Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchdog
.... A full length "war movie" about the Little Bighorn would almost have to center around George Custer since the entire debacle was almost wholly due to his own ego and an underlying inferiority complex (my opinion). There are things about Custer that would have to be shown in the film in order for it to make narrative sense ....
|
I think that’s exactly what pretty much every LBH movie so far has attempted to do, with varying degrees of success.
I don’t know whether you’ve seen “Dunkirk”, but the film explains nothing. Not why all those armed soldiers are standing around on the beach, and why they’re escaping instead of fighting, not why there are so few ships initially and why pleasure boats needed to be recruited, not why so few RAF planes were over the beachhead, not why there were no Germans actually attacking except some bombers, really no context at all. Just the individual experiences from a soldier, a pilot, a guy running a boat and such.
“Saving Private Ryan” and “Fury” were not much different in that respect.
Why Custer did what he did and made the decisions he made is still subject to debate among historians. Just like Von Rundstedt’s and Hitler’s hold order that made the Dunkirk evacuation possible. And the RAF’s decision to save most of their planes for the defense of Britain.
But I think it’s still possible to make a movie based on what happened, not why and whose fault it was.