheep, it's the wolves among us that were responsible for that and all wars.

 

The masters of propaganda and fear mongers

"But war's a game,which,were their subjects wise,kings should not play at"

 

William Cowper.

15 hours ago, Barry343 said:

Not while America keep interferring with other countries, since they became an Independent in 1776 country have been free of war for only 17 years. 

It is a 'stretch' to blame all wars since 1776 on America. 

Looks like a good movie. I'll check the historical accuracy after I see it.

 

By the way if you are Amazon dude, there are some awesome WW1 memoirs available that are a must read, and free or cheap.

1 minute ago, IAMHERE said:

It is a 'stretch' to blame all wars since 1776 on America. 

Agreed-this one was a 100% European...the USA came in much later.

But it is interesting to see how many English (and to a lesser extent German) aristocrats had wed American heiresses...

 

A very cosmopolitan world in 1914.

I have many memories of my Grandfather who was in the trenches at Aisne and Oise. He lost a lung to mustard gas, and strangely drank tea with salt, not sugar. When we used to visit he would sometimes just stare into the distance. One thing he never did was talk about his experiences.

Such a tragic waste of so many young lives.

2 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

Agreed-this one was a 100% European...the USA came in much later.

But it is interesting to see how many English (and to a lesser extent German) aristocrats had wed American heiresses...

 

A very cosmopolitan world in 1914.

Because the younger sons of aristocrats had small allowances and were looking for rich wives (to keep them in the style to which they were accustomed).  The heiresses were looking for poor aristocrat sons who would certainly be available.

 

A very good example is the father of Winston Churchill.  A younger son of the Duke of Marlborough.

 

 

 

 

While WW1 may well have been "the stupidest thing humanity ever did to itself" the warring parties in Europe rather than negotiating a truce to end it took advantage of US President Woodrow Wilson"s towering ego and convinced him that he alone could save the world by sending 1,000,000 US troops to the war and resoundingly defeat the Hun. Of course England and France took advantage of the German surrender to impose such onerous terms that WW2 was made inevitable. There was surely plenty of stupidity to go around. Yet in the midst of this stupidity there was a beacon of sanity. The French speaking people of Quebec argued that this was a European war and had nothing to do with Canada. Further, why should they send their sons, brothers, uncles and cousins to fight under incompetent British officers many of whom had bought their commissions? Since draft boards were local, exemptions were very freely granted. Now, more than a century after the horror that was WW1, who made the correct decision? Those who blindly followed the "mother country" or those who saw that it had nothing to do with Canada?

young mean lied into dying for more LIES ...

 

does anybody think about the fact that

 

UK, France & the Netherlands had colonies all over the world and ruled them and locals as slaves ???

 

did Germany not want to expand their realm but the 3 powers decided that would be against their interest of the rich kings & queens ?

 

a fake assassination (inside job ?)  blamed on for  starting this war, come on ... 

4 minutes ago, justin case said:

does anybody think about the fact that UK, France & the Netherlands had colonies all over the world and ruled them and locals as slaves ???

I certainly don't but then I've never been fond of fiction

On 1/3/2020 at 6:37 AM, Andrew65 said:

Contrary to what a lot of Brits think, it was never unavoidable or unthinkable for Britain to not get involved in WWI.

It was absolutely imperative that the British Empire entered the war. How else to steal the German colonies?

On 1/3/2020 at 7:19 PM, Barry343 said:

Not while America keep interferring with other countries, since they became an Independent in 1776 country have been free of war for only 17 years. 

Simply protecting the liberty and freedom of their people.

 

That live 1000's of miles away from everyone  else, on the other side of the planet. 

The history of the first half of the 20th century should be well studied by all.  The world power (UK) challenged by a would be usurper (Germany) while the new largest economy in the world (USA) initially waited it out before stepping in to leapfrog them both.  It was inevitable that the US would become the leading power, but it took two wars, and millions of lives lost, before Europe finally realised that.  The parallels with today, where the US and Russia play with their Middle Eastern pawns and try to out weaponize each other while China's economy makes its inexorable rise to the top, are scary at times, and I fear that the US will be just as stubborn as old Europe was - with the same tragic results, when its turn comes to be overtaken.

One interesting fact about WW1 is that Kaiser Wilhelm II was the son of Queen Victoria's eldest child - her daughter Victoria, who married the son of Kaiser Wilhelm I - Crown Prince Frederick.  Had the UK succession laws been the same then as they are now - where the eldest child of the monarch takes the throne, regardless of their sex, he would have been King of England at the time of WW1, inheriting the throne from his mother, who died in 1901.

Using restored footage of original black and white film, lip readers to work out what people were saying, and interviews with the few surviving veterans of WWI, Peter Jackson and his Weta Digital team came up with an amazing documentary just over a year ago.  This is just the trailer, but everyone should watch the full movie if they get the chance:

 

16 hours ago, HannahD said:

While WW1 may well have been "the stupidest thing humanity ever did to itself" the warring parties in Europe rather than negotiating a truce to end it took advantage of US President Woodrow Wilson"s towering ego and convinced him that he alone could save the world by sending 1,000,000 US troops to the war and resoundingly defeat the Hun. Of course England and France took advantage of the German surrender to impose such onerous terms that WW2 was made inevitable. There was surely plenty of stupidity to go around. Yet in the midst of this stupidity there was a beacon of sanity. The French speaking people of Quebec argued that this was a European war and had nothing to do with Canada. Further, why should they send their sons, brothers, uncles and cousins to fight under incompetent British officers many of whom had bought their commissions? Since draft boards were local, exemptions were very freely granted. Now, more than a century after the horror that was WW1, who made the correct decision? Those who blindly followed the "mother country" or those who saw that it had nothing to do with Canada?

And don't forget the Belfour Declaration and how it influenced America's involvement in that war.