By now, most film-goers know what constitutes a war movie, and this film could be complemented, or criticized as being, really the 'Mother' of all of them. Mingling patriotism and tragedy, this film can make a case for every archetype and trope that we groan over in other films, and for that reason, is a really fine movie.
There is nothing more however, no plot element or characterization that would make the viewer even blink twice. The performances are basically excellent, for what they are, and unlike many a conventional film, the actors do not fall into self parody, but these performances are not really captivating either.
If there is a flaw, it is in the pacing. Rather than a beginning, middle and end,there seems to be a beginning and a middle cut short, but this might also be considered the strongest creative choice in the film, in demonstrating the tragedy of war through life cut short. It just depends on how you want to take it.
The reason that I do not give it kudos, for what it is, is that this film is significantly historically incorrect, relying on faux British mistakes to avoid implying too strongly that the war was an inherent tragedy, and to enhance the Australian sacrifice, without implying additional Australian responsibility, at British expense. You could still draw that conclusion (that the war was simply a tragedy) from this film, and there was plenty of callous wastage of life, and plenty of mistakes, and errors of judgment in the real war to be sure, but this film prefers to fictionalize the story, and so I rank it as no better, and no worse than most films. People who really like war movies should like it, and people that don't, should be forewarned.
There is nothing more however, no plot element or characterization that would make the viewer even blink twice. The performances are basically excellent, for what they are, and unlike many a conventional film, the actors do not fall into self parody, but these performances are not really captivating either.
If there is a flaw, it is in the pacing. Rather than a beginning, middle and end,there seems to be a beginning and a middle cut short, but this might also be considered the strongest creative choice in the film, in demonstrating the tragedy of war through life cut short. It just depends on how you want to take it.
The reason that I do not give it kudos, for what it is, is that this film is significantly historically incorrect, relying on faux British mistakes to avoid implying too strongly that the war was an inherent tragedy, and to enhance the Australian sacrifice, without implying additional Australian responsibility, at British expense. You could still draw that conclusion (that the war was simply a tragedy) from this film, and there was plenty of callous wastage of life, and plenty of mistakes, and errors of judgment in the real war to be sure, but this film prefers to fictionalize the story, and so I rank it as no better, and no worse than most films. People who really like war movies should like it, and people that don't, should be forewarned.