Didn't win because of Britain, I mean English soldiers far outclassed the germans even in worse conditions but it was mostly Jewish American influence and the subsequent industry and expendable lives that ended it@@teddypicker8799
Houses now aren’t built so sturdily. I live right now in a house built in 1942 and it’s really solid. It’s been through several earthquakes (I’m in California) and no damage.
The British and French forces were supposed to be continually on the attack and therefore less attention was given to defensive fortifications. If you look at the German trenches at La Linge in Alsace, you will see that they are cut into the bedrock with concrete and steel re-inforcing. But the remains of the French lines are mere shell scrapes. The French never succeeded in taking the German lines there. Not in 4 years of trying.
But the French and British did ultimately win the war. Defensive doctrine doesn’t win wars…..somehow the French completely ignored this obvious fact and developed a defensive doctrine of their own over the next 20 years and we all know what that lead to in 1940.
@@felixjohnsens3201 nope. They were defeated militarily as well as politically. There army was in ruins after the failure of the spring offensive and French and British forces were taking ground in nearly every sector. The German war machine was out of both arms and ammunition. The stab in the back myth is just that. Nazi propaganda nothing more.
@@Daniel-wy2kx bad storyline, unrealistic scenes such as the german pilot "fighting to the death", and i felt the acting wasnt natural it felt very forced
@@David_brent I agree that the story line was an artificial construct. Problem (challenge) for the film makers was to make interesting what was in reality long periods of complete boredom and misery with those brief moments of unmitigated horror. Hard to engage the audience with those realities. I think the recent German “All Quiet on the Western Front” was a better story. That’s why it’s been a classic. In any event, I wouldn’t call “1917” a bad film.
@@reiahnnajackson3353well it's quite logical, the British and French had entire global colonial empires to call upon for resources and troops, while the Germans had just Germany and German soldiers... it was one country vs dozens
Nothing to do with how good they are as engineers but purely the time they had, higher ground, resources, brought in engineers instead of miners. If the British had all these factors in their favour then they would have looked the same.
The Germans also made sure the turns in their trenches were at right angles. Doing so has a surprisingly big effect on explosions. If the turn is rounded, the concussive shock wave will travel much farther than if it’s at a right angle.
I (a German) have a friend who had service time. He once told me: the most important thing in every Situation is - be comfortable. When you are out in the field in a combat Situation and it Rains - then build a shelter first. When battle goes on several hours and you lie out there, cold and wet, You ll be miserable. So you wont last long. Make yourself always as comfortable as possible. He applies this rule in literaly every aspect of life and i think this is a damn good approach to Things.
@@JaphuSeems like the friend is saying most important for personal well-being, based on the context. And just because Germany lost both World Wars doesn't mean that they don't have any valid military doctrine.
@@Japhu being surrounded by enemies never goes well. but germany lost WW1 because the civilians where sick of letting their kids die in the mud. without those trenches, germany most likely would have lost by being overrun by overwhelming forces.
The Germans would also pull back sections of the line to high ground so the new British trenches that were dug would be on water tables and flood often from lack of drainage and runoff from the high ground
Agreed. You can always tell people who've never visited or even looked at a decent map of the Western Front because they seem to have no idea of the topology of it. If you stand at the Thiepval Memorial and look west towards the British lines you are looking down a fairly steep hill.
@@CHAOS1997 but you can’t blow them up You build sets so you have a fully controlled environment to film I’ve been in the industry for 30years hope this helps?
The Germans had whichever ground they wanted and also wanted to consolidate their gains so they didn’t need to advance much further thus their defences could be much stronger as they didn’t expect to move much. The British on the other hand were trying to push the Germans back thus digging deep and defensive trenches is illogical while trying to attack
@@peterrobbins2862No, this is spot on. Germany knew that, after losing momentum, their best option was to sit on high ground and bleed the Western Allied armies dry. Yes, they were crap, but they were crap for a reason.
@@peterrobbins2862no he’s correctly pointing out that in France the Germans switched to a mostly passive defensive doctrine till the war was almost lost when they tried attacking again in 1918.
Germany learned early in the war what happens when you try to take fortified positions armed with machine guns. So when they inevitably started running dry on raw man power they dug in hoping the allies would throw them selves on harden defences just like they did in Belgium an on the French border.
Also, the tragic part. Is the entire story of 1917 is that it was for nothin .. As if you look carefully, you realize this all took place before Passenndale...a battle found in mud so deep..horses and men disappeared...making the mud in the movie look like a puddle. Trenches became rivers.
Also keep in mind the trenches were dug primarily in France and Belgium. The british and French were primarily trying to be the ones doing the attacking to try and dislodge the Germans from their home and allied soil. Therefore didn’t place as much emphasis on making their trenches as defensible as the Germans did.
Some Brits capturing a German trench were espeically annoyed to find bags that the cement to line the trenches bore the "Blue Circle" logo - a British company. We had sold them the cement before the war began, but it still rankled.
As others have said, the reason British and French trenches were shallower and not as heavily defended was that they were constantly on the offensive, they were trying to focus on taking ground and slowly creeping thier front line forward to expell the Germans from allied soil The Germans by comparison were more focused on defending thier positions and keeping the allied land they captured hence they dug in deeper
One of the best movies I've seen. The cinematography, the acting, the scenes, and the horrors of war. Not to mention the incredible music to portray emotion. This was a great movie.
Definently one of the best theatre experiences I had and it was the last movie I watched before Covid hit too. Wouldn't go back to a theatre for a couple years afterwards
There were a number of reasons why the trenches were designed so differently. For example, the fact that the Germans usually had higher ground, so their trenches were easier to drain. But the most tragic aspect was, that the Brit command assumed that if their trenches were in any way comfortable and safe,😊 the Tommies would be less willing to go over the top when commanded. This was a mind-bogglingly calous and inhumane disregard for the welfare of their troops that ultimately only increased their casualty rates due to disease. There is an old saying that the WW1 Brit army was composed of lions led by donkeys. It seems so.
That saying was made up decades later with political motivation - it's revisionist and didn't represent what was actually going on at the time. Casualties were higher amongst British Officers than men. The poppy fund was originally called the Haig fund and set up by Haig post war to give jobs and income to the wounded soldiers. Lloyd George (british pm) who hated haig for his popularity (and later after his death smeared him) tried to replace haig but was unable to because of his popularity with his troops. Mutiny amongst British troops was far far less than in other armies - the austria hungarian and italian armies particularly.
when looking at how colonialist/imperialist countries treat those people they subjegate or try to, it isn’t that surprising how they mistreat their soldiers, veterans tbh
@@H8M0ndays Yeah, but there wasn't as much of a reason to make amazing trenches when you are trying to be on the offensive constantly. German trenches on the Eastern front were notoriously underdeveloped and terrible, because the Germans were moving so much that they never had a reason to really dig in. There isn't really a point in talking around it though, British trenches were far less developed because of their strategy.
@@badfish5895 the Germans aren't good at war of attrition, prolonged wars or mass production so they lost. Also they don't have as many allies and is geographically at a disadvantage
@@badfish5895 Uhh, yeah... that tends to happen when the whole Zionist-controlled world comes down on you with a multinational army of mindless cannon fodder. No other army in the world could hold out as long as they did.
@@randomstories7609 Lol how are you going to say "their not good at it" rather then they simply don't have the resources compared to other nations many times larger than theirs. Your talking about the country the size of Texas more than held its weight in WW1 and actually was kicking everyone's ass in WW2 for years.
It depended on the areas, yes many German trenches were fortified with concrete, but many werent. That was typically after they changed their defenses to fit their elastic defenses doctrine. The movie did a pretty good job showing the differences though.
One reason why the British trenches were shallow was because the Germans were on higher ground than the Brits. The Brits had MUCH more trouble keeping water out of the trenches -- because the water table in their sectors was much higher.
Also the germans had installed power into their trenches, and had a circuit system that would allow them to progressively cut the power and back up if ever they were compromised l
If anyone ever finds themselves in Belgium I highly recommend the war museum in Ypres, it has a trench section in the basement where you can walk around in a mockup of a trench "building" with barracks, command and control rooms etc it's really well done.
They were winning massively, and had begun to win massively in 1917 until the juice in Germany stabbed the Germans in the back and surrendered their country to an unreasonable set of demands known as the treaty of Versailles. They had to get the Americans involved.
Imperial Germany cared more for her soldiers. German WWI pilots were also the first to received standard issued parachutes, while the Brits considered this detrimental to morale... In part this was due to a shorter supply of manpower, but also reflective of grander social developments. Germany had the most advanced social security legislation to fight off Europe's greatest socialist movement that nevertheless gained steam and achieved even more concessions in WWI.
They also occupied the high ground meaning that draining out the rain was easy and made it so they could more easily construct defenses while the Allie’s occupied the lowlands that were marshier and all the rain pooled in their trenches.
@@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballzI mean he’s right. The fundamentals of warfare hasn’t changed. Basically you either fight through your enemy or you outflank them from your trenches.
@@backwoodscharlie8483 yes check out the details. An artilery barrage for a week loud enough to be heard in London with the expectation that it would kill everyone in the defending lines - which turned out not to be true (although pretty credible) leading to large losses on the first day (although not KIA, 60,000 casualties). Changed tactics and adapted - creeping barrages, air spotting. By the following May all objectives of the Somme offensive had been completed successfully.
I honestly think germany lost both wars partially due to their spending habits. Theyd invest in the top of the line equipment, vehicles, and over engineered weapons. And then as the wars dragged on theyd lose money, production power, manpower, and it wouldn't be sustainable. Whereas the Allies would get the best bang for their buck, with easy manufacturing (think M3 greasegun and M4 Sherman for example) so theyd have insane production power.
I genuinely believe one of the biggest factors of Germany losing WWII was nearing the end of the war when Hitler began panicking and basically trying to kill as many jews as possible, he could’ve easily made the war last longer if he wanted, by at least 3-4 months, maybe even nearing a year (depending how offensive the Allies decided to be) but instead he started allocating a ton of funds into killing Jews, inevitably just surrendering because it was clear they’d lose
@@garyslayton8340 i disagree....lots of crime went through the roof when soldiers arrived home, theres nothing positive gained from ww1....it was a bloodbath
British trenches where supposed to be temporary as they where supposed to move with attacks while German ones where designed to hold the line on the defence so we’re stronger
Talk about incentive to fight. “Get across that field and you’ll have dry feet and cots to sleep on. Let’s go take their trench and turn it around on em eh boys”. It would go a lot further than “our old stuffy leaders 20 miles back that way in warm comfy French chateaus want us to claim some ground so they can gloat at the next officers club meeting”. 😏
Important to mention the allies were the one trying to push the Germans back into Germany. The Germans were happy to defend the land they had conquered already, hence better trenches
The German tranches were also on high ground. So when it rained there was no water run off. It went down hill until the British trenches. So no matter how deep they dug in, it was wet and marshy.
The Germans picked their places to build trenches, in many places they actually retreated to ensure they had the high ground, the British often found themselves several feet lower and when they dug down hit the water table and couldn’t go much deeper without constantly having to pump out the water
The fact he is so good without having no where near toxic or clawz aim in hitscan and tracking speaks volumes about his gamesense and thinking. If the aim was equal they wouldn't be able to do anything. Agent just needs to train aim. If he had clawz rail with his prediction the opponent would not be able to do anything.
German doctrine after 1914 held that the forward trench line WAS the new German border, and until the next major offensive was ordered, that position was to be held, no forwards, no backwards. The Entente forces attempted to be more fluid, hoping that this week's forward line would be next week's rear garrison. As we all know, it didn't often play out that way.
Due to the military situation the French and British needed a more offensive doctrine while the Germans needed defensive in order to stabilize the other fronts
The narrator forgot to mention that the Germans retreated to the high ground and dug in for months before the British arrived for the battle. They were waiting for the British to arrive. They also nicked most of the available materials available. Most of the British trenches were constructed under fire and not intended to be home from home for the duration of the war.
I think the biggest reason for the difference was the difference in mentality at the high command, to the British and especially the French, they thought there was no point to fortify your current position when they were surely going to advance and take over the German lines, whereas the Germans were trying to hold on to every inch they had taken with their first big offensive. So to the French and British, if they were to put a bunch of effort into improving their current trenches, it was almost an admission of defeat, that they were admitting they couldn't dislodge the Germans.
When the Germans retreated after realizing they couldn’t take Paris they stopped on defensive high ground. The Allies just got whatever and it was low and swampy. The Allies also didn’t want the troops to be comfortable, they wanted them to attack.
Idk about the Germans "knowing this would be a long and bloody stalemate." The German attack plans were always organized as if the war would last less than a year. The German trenches were still crappy, but they had more time than the Allied Powers to construct and fortify their trenches. The English were literally scrambling to dig trenches in Belgium and responding to every attack plan they had knowledge of. The attacker in this scenario was always going to have the advantage, and the Germans knew that.
Really good and honest review. The SRT was my camera of choice when I got into shooting film last year, since then I've gotten another and have been loving using both of them. It's a simple, affordable workhorse that produces some really good results. Regarding the string linkage I am a little concerned about it, but from what I can tell it's pretty uncommon to have problems with it. The string I believe is silk which is a pretty durable material but who knows maybe one day it'll turn out to be like the X-700 capacitors where they all start going bad around the same time. But the SRT series have a great reputation for reliability and durability so I wouldn't let that concern dissuade anyone from getting one.
In fact, the most key difference was the longer rotation of German soldiers. Units that stayed longer on the front had more time and opportunity to prepare.
The Germans, like most states in WW1, definitely did not initially expect a long and bloody war. In fact, their ambitious schlieffen plan pretty much anticipated the complete opposite, planning for a quick, decisive victory. Though Germany’s recklessness and its burden in coping with a two front war had other plans, and the realities of improvisational trench warfare became realized between both the Central and Allied powers.
Acutally not really reality actually. Germany went to war because Russia was mobilising in support of Serbia after the Austria-Hungarian invasion. After the Franco-Prussian war the prevailing belief was that whichever army got into the field quickest would likely win. Germany begged the British to interced with the Russians and stop them mobilising but they didn't. France and Belgium were allied with Russia. Therefore Germany invaded France through Belgium with the intention to knock France out of the war and therefore avoid a two front war - in the end improvising a fixed defensive line to essentially achieve the same, whilst defeating Russia in the east (which they succeded in doing).
The Germans also had time to prepare for a defensive war, the aim being to hold ground. Whilst the British were on the offensive, with the aim of taking ground, therefore their trenches were ‘temporary’.
Nearly true: in 1917 the germans fall back on a well prepared line called siegfriedlinie to shorten the front. So, the germans had trenches, that were built in 5 month by workers meanwhile the brits has to built trenches by themselves in shorter time. Sad, you do not know
That Gemans also had modern type gas masks with activated charcoal filters. Not sure what the British used, but the French used rags that they would pee on then place over their mouths and secure with a string tied around the back of the head. True story.
You forgot to mention the British brought in miners to build their trenches while the Germans brought in Civil Engineers
😂😂😂😂
And yet to this day minors aren't allowed in bars
@@jmorton3462 but they are allowed in my basement
And the Germans still lost
@JDnFL yep that's war for you when you thought you were winning the next day you wake up you are suddenly losing
The germans also had the highground
And yet they still lost L Germany
@@lemarjames9546nobody lost ww1
Was just going to mention that. The English, instead of pulling back to higher ground, they dug in located in a bog. Bloody idiots.
Then Germany had a training montage for ww2 and ended up losing again
@@David_brentevery body lost WW1.
The Germans also had higher ground so the drainage problems weren't as bad.
Not only drainage, but sewage as well... 🤢
you drain sewage bozo@@AlphaChinoz
Still lost tho init rule britannia
Because they chose a better spot, that's about it
Didn't win because of Britain, I mean English soldiers far outclassed the germans even in worse conditions but it was mostly Jewish American influence and the subsequent industry and expendable lives that ended it@@teddypicker8799
sounds like a German ww1 trench is more comfortable than my flat😂😂
Considering London and the UKs extortionist rates in general, yeah, maybe. Although im sure your flat is nice.
Oh trust me, if you saw the way German houses are built. This short would make perfect sense 😂 American houses are made of paper
@@Sebastianator01 you forgot plastic too. And they cost 400,000$😂
Houses now aren’t built so sturdily. I live right now in a house built in 1942 and it’s really solid. It’s been through several earthquakes (I’m in California) and no damage.
This is a severely underrated comment. 😂
The one-shot uncut opening scene was an incredible piece of work.
I still don't know how they did that😮😮😮
I believe the entire film is made to look like it is one shot
@@Thebes_S
Correct.
It was designed to resemble one unbroken shot. However, there are 34 camera cuts that are cleverly masked throughout the movie.
Meh.
Queue in the One Punch Man theme. 😂
The British and French forces were supposed to be continually on the attack and therefore less attention was given to defensive fortifications. If you look at the German trenches at La Linge in Alsace, you will see that they are cut into the bedrock with concrete and steel re-inforcing. But the remains of the French lines are mere shell scrapes. The French never succeeded in taking the German lines there. Not in 4 years of trying.
But the French and British did ultimately win the war. Defensive doctrine doesn’t win wars…..somehow the French completely ignored this obvious fact and developed a defensive doctrine of their own over the next 20 years and we all know what that lead to in 1940.
@@robertofulton Germany didn´t really lose. They had a revolution, just like the Russians.
@@felixjohnsens3201Which happened after the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month
@@felixjohnsens3201 nope. They were defeated militarily as well as politically. There army was in ruins after the failure of the spring offensive and French and British forces were taking ground in nearly every sector. The German war machine was out of both arms and ammunition.
The stab in the back myth is just that. Nazi propaganda nothing more.
@@billygoatgruff3536 Yes, because Russia lost.
Great movie if you haven’t watched it, you should.
Last movie I saw in theaters before the pandemic, it was definitely one of the best WW1 movies.
I watched it in cinema...terrible movie
@@David_brentwhat makes you say that
@@Daniel-wy2kx bad storyline, unrealistic scenes such as the german pilot "fighting to the death", and i felt the acting wasnt natural it felt very forced
@@David_brent I agree that the story line was an artificial construct. Problem (challenge) for the film makers was to make interesting what was in reality long periods of complete boredom and misery with those brief moments of unmitigated horror. Hard to engage the audience with those realities.
I think the recent German “All Quiet on the Western Front” was a better story. That’s why it’s been a classic.
In any event, I wouldn’t call “1917” a bad film.
To quote Vince from Shamwow: “You know Germans make good stuff!”
But they still lost
@@reiahnnajackson3353well it's quite logical, the British and French had entire global colonial empires to call upon for resources and troops, while the Germans had just Germany and German soldiers... it was one country vs dozens
Nothing to do with how good they are as engineers but purely the time they had, higher ground, resources, brought in engineers instead of miners. If the British had all these factors in their favour then they would have looked the same.
GERMAN TECHNOLOGY IS THE WORLD FINEST
@@reiahnnajackson3353 Imagine you against two Big guy and your friend betraying you
The Germans also made sure the turns in their trenches were at right angles.
Doing so has a surprisingly big effect on explosions. If the turn is rounded, the concussive shock wave will travel much farther than if it’s at a right angle.
I (a German) have a friend who had service time. He once told me: the most important thing in every Situation is - be comfortable. When you are out in the field in a combat Situation and it Rains - then build a shelter first. When battle goes on several hours and you lie out there, cold and wet, You ll be miserable. So you wont last long.
Make yourself always as comfortable as possible.
He applies this rule in literaly every aspect of life and i think this is a damn good approach to Things.
Most important for what? Apparently it didn’t make a huge difference as we Germans still lost the war horribly.
@@Japhu tbf we did quite well, didnt we🫣😅?
That is absolutely correct.
@@JaphuSeems like the friend is saying most important for personal well-being, based on the context. And just because Germany lost both World Wars doesn't mean that they don't have any valid military doctrine.
@@Japhu being surrounded by enemies never goes well. but germany lost WW1 because the civilians where sick of letting their kids die in the mud. without those trenches, germany most likely would have lost by being overrun by overwhelming forces.
The Germans would also pull back sections of the line to high ground so the new British trenches that were dug would be on water tables and flood often from lack of drainage and runoff from the high ground
Agreed. You can always tell people who've never visited or even looked at a decent map of the Western Front because they seem to have no idea of the topology of it.
If you stand at the Thiepval Memorial and look west towards the British lines you are looking down a fairly steep hill.
They also had to HOLD a line. The british had to try and constantly build forward
Just straight up bollocks.
Yeah, you speaking total crap. Please, educate yourself.
The war was a stalemate until us troops arrived, everybody was just holding their line, no one was substantially pushing the Front in any direction
@@tunichtgut02that’s also not true. If both sides didn’t try to constantly push forward the death count wouldn’t be as high.
@@imGeistevereint i meant that no one was pushing the Frontline substantially, not that they didnt try it
Electricity and phone lines in the trenches on 1917 would be like having super high speed wifi today.
Fr
Phone lines were common - both armies had them to cooridnate results.
Field telephones were a thing seveal decades before WWI, and still see limited use today.
Not field telephones, they had phonelines that connected to the globally connected network @@RevOwOlutionary
I was a set builder at Shepperton Studios on the film
But I heard there's no need to build sets,since there exists historically-accurate reenactment trenches in France and Britain.
@@CHAOS1997 but you can’t blow them up
You build sets so you have a fully controlled environment to film I’ve been in the industry for 30years hope this helps?
AWESOME!
@@kevinswabeyWhat was it like working on the film
@@OscarOSullivan just another film I was based in the workshop it’s not as exciting as people would like to think it’s a job
The Germans had whichever ground they wanted and also wanted to consolidate their gains so they didn’t need to advance much further thus their defences could be much stronger as they didn’t expect to move much. The British on the other hand were trying to push the Germans back thus digging deep and defensive trenches is illogical while trying to attack
Nah you are falsely assuming that the Germans had given up
The simple fact was that the British trenches were crap
@@peterrobbins2862No, this is spot on. Germany knew that, after losing momentum, their best option was to sit on high ground and bleed the Western Allied armies dry.
Yes, they were crap, but they were crap for a reason.
100%
@@peterrobbins2862no he’s correctly pointing out that in France the Germans switched to a mostly passive defensive doctrine till the war was almost lost when they tried attacking again in 1918.
@@robertofulton Maybe because the Germans had also to fight in the east and had simply not enough Soldiers to make offensives on both fronts.
Germans also had drainage, and made square corners to minimize blast damage to the other sections
The British lines were zig-zagged to reduce to absorb blast damage
@@dmvzfdac the brits weren’t shown in All Quiet on the Western Front
drainage Eli
Germany learned early in the war what happens when you try to take fortified positions armed with machine guns. So when they inevitably started running dry on raw man power they dug in hoping the allies would throw them selves on harden defences just like they did in Belgium an on the French border.
And ultimately they lost. Defensive doctrine does not win wars. Never had never will.
@@robertofulton Oh it does. Until the insidious banker cabal calls up more and more nations lmao
@@robertofulton but an offensive one sometimes costs more than you are willing to pay
@@robertofultonThey didn't lose, they sought an end to the war to save lives, because the front line hadn't moved in years.
GERMAN TECHNOLOGY IS THE WORLD FINEST
Also, the tragic part. Is the entire story of 1917 is that it was for nothin ..
As if you look carefully, you realize this all took place before Passenndale...a battle found in mud so deep..horses and men disappeared...making the mud in the movie look like a puddle.
Trenches became rivers.
That rat setting off the mine 😂 fav scene
Great film. Gripping and poignant
Stunning film, loved the night part in the ruins when the light hits....brilliant
The sound in the cinema when the bobby trap went off was deafening
@@salfordnick5336 my favourite scene is the striking visual during the trench charge at the end with the white lime powder
Also keep in mind the trenches were dug primarily in France and Belgium. The british and French were primarily trying to be the ones doing the attacking to try and dislodge the Germans from their home and allied soil. Therefore didn’t place as much emphasis on making their trenches as defensible as the Germans did.
Wrong
Not fought on German territory
@@tomhenry897 sorry mate whats wrong about this?
Makes you want to go live in a german trench given the fact how expensive rent is these days.
Meanwhile the trenches in All Quiet On The Westernfront:
the frenchies had kitchen and music...
damn, even ww1 german trenches sound more comfortable and livable than NYC apartments
This movies attention to detail and historical accuracy put it in documentary category for me as a WW1 history buff.
Some Brits capturing a German trench were espeically annoyed to find bags that the cement to line the trenches bore the "Blue Circle" logo - a British company. We had sold them the cement before the war began, but it still rankled.
Similarly German grenades used a patented British fuse, after the war they paid the company that owned the patent....
@@tomriley5790Where can i read more about this?
As others have said, the reason British and French trenches were shallower and not as heavily defended was that they were constantly on the offensive, they were trying to focus on taking ground and slowly creeping thier front line forward to expell the Germans from allied soil
The Germans by comparison were more focused on defending thier positions and keeping the allied land they captured hence they dug in deeper
One of the best movies I've seen. The cinematography, the acting, the scenes, and the horrors of war. Not to mention the incredible music to portray emotion. This was a great movie.
The acting is average at best, the story isn't remotely believable and the cinematography is the only good thing about it.
This is a movie that's best seen on the Big Screen. If they ever have a theater re-release, I'm going.
Definently one of the best theatre experiences I had and it was the last movie I watched before Covid hit too. Wouldn't go back to a theatre for a couple years afterwards
One more - german trench have vertical or angled shape for survivability against artillery. And years later, it evolved into V-hull of MRAP.
both are still better than a 3k/month studio appartment in nyc
There were a number of reasons why the trenches were designed so differently. For example, the fact that the Germans usually had higher ground, so their trenches were easier to drain.
But the most tragic aspect was, that the Brit command assumed that if their trenches were in any way comfortable and safe,😊 the Tommies would be less willing to go over the top when commanded. This was a mind-bogglingly calous and inhumane disregard for the welfare of their troops that ultimately only increased their casualty rates due to disease.
There is an old saying that the WW1 Brit army was composed of lions led by donkeys. It seems so.
That saying was made up decades later with political motivation - it's revisionist and didn't represent what was actually going on at the time. Casualties were higher amongst British Officers than men. The poppy fund was originally called the Haig fund and set up by Haig post war to give jobs and income to the wounded soldiers. Lloyd George (british pm) who hated haig for his popularity (and later after his death smeared him) tried to replace haig but was unable to because of his popularity with his troops. Mutiny amongst British troops was far far less than in other armies - the austria hungarian and italian armies particularly.
when looking at how colonialist/imperialist countries treat those people they subjegate or try to, it isn’t that surprising how they mistreat their soldiers, veterans tbh
British trenches weren't poorly built they're meant to be temporary and throwaway as they're an "assault trench"
seems more like it
So in other words. They were poorly built compared to German trenches as movie depicts here.
No use in having an assault trench if you never actually move forward
@@H8M0ndays Yeah, but there wasn't as much of a reason to make amazing trenches when you are trying to be on the offensive constantly.
German trenches on the Eastern front were notoriously underdeveloped and terrible, because the Germans were moving so much that they never had a reason to really dig in.
There isn't really a point in talking around it though, British trenches were far less developed because of their strategy.
Only thing that got me about this film is how clean there uniforms were throughout the whole film
This is so beautiful!
Well really its just because the Germans were on the defense most of the war. They never expected a long war either though.
Not true at all
You know it’s good quality when is Made in Germany
And they lost 2 times
@@badfish5895 the Germans aren't good at war of attrition, prolonged wars or mass production so they lost. Also they don't have as many allies and is geographically at a disadvantage
@@badfish5895go look at how German houses are built vs American homes. They lost but MAN are they incredible builders
@@badfish5895 Uhh, yeah... that tends to happen when the whole Zionist-controlled world comes down on you with a multinational army of mindless cannon fodder. No other army in the world could hold out as long as they did.
@@randomstories7609 Lol how are you going to say "their not good at it" rather then they simply don't have the resources compared to other nations many times larger than theirs. Your talking about the country the size of Texas more than held its weight in WW1 and actually was kicking everyone's ass in WW2 for years.
It depended on the areas, yes many German trenches were fortified with concrete, but many werent. That was typically after they changed their defenses to fit their elastic defenses doctrine.
The movie did a pretty good job showing the differences though.
One reason why the British trenches were shallow was because the Germans were on higher ground than the Brits. The Brits had MUCH more trouble keeping water out of the trenches -- because the water table in their sectors was much higher.
If you got time then make your posisjon as comfy as possible
Ahhh yes all the ikea furniture you can eat
“Deep, dry and well fortified”
Bro dropped the hardest verse and thought we wouldn’t be noticing
Your confidence is contagious.
This was a good breakdown and informative
'this was not a mistake by the filmmakers'
Yeah, no shit. British kids learn about this in school at around 12 years old. It's not that niche.
Well I’m glad your ignorant self knows this! Not all of us over the world do punk.
Buddy thinks everyone went to school and is British
“Bri” “ish kIdS lEaRnEd AbOuT tHiS”
@markmattson2138 is that a code or something?
Yeah because anyone not British inherits the information through their Anglo cousins
Those underground bunkers really helped at Somme
Also the germans had installed power into their trenches, and had a circuit system that would allow them to progressively cut the power and back up if ever they were compromised l
Haven't watched this in a while,I need to dig it out
The Germans were fighting on the defensive the British weren’t planning to stay in their trenches.
If anyone ever finds themselves in Belgium I highly recommend the war museum in Ypres, it has a trench section in the basement where you can walk around in a mockup of a trench "building" with barracks, command and control rooms etc it's really well done.
Good facts 👍 I subscribed
Germans had enough time to built them , same russia in Ukraine they have strong bunkers
There built since 2014...
I think there's a simpler explanation. The Germans are efficient perfectionists, the British are a bit more "as I rove out."
Sharp angles in the layout of the trenches also limited the blast effect range of any ordinance exploding in the trench
GREAT FILM!
Germany: (Invests heavy on their trenches making them "almost" Impossible to cross)
Also Germany: *"loses to British"*
Running out of money, having a revolution, and seeing your lines be pumped full of thousands of fresh Americans will do that to you
All the brilliance in the world cannot prevail against mass production
They fought a 4v1
They were winning massively, and had begun to win massively in 1917 until the juice in Germany stabbed the Germans in the back and surrendered their country to an unreasonable set of demands known as the treaty of Versailles. They had to get the Americans involved.
Almost as if they knew they would go to war before everyone else 😂
Lol, that makes zero sense 🤣
??? What is blud saying
What the fuck are you on about? This is WW1 not WW2...
Lmao there’s so many wrong w this comment.
The grrmans also were the ones whobsimpky had to defend, the allies had to regain territory
Imperial Germany cared more for her soldiers. German WWI pilots were also the first to received standard issued parachutes, while the Brits considered this detrimental to morale...
In part this was due to a shorter supply of manpower, but also reflective of grander social developments. Germany had the most advanced social security legislation to fight off Europe's greatest socialist movement that nevertheless gained steam and achieved even more concessions in WWI.
British just wanted to feel home in the trenches
Fantastic movie; however, one guy has P08 gear while the other has P14? Why aren't the gasmasks at the ready? 97%
The one soldier with P08 gear is the longer-serving of the duo, hence the older stuff
They also occupied the high ground meaning that draining out the rain was easy and made it so they could more easily construct defenses while the Allie’s occupied the lowlands that were marshier and all the rain pooled in their trenches.
Modern war and WW1 are so identical, same trenches, same underground systems, same main role of artillery
that is not modern
Neither russia ot ukraine have modern millitarys
Same amount of air support, same amount of mobile firepower, same level of communication...... 🙄
@@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballz
Signifigetly more of all of those things
Infact more of those than in most modern wars
@@garyslayton8340 I'm aware. Im mocking the guy who thinks warfare hasnt changed on 100 years.
@@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballzI mean he’s right. The fundamentals of warfare hasn’t changed. Basically you either fight through your enemy or you outflank them from your trenches.
They made a defensive line and retreated to it multiple times during the war, whereas the British were advancing then entrenching.
The British not caring about their soldiers? No surprise there
I agree, just check out the details of the battle of the Somme. Approx 57,000 kia charging german machine guns.
@KingOfTheWorld163 Being on the offensive means it's okay to slaughter that many people running down machine gun fire? Stupid tactics.
@@backwoodscharlie8483 yes check out the details. An artilery barrage for a week loud enough to be heard in London with the expectation that it would kill everyone in the defending lines - which turned out not to be true (although pretty credible) leading to large losses on the first day (although not KIA, 60,000 casualties). Changed tactics and adapted - creeping barrages, air spotting. By the following May all objectives of the Somme offensive had been completed successfully.
I honestly think germany lost both wars partially due to their spending habits. Theyd invest in the top of the line equipment, vehicles, and over engineered weapons. And then as the wars dragged on theyd lose money, production power, manpower, and it wouldn't be sustainable. Whereas the Allies would get the best bang for their buck, with easy manufacturing (think M3 greasegun and M4 Sherman for example) so theyd have insane production power.
Na i dont believe anyone lost ww1..
All side lost at the end of it...what was gained?
@@David_brent
Lots
It was just eventully lost by the time ww2 rolled around
I genuinely believe one of the biggest factors of Germany losing WWII was nearing the end of the war when Hitler began panicking and basically trying to kill as many jews as possible, he could’ve easily made the war last longer if he wanted, by at least 3-4 months, maybe even nearing a year (depending how offensive the Allies decided to be) but instead he started allocating a ton of funds into killing Jews, inevitably just surrendering because it was clear they’d lose
You really don't know much about WW1 do you
@@garyslayton8340 i disagree....lots of crime went through the roof when soldiers arrived home, theres nothing positive gained from ww1....it was a bloodbath
They didn't know it would be a long and bloody stalemate but they realized that it would be
British trenches where supposed to be temporary as they where supposed to move with attacks while German ones where designed to hold the line on the defence so we’re stronger
Talk about incentive to fight. “Get across that field and you’ll have dry feet and cots to sleep on. Let’s go take their trench and turn it around on em eh boys”. It would go a lot further than “our old stuffy leaders 20 miles back that way in warm comfy French chateaus want us to claim some ground so they can gloat at the next officers club meeting”. 😏
Didn't think of it that way 😂😂
Important to mention the allies were the one trying to push the Germans back into Germany. The Germans were happy to defend the land they had conquered already, hence better trenches
The German trenches even had wifi and Foxtel
The German tranches were also on high ground. So when it rained there was no water run off. It went down hill until the British trenches.
So no matter how deep they dug in, it was wet and marshy.
The Germans picked their places to build trenches, in many places they actually retreated to ensure they had the high ground, the British often found themselves several feet lower and when they dug down hit the water table and couldn’t go much deeper without constantly having to pump out the water
This wasnt always the case by 1918 rapid advances meant that both sides were not able to keep up and they got much much worse
The fact he is so good without having no where near toxic or clawz aim in hitscan and tracking speaks volumes about his gamesense and thinking. If the aim was equal they wouldn't be able to do anything. Agent just needs to train aim. If he had clawz rail with his prediction the opponent would not be able to do anything.
German doctrine after 1914 held that the forward trench line WAS the new German border, and until the next major offensive was ordered, that position was to be held, no forwards, no backwards. The Entente forces attempted to be more fluid, hoping that this week's forward line would be next week's rear garrison. As we all know, it didn't often play out that way.
All that time on the trenches really paid off for the Germans
Due to the military situation the French and British needed a more offensive doctrine while the Germans needed defensive in order to stabilize the other fronts
The British Empire took about 950 thousand fatal casualties and won the war; Austria-Hungary and Germany took about 2.8 million and lost.
Never learned about the German trenches, too cool
I saw that movie and own it too, I never really appreciated the differences pointed out here, thankyou for doing so!
image a streetfight is going to break out and the other one start pulling out telefone lines saying: this is gonna be long war
The narrator forgot to mention that the Germans retreated to the high ground and dug in for months before the British arrived for the battle. They were waiting for the British to arrive. They also nicked most of the available materials available. Most of the British trenches were constructed under fire and not intended to be home from home for the duration of the war.
"FREDERICK! ZE BUNKER IS MOVING!
FREDRICK! ZE BUNKER IS SHOOTING!"
I think the biggest reason for the difference was the difference in mentality at the high command, to the British and especially the French, they thought there was no point to fortify your current position when they were surely going to advance and take over the German lines, whereas the Germans were trying to hold on to every inch they had taken with their first big offensive. So to the French and British, if they were to put a bunch of effort into improving their current trenches, it was almost an admission of defeat, that they were admitting they couldn't dislodge the Germans.
When the Germans retreated after realizing they couldn’t take Paris they stopped on defensive high ground. The Allies just got whatever and it was low and swampy. The Allies also didn’t want the troops to be comfortable, they wanted them to attack.
It depends on your perspective
I think the Germans built for defense and the British built for a forward moving offense
Hard work saves blood, blood saves lives. And common sense saves both.”
Erwin Rommel
Well the British also wanted their trenches to be so uncomfortable it caused their troops to want to take the German ones
Crazy thing is that this whole movie was made in one shot. That is incredible.
Idk about the Germans "knowing this would be a long and bloody stalemate." The German attack plans were always organized as if the war would last less than a year. The German trenches were still crappy, but they had more time than the Allied Powers to construct and fortify their trenches. The English were literally scrambling to dig trenches in Belgium and responding to every attack plan they had knowledge of. The attacker in this scenario was always going to have the advantage, and the Germans knew that.
Really good and honest review. The SRT was my camera of choice when I got into shooting film last year, since then I've gotten another and have been loving using both of them. It's a simple, affordable workhorse that produces some really good results. Regarding the string linkage I am a little concerned about it, but from what I can tell it's pretty uncommon to have problems with it. The string I believe is silk which is a pretty durable material but who knows maybe one day it'll turn out to be like the X-700 capacitors where they all start going bad around the same time. But the SRT series have a great reputation for reliability and durability so I wouldn't let that concern dissuade anyone from getting one.
In fact, the most key difference was the longer rotation of German soldiers. Units that stayed longer on the front had more time and opportunity to prepare.
The Germans also had really cool trench digging machines on wheels.
The Germans, like most states in WW1, definitely did not initially expect a long and bloody war. In fact, their ambitious schlieffen plan pretty much anticipated the complete opposite, planning for a quick, decisive victory. Though Germany’s recklessness and its burden in coping with a two front war had other plans, and the realities of improvisational trench warfare became realized between both the Central and Allied powers.
Acutally not really reality actually. Germany went to war because Russia was mobilising in support of Serbia after the Austria-Hungarian invasion. After the Franco-Prussian war the prevailing belief was that whichever army got into the field quickest would likely win. Germany begged the British to interced with the Russians and stop them mobilising but they didn't. France and Belgium were allied with Russia. Therefore Germany invaded France through Belgium with the intention to knock France out of the war and therefore avoid a two front war - in the end improvising a fixed defensive line to essentially achieve the same, whilst defeating Russia in the east (which they succeded in doing).
The Germans also had time to prepare for a defensive war, the aim being to hold ground. Whilst the British were on the offensive, with the aim of taking ground, therefore their trenches were ‘temporary’.
Nearly true: in 1917 the germans fall back on a well prepared line called siegfriedlinie to shorten the front. So, the germans had trenches, that were built in 5 month by workers meanwhile the brits has to built trenches by themselves in shorter time. Sad, you do not know
I once heard that french and british troops would fight with greater ferocity for the prospect of more comfortable trenches of the germans.
That Gemans also had modern type gas masks with activated charcoal filters. Not sure what the British used, but the French used rags that they would pee on then place over their mouths and secure with a string tied around the back of the head. True story.
Awesome movie! I’ve re-watched it a handful of times since it’s release