Talk:War film/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Das boot?

Das boot is in the "1990s to 2000s" section but it came out in the 80s —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.169.119.58 (talk) 06:22, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

No subject

What about the post-war films about various wars, e.g., "Apocalypse Now"? How are these referred to? ("War films" or something else?) Also, as I know from experience having watched some Russian war films, the U.S. isn't the only country to have made war films--unless "war film" is a technical term I'm not familiar with.

"War film" is just what it sounds like and is not a technical term, by any means. This stub was just a bad cut and paste I did moving it from War Genre Film. I keep having questions directed at me for entries I moved from elsewhere. I suppose the solution is obvious enough: correct the entries immediately, rather than at some unspecified time in the future.  :-) --KQ

some good additions here! Makes me want to warm up my DVD player and watch a couple of them again

The order of the list of films seemed closest to chronological in order of wars, then alphabetical in list of films about each war. "The" was included in the alphabetization, which I didn't change, but perhaps someone else should? Infrogmation

Should we add a section on (the hypothetical) World War III, or keep it to historical wars? --Koyaanis Qatsi

No, but we should add one about Nuclear War films. Even if it never happened. Hires an editor 17:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Is it worth separating British War films (within this page), there are a kind of genre in their own right? Mintguy

How about homefront films set in wartime. Mrs. Minniver, etc. Danny

Expanding Furthur...

I was thinking, why not attempt to create a list of films specific to each War. I have only just started List of World War II films. And being very tired and busy this is as far as i have got. But i believe that this is a good idea.
I would be interested to hear what others think and if so prehaps spawn this idea to encompass all wars. --Spud85 14:17, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Alphabetical listings

If people add films to the lists can they please keep them in alphabetical order (unless there is a consensus to re-arrange them all chronologically). Also as had been mentioned, "The" has been included in alphabetization, although most of these have been changed now. JW

Yugoslav partisan films

You should find a place for Yugoslav partisan films, that were very popular in former Yugoslavia. The most famous are Battle of Neretva (Oscar nominated), Valter defends Sarajevo (very popular in PR of China), Kozara, Raid on Drvar, Otpisani, Sutjeska... Even Hollywood shot a partisan movie -- Bojan  05:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Zulu

I think that Zulu really deserves to be mentioned in the article, set in the Anglo-Zulu War, it surely qualifies as a war film. Mjroots (talk) 21:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

WorldCat Genres

Hello, I'm working with OCLC, and we are algorithmically generating data about different Genres, like notable Authors, Book, Movies, Subjects, Characters and Places. We have determined that this Wikipedia page has a close affintity to our detected Genere of war-films. It might be useful to look at [1] for more information. Thanks. Maximilianklein (talk) 00:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Globalize

I tagged this article as needing a global perspective because it seems to be limited to Hollywood films, without even considering European, Russian, or Asian films in a systematic way (though a few do slip in).

Perhaps the most realistic strategy would be to start a new article and move this to "Hollywood War Movies" or some such.

What do others think? ch (talk) 20:39, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

@ch: Well, it certainly needs some serious referencing. There are some British films mentioned, so it isn't *entirely* American, but the bias is obvious and excessive. There isn't a lot of point in moving the article to another title, as it is not exclusively Hollywood, is rather randomly structured (recentism?) and is dreadfully poorly cited. I suggest that work should proceed to balance the picture, all new material to be fully referenced as it is created. We can then think about what to cite, what to rewrite, and what simply to ditch as WP:OR. Given that we will have to look up everything afresh, all the uncited material must be seen as due for rewriting or replacement. I've already put back the start date from 1915 to 1898 ...
Apart from lack of citations, the real problem with the article is that it consists mainly of thinly veiled lists of films, with precious little in the way of discussion and quotations from learned film critics about the movements, trends, and meanings of war films of different kinds and at different periods. It may be as well to delete the not-quite-lists (done some of that now) and replace them with proper summaries of critical opinion, suitably cited. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to the hard work of Chiswick Chap the article is going in the right direction. I appreciate the trouble that somebody put into adding all those films, but you are right that it is OR and it was also really just a list.
I'd be glad to add a stub-level section on war film in China, Japan, and Korea listing some of the biggies, if you think this would help. Problem is that we wouldn't have sections on other world areas.
In any case, the films do not need to be listed here, since there is a list article List of war films and TV specials, which is limited to films with Wikipedia articles. We could create a navigation template {{War films}}, but it would be huge and would have to be added to every article it contains. The simplest thing is just to make sure that all the films are added to the existing category Category:War films
Cheers ch (talk) 23:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. We might with benefit mention the approach to the genre in Asia, but you're right, a list of biggies is not what is needed, but a brief mention of what the critics think is the region's way of handling the genre, with quotations, paraphrase, and of course refs. With many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:43, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I added a section on Japanese WWII films which mentions the three most important films and how they contrast with Hollywood films, based on the most important scholarship. I'll try to return in a couple of days with material on Chinese and Korean films, perhaps renaming the section to "Asian films" or some such when I actually do it. I will also create stub articles for the Japanese films which are now red linked. ch (talk) 18:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, "Asian" would be better, especially as the "American" section contains British films! Seriously though, thank you very much: and I'll have a go at rewriting the WP:OR of the Western section - the other bits I've done have resulted in replacing virtually everything that was there before, as I discovered it was really pure opinion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Animated war films

Any thoughts on animated war films (i.e. inclusion, exclusion?). There are a few (top of my head, Grave of the Fireflies has often been classified as an (anti-)war film, and Waltz with Bashir walks the line between docudrama and war film) but they to be considerably rarer than others. Perhaps Japanese animation would have the most examples. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Not something I know anything about - could you add a few lines on the subject? Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:35, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I'll see what reliable sources I can find, with a more general discussion of the subject matter. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:24, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  • And... that's a resounding no on general sources. Individual films, of course. This discusses Waltz with Bashir, and Grave of the Fireflies war film references are a dime a dozen. When the Wind Blows is described as a war film here, but not an RS (I've seen it, and I can't say I agree, though the Cold War does play a major role in the film). Blasted limited sources. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
You might try the Susan Napier online article I added to Sources to see if it is useful here. It is drawn from her book Napier, Jolliffe, Susan (2005). Anime from Akira to Howl's Moving Castle: Experiencing Contemporary Japanese Animation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 1403970513. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help) ch (talk) 19:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
It's interesting but doesn't offer an overview of the topic. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  • What about including mentions of individual films in the respective countries' sections? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:46, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
If you know of countries involved, go right ahead, that would be appreciated. If you're asking about whether items should go in separate sections on topics or merged within larger topics, there's a tricky question of overlap - any one film may be a) about a certain war; b) from a certain country; c) in a certain subgenre – and we probably don't want it in all three. Answers on a postcard. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Alright. Later today I'll try and get blurbs for the two I've mentioned above. Shame there doesn't appear to be much scholarship on animated war films as a sub-genre. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:00, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes. I think overlap will be reduced if we have separate Russian and Japanese sections, so I've created these; anime is mentioned only in the Japanese section as yet. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Re: Japan section: Merdeka 17805 and Pride have links to sources which discuss this revisionist trend (moreso the latter). This also lists several further WWII films from the country's cinema.
For anime: should it be limited to actual historical wars, or mix sci-fi (Akira) and fantasy (Howl's)? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:16, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
I think we have to use our skill and judgement to spot where the football should be in the photo. Mixed films should perhaps be included where they are of large importance. I've used that principle in deciding when to include wartime romances and such. There's certainly no easy answer. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:54, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Hmm... alright. So, a bit less stringent than the criteria applied by WP:MILHIST. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess so: this article straddles war and film, so it cannot be entirely MILHIST's territory. We're describing something cultural, not just 'old forgotten far-off things, and battles long ago'. But if you want to be stricter, go ahead. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
American; Animated; First World War; and Propaganda. That's a dog. Where to put it? Maybe a new Animated section. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Looking at it, that's likely our only choice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Done. But perhaps Howl was "a bridge too far". I've commented it out. Overall, the rearrangements and additions seem to have made the article more coherent. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Agree... Pinging Curly Turkey, who's fairly well versed in animation; Curly, do you know of any more animated war films worth mentioning? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure I understand what this is about, but have you seen this freaky thing? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 10:43, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Wow... is Pikadon the title of the short? We're trying to expand the war film (genre) article, but very few sources deal with animated war films. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Yeah, "Pikadon" is a an onamatopoeic name given to the bomb: "Pika" is the "sound" of the flash and "Don" is the sound of the explosion. I came across the short when I was trying to find a source for the term for the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki article when it was at FAC. Haven't found any info on it, but I'm sure there are print sources that talk about it. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 11:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • The article Michihiko Hachiya claims that he and the staff were using the term after the bomb dropped. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Oh, yeah, the term came into use almost immediately, but English-language sources don't seen to have picked up on it. At least, not the online ones. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 12:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
      • Oh, wait, what I meant by "haven't found any info on it", I meant the film. It's easy enough enough to find info on the term "pikadon" in Japanese. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 12:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
OK, done. It seems big enough, tho' I'm always wary of recentism with anything in the last 20 or 30 years! Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Well, it is the 59th highest grossing film ever in Japan, and had a lot of people talking. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 20:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated

I've removed the following as uncited; it seems like someone's opinion. If you have a reliable source for the claim, feel free to use it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:36, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

"While anti-war films may seem necessarily aimed at a specific national audience, many receive worldwide regard. Kan Ichikawa's Fires on the Plain (1959), Jean Renoir's La Grande Illusion, and Kwang-Hyun Park's fantastical Welcome To Dongmakgol (2005) are all internationally acclaimed anti-war films."

XX Century

I do not understand the statement «typically about naval, air, or land battles in the twentieth century». There are a lot of war movies about Ancient wars (Greeks, Romans, ..), about Middle Age, about modern centuries (as Waterloo). I think we should remove that because it is misleading.--Dejudicibus (talk) 09:00, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree with your sentiment, but most critical sources (i.e. academics and professional film critics, as discussed and cited in the body of the article) treat "war film" very narrowly, the genre being not just restricted to 20th century, but actually to the Second World War or even to combat films of that war. For the moment, therefore, the article seems to reflect its sources correctly. However if you have reliable sources which describe other genres (sword-and-sandal springs to mind) as "war films" then those would be useful and I'll be happy to incorporate them. With many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I suspect that this is true only in USA. Professional film critics in Europe consider war films all films about wars, and we had many in Europe before the Second World War. Probably it is a matter of perspective. In USA the most notable past wars are the Indipendence War, the Civil War, the Second World War, and the Korean and Vietnam Wars. Today they consider also the Gulf and Afghanistan wars. For Europe is different. We spent most of centuries in wars, and all movies about those wars are war films for us.--Dejudicibus (talk) 14:38, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm glad to hear this, and hope you will add some of these sources to the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:18, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:War_film/Archive_1&oldid=1144755083"