<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A piece of cinematic history
Review: "Why We Fight" was produced by acclaimed Hollywood producer Frank Capra with the encouragement of Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall. It was originally intended for the indoctrination of U.S. soldiers preparing for deployment and thus must be understood to be a work of propaganda. However, it was such effective propaganda that it was widely shown to U.S. civilians and allies.
Much of the historical interest of "Why We Fight" lies in the fact that it made extensive use of Axis footage to tell its story. Capra effectively turned enemy propaganda on its head, using it to depict the evils of the enemy.
Of course, the films are not particularly reliable history. Capra covered the Tanaka Memorial at length, which was widely believed by Americans of the time to be an authentic description of Japanese plans for world conquest. Most likely the Tanaka Memorial was a Chinese forgery. Likewise, Capra selectively quotes a letter from Japanese Admiral Yamamoto, planner of the Pearl Harbor operation, to reinforce the admiral's image as a villain. It was only in the postwar period that Americans came to understand that Yamamoto was an officer doing his duty in spite of a belief that a war with America was foolish and unwinnable.
The depictions of Russia and China are laughable today, but were spun to meet the need for allied unity at the time. There is no mention of Stalin's brutality, his early collaboration with the Axis, or of the Winter War against Finland; or of China's appalling corruption and military incapacity.
The most historically accurate of the films is undoubtedly "Divide and Conquer," which is a surprisingly good description of the early German conquests. This is the only one of the films that can be wholeheartedly recommended for the history it depicts as well as the history that it is.
In summary, "Why We Fight" is of interest because of what it reveals about U.S. attitudes and perceptions at the time, as evidenced in some of the most skillfully produced American propaganda of the war.
Rating:
Summary: Capra's coverage of the war...badly dated but entertaining!
Review: As a child I thought Frank Capra's highly acclaimed "Why We Fight" (made between 1942 and 1944) documentaries were outstanding and totally authentic. However, as I grew up and read many books about World War Two, I realized just how inaccurate these dated propaganda films are. Even so, I still find watching these documentaries very entertaining, and the amazing footage speaks for itself.
The first film in the series, 1942's "Prelude to War", recounts the Japanese invasion of Manchuria, the Italian conquest of Ethiopia, and Germany's massive preperations for war in Eastern Europe. The footage of goose-stepping German and Italian troops in parades is haunting and unforgettable.
The second film, 1942's "The Nazis Strike", chronicles the Nazis' "peaceful" conquests of the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia, and the invasion and conquest of Poland. It's obvious from the narration that the filmmakers relied on the German reports to recount the brutal campaign for Poland. For example, the narrator claims that the Polish Air Force was wiped out on the ground by the Luftwaffe. The fact is that the only planes destroyed on the ground were for training, and the Polish fighter planes had been well-hidden prior to the German attack. No mention is made at all of the brave counterattacks made by the Polish ground forces, or of the fact that Russia betrayed Poland while the Allies did nothing to help Poland.
The third film, 1943's "Divide and Conquer", focuses on Hitler's "blitzkrieg" which resulted in the capture of Denmark, Holland, Norway, Belgium, and France. This is one of the very best in the "Why We Fight" series, and the music by famed composer Dmitri Tiomkin adds a lot.
The fourth film, 1943's "The Battle of Britain", recounts the amazing courage of the people of Britain, who endured the merciless bombing from Hitler's Luftwaffe and still refused to surrender. The ariel combat footage is awesome!
The fifth film, 1944's "The Battle of Russia", is a very mixed bag. The combat footage of Barbarossa is very impressive, but the false image of Russia's society and military along with the corny narration makes this hard to sit through at times.
The sixth film, 1944's "The Battle of China", has some of the best combat footage in the whole series, much of it being captured from the Japanese. From the brutal slaughter in Nanking to the creation of the Burma Road, this is one of the most important campaigns of World War Two. I especially enjoyed the content on Claire Chennault's Flying Tigers. However, this documentary, like the one on Russia, is not an accurate depiction of the country it portrays, but remember this series is better viewed as propaganda, not history.
The seventh film, 1944's "War Comes to America", is a corny depiction of how and why the United States entered World War Two. Personally, I think this is one of the weakest in the series, but it's at least watchable.
Well, there you have it. Although there are many documentaries that are far more accurate and exciting, the "Why We Fight" documentaries are still very important, both for studying propaganda of World War Two as well as experiencing a different side of the multi-talented Frank Capra.
Rating: 
Summary: A great series!
Review: At what point should you go to war? How far can you dibate an issue before it's too late? The thought process is almost dizzying. This film gives a possible view of what might have happened should action not have been taken. Thank God the English stepped up to the task as quickly as they did. It's nice to believe that there is never a time for war. War is ungly, and heart breaking, but to say there is never a time for war is naive. I highly recommend this as both a learning source and also as something to provoke you into thought.
Rating: 
Summary: "The Battle of China" is a great propaganda.
Review: I was truly shocked by this self-acclaimed Âginformation filmÂh or ÂgdocumentaryÂh. I donÂft know about the European theatres of the World War 2, but, as an amateur researcher on wartime history of Japan, I was totally appalled by ÂgThe Battle of ChinaÂh. The filmÂfs assumption is based on one forged document so-called ÂgTanaka MemorialÂh in which Japanese Prime Minister Tanaka Giichi allegedly announced JapanÂfs evil plan for the conquest of the whole world to the Emperor.
The validity of the document was, however, very scant from the first. The allegation was made on only alleged ÂgtranslationsÂh in English and Chinese. ÂgOriginalÂh Japanese version of the document was never found. If one says that the original was deliberately lost or hidden, the manner with which the document was written was so horribly wrong and inadequate for the letter that was presented to the Emperor anyway, that one would assume very suspicious. Even the prosecutors of the infamous Tokyo Trial, its entire procedure was hideously unfair and unjust, had to admit that the Tanaka Memorial was fake, after all.
Apart from it, the film is full of inaccuracies and pernicious distortions. The film claims that many Chinese civilians are suffered by the Japanese bombings on Shanghai, for instance. However, according to Âgthe China Year Book 1938Âh (edited by prominent China scholar, H.G.W. Woodhead, C.B.E.), it was Chinese planes who bombed international Settlement in Shanghai and killed almost 2000 civilians including foreign nationals in August 1937. The book never mentions wrong-doings in Japanese side. As for the infamous ÂgRape of NankingÂh, the book just states in Event Calendar, December 13, 1937; ÂgNanking occupied by Japanese.Âh
The China Year Book 1938 features the statements on the Sino-Japanese War and the appeal to the League of Nations of General Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party, but he never mentions ÂgmassacreÂh or whatsoever of Nanking or anywhere else. I presume many readers know about the famous Life magazine photograph of a baby crying all alone in a Shanghai station that was bombed by Japanese Navy Air Force. But what unknown to many is that, in fact, the baby was deliberately put there to cry one day after the Shanghai South station was bombed. Furthermore, the station was in fact a Chinese Army communication centre, therefore, actually no civilians were there, let alone a wounded, lonely poor baby.
Any way, the photograph in question was originally cut from a newsreel taken by H.S. Wong, a.k.a. ÂgNewsreel WongÂh. In this ÂgdocumentaryÂh, Frank Capra actually included a part of WongÂfs staging session for the Âgcrying babyÂh. You can see a Chinese man (Wong?) carrying the baby to the ÂgsetÂh platform in the station. This propaganda film may be looked cunning at the first glance, but, if you watch it with very careful eyes, you can see many odd things going on in it. For example, on the wall of the room in which ÂgJapanese high rank officersÂh are ÂgconspiringÂh, there are posters and slogans in Chinese language. And, the soldiers who are executing some Chinese men in civilian clothes are, in fact, the Chinese Nationalist Party Army! And many, many more! It is so obvious and ridiculous, almost laughable. But it is not funny when you realise that so many people in the world believe this is a genuine Âgdocumentary filmÂh.
It is sad fact that there are staggeringly many people who even donÂft know China and Japan is separate two countries. Not to mention to distinguish between the Chinese and the Japanese. I cannot do it, either. Then, who can tell a naked dead body is the Chinese or the Japanese? The most pathetic fact is that there are so many ÂgscholarsÂh who accuse Japanese Army of massacring the Chinese civilian being based on pictures or ÂgnewsreelsÂh of naked dead bodies. Please do not forget that, in China, many Japanese soldiers and civilians were killed and stripped by the Chinese as well. The ÂgmassacredÂh body you are looking at may have been Japanese.
Rating:
Summary: "The Battle of China" is a great propaganda.
Review: I was truly shocked by this self-acclaimed ginformation filmh or gdocumentaryh. I donft know about the European theatres of the World War 2, but, as an amateur researcher on wartime history of Japan, I was totally appalled by gThe Battle of Chinah. The filmfs assumption is based on one forged document so-called gTanaka Memorialh in which Japanese Prime Minister Tanaka Giichi allegedly announced Japanfs evil plan for the conquest of the whole world to the Emperor.
The validity of the document was, however, very scant from the first. The allegation was made on only alleged gtranslationsh in English and Chinese. gOriginalh Japanese version of the document was never found. If one says that the original was deliberately lost or hidden, the manner with which the document was written was so horribly wrong and inadequate for the letter that was presented to the Emperor anyway, that one would assume very suspicious. Even the prosecutors of the infamous Tokyo Trial, its entire procedure was hideously unfair and unjust, had to admit that the Tanaka Memorial was fake, after all.
Apart from it, the film is full of inaccuracies and pernicious distortions. The film claims that many Chinese civilians are suffered by the Japanese bombings on Shanghai, for instance. However, according to gthe China Year Book 1938h (edited by prominent China scholar, H.G.W. Woodhead, C.B.E.), it was Chinese planes who bombed international Settlement in Shanghai and killed almost 2000 civilians including foreign nationals in August 1937. The book never mentions wrong-doings in Japanese side. As for the infamous gRape of Nankingh, the book just states in Event Calendar, December 13, 1937; gNanking occupied by Japanese.h
The China Year Book 1938 features the statements on the Sino-Japanese War and the appeal to the League of Nations of General Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party, but he never mentions gmassacreh or whatsoever of Nanking or anywhere else. I presume many readers know about the famous Life magazine photograph of a baby crying all alone in a Shanghai station that was bombed by Japanese Navy Air Force. But what unknown to many is that, in fact, the baby was deliberately put there to cry one day after the Shanghai South station was bombed. Furthermore, the station was in fact a Chinese Army communication centre, therefore, actually no civilians were there, let alone a wounded, lonely poor baby.
Any way, the photograph in question was originally cut from a newsreel taken by H.S. Wong, a.k.a. gNewsreel Wongh. In this gdocumentaryh, Frank Capra actually included a part of Wongfs staging session for the gcrying babyh. You can see a Chinese man (Wong?) carrying the baby to the gseth platform in the station. This propaganda film may be looked cunning at the first glance, but, if you watch it with very careful eyes, you can see many odd things going on in it. For example, on the wall of the room in which gJapanese high rank officersh are gconspiringh, there are posters and slogans in Chinese language. And, the soldiers who are executing some Chinese men in civilian clothes are, in fact, the Chinese Nationalist Party Army! And many, many more! It is so obvious and ridiculous, almost laughable. But it is not funny when you realise that so many people in the world believe this is a genuine gdocumentary filmh.
It is sad fact that there are staggeringly many people who even donft know China and Japan is separate two countries. Not to mention to distinguish between the Chinese and the Japanese. I cannot do it, either. Then, who can tell a naked dead body is the Chinese or the Japanese? The most pathetic fact is that there are so many gscholarsh who accuse Japanese Army of massacring the Chinese civilian being based on pictures or gnewsreelsh of naked dead bodies. Please do not forget that, in China, many Japanese soldiers and civilians were killed and stripped by the Chinese as well. The gmassacredh body you are looking at may have been Japanese.
Rating: 
Summary: overall good film
Review: this film series was made during the war, so #1 it's fairly factual, but #2 it's politically incorrect....basically this film was made to boost national morale, so it's your typical "US is pure good and Germany/Japan is evil incarnate". overall I'd definitely recommend this film, a must for any WWII fan.
Rating:
Summary: interesting
Review: This four disc set from Frank Capra and the US Armed Forces is an interesting piece of documentary film. The seven films are loaded with historical information as well as propaganda. Some of the things said here, Amazon.com would never let me repeat. But it is a piece of our history--of the war, or our military, of world politics, and of the propoganda machine. It's worth watching, especially with the information we have now. Disc one contains 'Prelude to War' (which covers the initial aggressive acts of Italy, Japan, and the Nazis) and 'The Nazis Strike' (covers the Nazis early conquests); disc two contains 'Divide and Conquer' (mostly the fall of France) and 'The Battle of Britain' (covers the attacks made on England); disc three contains 'The Battle of Russia' (the longest of the seven films, this one runs almost an hour and a half and covers the invasion of Russia and the Nazis retreat--lots of unintentional irony here); and disc four contains 'The Battle of China' (covers the Japanese invasion of China) and 'War Comes to America' (the final documentary just sorts of rehashes the other films and then pumps us up as to why we fought the war and makes excuses for not going into it earlier).
Rating:
Summary: Riveting!
Review: This series is a must see. Whether you are a WWII buff or just interested, this series has some of the most riveting and shocking war footage ever filmed. Think war is glorious? This will change your mind. Some of these images will stay with you the rest of your life
<< 1 >>
|
