Added: 2 years ago
From: WesternFront1916
Views: 200,195
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (520)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Beethoven? Beethoven would have sent to hell that moronic teacher.

  • Am glad I was not a young man in 1916... my local graveyard is full of headstones of young soldiers that fought in that conflict. In fact many more world war 1 headstones than world war 2 one's....

  • the guy who gets injured at 7:50 looks a bit like young jim carrey anyway i love the book and the film!

  • Oh shit, I have only just realised that Donald Pleasance was in this!

  • This is what war is all about, two or more armies killing each other. They way you do it is not very important.

  • WW1 was a civil war,,,

  • @christmar67 every war is a civil war, for all men are brothers

  • Any book that was banned & burned in nazi germany is allright by me!

  • the funny point at this place is the film doesn't exist on german

  • @tripplecrossfire nah, the original movie is also available in German. this is just a remake. the novel these movies are based onis a German book in fact.

  • Comment removed

  • How was World War Ⅱany better than this? Here people are fighting because of alliances and the death of an Archduke, while in the 2nd your fighting because of some psychopath trying to gain control of the world and make it "Jew free". So I don't know why people are comparing wars cause in the end they all remain the same... meaningless and violent.

  • The crazy thing is that the King George V, Kaiser Wilhelm, and Tzar Nicholas, the Heads of State of Great Britain, Germany and Russia respectively in 1914, were all cousins. At one point Kaiser Wilhelm was 6th in line to the British Royal Throne.

    Right up until the outbreak of war they regularly exchanged hand written personal notes & letters about everything from world politics to court gossip. 4 years later Wilhelm was an exile, Nicholas was dead and only the British monarchy survived.

  • ok, so the blue guys are who? and the main actors are what?

    who is fighting here?!

  • @thedayitriedtodie

    the mains were Germans(note the pointy helmets)

    the blue guys are the French

  • Russia and Germany were allies for a long time. Bismark tried to strengthen this alliance... And what a pitty? We fighted against each other 2 terrible wars!

    We must be allies again.

  • PASSCHENDAELE is from PAUL GROSS

  • I should really avoid watching this sort of thing, it brings thoughts. If I think about it too long it makes me want to check myself into the madhouse. I can't stand it.

  • They should have play Call of Duty so they could be better prepare for horrors of war .I play it at all time so I would be tough mentally like a stone

  • @garden2011city lol thats awesome

  • @garden2011city...... and dumb like a rock.

  • @garden2011city Stop trolling 0/10

  • @garden2011city then get your ass in war! you will return 3 days after crying for yor mama... search in youtube for "saving private ryan" and you will se what war is all about

  • this is definately one of my favourite films <3

    but yeah, world war one WAS stupid. it was pointless, millions died but what for? absolutely nothing.

    if germany had won, hardly anything would have changed.

    if you actually watched the film you would understand.

  • @AnySongLyric4U Now that you mention it. Yes, WWI was probably the most pointless war ever. Millions of good young men died because of pointless imperialism. Millions of lives may had been saved if Germany, France, Great Britain, etc. never got their big noses into the conflict between Serbia and Austria-Hungary. But, all in all, it was just a war caused by the different empires' lack of trust in one another. Suspicion that caused the death of millions and horror for even more.

  • @AnySongLyric4U and + if germany had won ww2 would never had started

  • @AnySongLyric4U just dont call it world war one please call it either the great war or first world war world war one is just low brow

  • @sonofhimmler1 sorry for just calling it what i was taught. :|

  • the thing i noticed most is that in those days, figurators in those days died in super-dramatic ways, nowadays, if a non-leading character dies in a film, you just see a bloodbomb going off and he drops to the ground like a doll :P

  • @xTheGerbilx Yeah mate..Know what U mean about ppl in films dying in the most dramatic of ways..Check out Hammer Horrors - Kapt Kronos, Vampire Hunter. It's funny when he slits the thropats of 3 swordsmen in the tavern who were paid 2 kill him & his mate. The 3 killers r taking the piss outa Kronos' mate..He has a hump like a football on his back. Some of the lines r classic..But check out how they die in it..The guy in the middle goes walkabout in the bush b4 dropping to his knees..haha!

  • the more you read about WW1 you start to realize that blackadder was right it really was to much trouble not to have a war, sorry if i sound a bit glib about a war where millions died

  • This is probably the only war movie I have seen, where the viewpoint is shown from the Germans' perspective, and they are not portrayed as villains.

  • @SamonMarquis the holly wood movie passcendale is another war moive from germans perspective.

  • @stockguide1 no it isnt, it's about canadian men who join the great war.

  • @stockguide1 Is that the film with Paul Gross? I believe it was told from the Canadian perspective.

  • @SamonMarquis The German soldiers in WW1 were not villains, ok Germany invaded but the solider had no control over that they were just fighting for there country as everyone was.

  • @TheBigBeav the wehrmacht in th second war were not villians also please dont call it ww1 or ww2 so low brow

  • @SamonMarquis

    The Germanic race have always been warriors & some of the best in the world. Too bad about their leaders.

  • @SamonMarquis Stalingrad?

  • @loch70 Stalingrad focused on the Second World War, but still a good citation. "Enemy at the Gates" presented both sides as heinous, but initially the viewer had distate for the Russians--despite the fact they were fighting in their own city.

  • @SamonMarquis Ok. But still "Stalingrad" is from the germans perspective and they are not portrayed as villians. Thats what im saying.

  • @SamonMarquis U should also watch Stalingrad (1993) and Cross of iron.

  • @ORKSIZDABEST Don't forget 'Das Boot'!

  • @ORKSIZDABEST Don't forget 'Das Boot'! Stalingrad is a gr8 film, so harrowing!

  • @SuperPowderkeg "Das Boot" is a really good example. I cannot believe I overlooked that one.

  • @ORKSIZDABEST I have seen the former, but not the latter.

  • @SamonMarquis it's probably the only war movie where neither side are portrayed as villain and no one is portrayed as hero, everyone are just victims, that what make it a classic.

  • @SamonMarquis watch War horse

  • @SamonMarquis They have made wuite a few about WWII though. For instance Stalingrad and Das Boot. Not to mention Der Untergang.

  • @SamonMarquis because War is fucking politics.

  • @SamonMarquis And they didn't start the war they got pulled in because of alliances and then got the wrap.

  • @SamonMarquis Try "Stalingrad (Bis zum letzten Mann) (1990). A very good and morally balanced movie from the perspective of German infantry.

  • @SamonMarquis stalingrad, also a good one, das boot... a masterpiece

  • @zednkas On the peace time young men bury their fathers. On the war fathers bury their kids.

  • i went metal detecting around Verdun/Ieper,Where much of WW1 took place and found alot of unexploded shells,and other items.....It was very dangerous.Called the policeand they took care of it.

    now i still go relic hunting but no longer in that region,But the Ardennes(Battle of the bulge)

  • what was exactly the reason for this war?

    - Nothing, just some stupid bitches that wanted to show their ''strength'', but the people who declare war are too pussy to fight in the war.

  • @rickvangils100 aparentlly they exhaust every possibillity of an peaceful solution.that is what they allways say.but i say,give the politicians guns and helmets and send them first together with they firstborn sons!!!they would find a peaceful solution in 15 minutes!!!!

  • @hrzan True, I would love to see our politicians get into a ring with machetes. After a minute they would just leave together for a drink at a pub. In war the only time they surrender is when there is no more meat between them and the enemy guns.

  • I just wish they had bulletproof vests in that time. Not as many men would have died that way

  • @ElaineKiki1 Most casualties were actually from the artillery

  • @ElaineKiki1 they existed, but were far too heavy to be pracitcable and slowed men down to be vulnerable to head shots. In any case, artillery was the real danger.

  • world war 1: The War the Allies should have let the Germans win.

  • @IamDayoldHate1 what makes u think that?

  • @swefress It all boiled down to a conflict amongst colonial powers. The Entente (UK and France) were determined to maintain colonial expansion. Germany wanted to expand its sphere of influence, something the allies would not allow. The German's had no plans on keeping the European nations like WW2. They would have went home, demanded a larger presence in Africa and deep into Asia. The Kaiser would have kept his monarchy and a little man name Hitler would not have the means for a rise to power.

  • @IamDayoldHate1 but lets just say that world war 1 wasnt needed in any way..

  • @swefress it was inevitable that this war would happen. When the Germans destroyed the French in 1870, everyone then knew this war would occur as Germany grew into the forth, unpredictable power. WW1 was the result of 5 colonial powers with exact same policies and the same nationalistic fervor clashed all at the same time. As pointless as it may look from our perspective. Had this war resulted in the other side winning, or Peace with dignity for Germany, A second war would have been impossible.

  • Poles in German army speaking English, amazing.

  • saw a long clip of this in history class and i just loved it. gotta watch the whole thing

  • 6 months later 100 feets been won half a million men are gone

  • Did the Germans have those spikes as a last resort in hand to hand? Doesn't bear thinking about. Some mother's son...

  • because you can gain freedom on peaceful ways too.

  • @Oesterreich1156 I know wars are cruel, and indeed, you can gain freedom on peaceful ways too, but, if the people you are negotiating with are not willing to give you your freedom, what other option is there than going to war?

  • @gerian001

    the british wasn't willing to give india it's freedom.

    and what happened ? the indians didn't make war because that. they gained their freedom peacefully.

    (thanks to mahatma gandhi)

    so you see that you need no war, even if one side doesn't want.

  • people die in war not because the hate what the see in front of them but what the love behind them

  • I've recently read the book "All quiet in the Western Front" and "Fall of the Giants" by Ken Follet.

    These great books sparked my interest on WW1.

    Did you know that just 50 people in the world were responsible for the outbreak of the most pointless of all wars. Non of them had to die on the battlefields of this war.

    Btw, I'm looking forward on the new film "All quiet on the western front" in 2012/2013!

  • @ruhri0411 Well I don't think it were just 50 people. The whole population of all big nations in Europe shouted for war. Even some nation-leaders were forced by their people to go to war. There were many problems that caused such a society.

    But that aside, they make a new movie? Who is producing it? I hope not Hollywood : )

  • Comment removed

  • @Shadowtrooper1990

    I've read it in an analysis of "All quiet on the western front" that just 50 ppl. were responsible for the outbreak of this war. E.g. the highest german generals put pressure on the Kaiser, who was in doubt about a war.

    If he had said no to Austrias plans to attack serbia, this war had never took place:-(

    The new movie: I'm afraid it will be a Hollywood production... The director will be Mimi Leder, Paul Bäumer's actor will be Harry Potter a.k.a Daniel Radcliffe:-))

  • @ruhri0411 i am sure that All quiet in the Western Front is not made by Ken Follett but by Erich Maria Remarque

  • @Rex1987

    Are you serious???????????????????

    I know very well that "Im Westen nichts Neues" (the original german title) was written by Erich Maria Remarque)

    I've got the novel im my book shelf!!!!

    I supposed everyone knows here who's written the novel "All quiet on the western front"!!

  • WW1 was a "War to end all Wars" - so the propaganda proclaimed.

    WW2 followed a score years later.

    Two fratricidal follies that bled the White Race, white.

    Plutocratic Capitalism and Soviet Bolshevism emerged victorious.

    Britain became an appendage to the USA.

    Germany divided, prostrate for half a century.

    We need a Unifying IDEA that finally prevents such suicidal fratricides.

    An Imperium of Regions and Peoples.

    A planetary Imperium for Europids only.

    Imperium Europa.

  • @NormanLowell

    The European Union not imperial enough for you?

  • Eww from the German's POV. DOn't want to watch anything from a German POV.

  • @TheFearlessBastard my great grandad fought for britain on the somme and was injured, he survived the war and fought the japanese in WW2, was taken as a POW but still survived. a terrible life because of idiots that were in charge.

  • My great grandfather was a Portuguese soldier, and he fought in the Battle of La Lys. Honor and respect to both sides! The World War One was an unnecessary conflict - Europe was a prosperous continent, and only the greed of the most powerful countries in Europe caused this war. So many thing changed this conflict... for nothing.

  • @AvatarMarxon90 well, which conflict isnt unnecessary?

  • Trench warfare is so useless example british will advance the german will defend and when the british soldier has been overwhelme so the they will retreat and then the german soldier will attack. Nothing will happen they will suffer and suffer O_O

  • so who's who?

  • My great grandfather was a Belgian soldier and he fought (like many others) in this war from 1917 until 1918. The best story i've heard from my grandmother (the daughter of m great grandfather) was that he had a friend, wich was born on the same day as he was (27 July 1899). When his best friend died during the Hundred Days offensiven he was a broken man, and that haunted him throughout the rest of his life. There friendship was destroyed by war!

  • World war one was such a fucking stupid war.

  • @TaZ101SAGA but it brought liberation to some nations for about 20 years.

  • @TaZ101SAGA

    Aren't all wars stupid?

  • @DennisSpeer1 Yes

  • @DennisSpeer1 No, not all wars are stupid. Some wars are fought by men willing to give their lives for a nation's freedom. Those wars are not stupid.

  • @gerian001

    every war is stupid.

    freedom is no excuse for killing men, women and children.

    there is no excuse for any sort of war.

  • @TaZ101SAGA You're right, but please, tell me one war that wasn't fucking stupid...

  • @Zagge93 God sake, I wasn't saying that world war one was the only stupid war thats ever existed. I was just saying that it was stupid because they used tactics that weren't up to date with the technology.

  • @TaZ101SAGA Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you and you're completely right. Just mentioned that all of the wars are quite stupid.

  • @TaZ101SAGA Tell me about that one smart war...?

  • @BadMadChicken Listen, I'm getting pretty tired of comments like this popping up every day. I did not say that war was a smart or good thing, I was simply expressing MY OPINION, that WW1 was a stupid war, mainly because of the tactics used that lead to the slaughter of so many men over nothing. I didn't mean that other wars aren't stupid, because war is a stupid thing but there will always be wars, that won't change.

  • @TaZ101SAGA I see your point but there is a saying "Generals fight this war with tactics from the previous war"

  • @truvianni Yes I know that, that's why it was stupid?

  • @BadMadChicken I agree, if you are to rage war (which is fucking stupid) at least you don't have to dig your soldiers in a dirty trench with a rifle and say: "Rage war. You're our pride"

  • @TaZ101SAGA so was world war 2

  • @swefress No shit.

  • Comment removed

  • @TaZ101SAGA

    I believe war is stupid however do not criticise just one war for being stupid please.

  • @samosammo123 Did my comment say "World war one was such a stupid war and all other wars aren't stupid?" I believe it didn't. I'm getting quite tired of all these comments which are just saying the same thing over and over, I didn't say that no other wars were stupid, learn to read comments properly, no offence.

  • @TaZ101SAGA

    Well please do stop ranting kind stranger, your comment clearly says "World war one was such a f*ck*ng stupid war, you implying that you only find world war one stupid, at least to us readers you are sounding like that.

  • @samosammo123 No - "World war one was a stupid war" thats it, I said it was a stupid war. There is nothing implying that I don't think other wars are stupid. That's like saying "I love Lamborghini's, they are great cars" - Doesn't mean you hate Ferraris. "I love kit-kats" - Doesn't mean you hate snickers. Besides your last comment was kind of pointless, since you are putting words in my mouth when my previous comment clearly stated that it wasn't what I mean't.

  • @TaZ101SAGA do you wanna say its stupid to all the people who dies in it?

  • @TosheyLovesU But they are dead? Doesn't change the fact it was a stupid war.

  • As if the second was any smarter.... >.>

  • @TaZ101SAGA yeah world war two was great

  • @joep0412 Yeah, very funny. As I've already said about 30 times, I didn't say that world war one was the only stupid war in existence.

  • One of the lessons learned from the world wars was "Never start fighting with a country that has equal or greater military force than yourself"

    There will always be war, conflict and killing. Just different ways and ideas on how it is done.

  • classic movies

  • 5:13 awesome scream

  • 5:15 awesome scream

    

  • I don't think Kantorek could have been cast better

  • Suddenly, my time machine does seem like such a great idea

  • Rip to everyone who fought in ww1 and 2 apart from hitler.

    i hope he rots in hell

  • @Roxie2122 Hitler was a nice man in the germans eyes,

    Just as churchill was nice in the englishes eyes....but churchill was not nice...

  • @Roxie2122 Let's not forget the role of Stalin, the greatest mass killing organizer in the whole history.

  • JEEEEEEEEESUS WHAT A CARNAGE !!!!!!!!!! and my great grandfather was in that nightmare .... give me the chills just of thinking of it ....

  • @MATASEREANU well there was worse then this... much and much worse.... but it is interesting to hear... where did he fight?

  • @pongboy1100 i know it was in france ....but the exact place i dont know........

  • @MATASEREANU ha okay... thank you!

  • old men start wars, young men die in them

  • @zednkas Some old men start wars; and some old men die in them, mainly at the hands of young men. Bombing and hunger have no age discrimination device.

  • @zednkas But the stupidest is the Balkan wars. It's the worst of them all

  • one of the best war movies

  • thanks for posting this movie!:)

  • Consulting old school books on the 1st World War you'll find nebulous explanations on the reason of WW1.

    The main reason was that Austria annexed Bosnia & Herzegowina when the jung turks tried to free Turkey from foreign influence. Then the heir to the austrian throne was killed by a bosnian student and Austria, encouraged by a stupid loyalty depeche from Germany, set up an ultimatum and despite mediation declared war to serbia.

    The tail (Austria) wagged the dog (Germany).

  • do you know one thing i do not get? In the old times (like in the Middle ages) kings and nobles were the first ones to fight in a battle. Like now and these days, normal soldiers are the first to fight and first to die in the war, while the GENERALS and COMMANDERS cower and not fight, just hiding in their cozy HQ just yelling out orders. things have changed.

  • @ThePieMaster219 i think its because in the old days people used to use swords to fight, and the commanders and kings were good at using swords so they wont get killed easily, but now days wars are fought with guns, and even if a commander is good with a gun, they can still easily get shot, while in the olden days the commanders wont die easily cause their skill with the sword will help them survive.

  • @njtaha no, that is not what i mean. What i mean is that lots of kings and dukes and those sorts still died in battle! nonetheless, they still fought!

  • Thankyou for putting this up, and it is good quality too :D

  • Are those german bayonets? I know it seems a stupid question but i have a WWII Japanese bayonet on my wall which looks exactly the same..literally from the size, shape of the quillon, to the release button on the 'hilt' cap end. i only know its a Jap one becuase of the makers mark, factory stamps is in kanji. anyone help?

  • @Hardrada88 lmao good eye's i noticed that as well. They are Japanese, and in a older movie like this im not surprised.

  • @slim77k They wouldent be original rifles though right? Maybe..deac's/possible antiqued airsoft?

  • @Hardrada88 Good man I didn't even notice that til you pointed it out, I think your right, but don't quote me on it.

  • @megadeth628 I'll have to look into it. Silly detail like the bolt could swing my mind. the German rifles bolt went out and down like this almost ¬ whereas the Arisaka rifle had a bolt that pointed straight out - odd...i want to know ^_^

  • @megadeth628 The bolt looks like the mauser, the bolt on a ariska sticks out horizontally.

  • In those days men fought for a reason,an ideal! Von Richtofen-red baron was a prominent Prussian aristocrat and many other flying aces like Francesco barraca an Italian Nobleman who downed 34 planes for Italy during WW 1 were all men who were young,wealthy and socially respectable.They should have gone for a life of babes,booze and luxury but instead were willing to die young for their country! This is the difference between royals and politicians, who would flee at the first signal of trouble.

  • And who exactly said the french were cowards?

  • @indonippon the americans i think after they said that it was wrong for the us to blow the crap out of iraq yet again. lol

  • @mikflaherty Hehehe! I just hate stereotypes and wanted to raise this point about the french.No coward would rush to his death in a trench..are there any movies about Indian soldiers in ww1/ww-2? There were around 2 million+ Indian volunteers in the Indian army(ww-2) fighting in Europe and they won 30+ victoria cross medals,unfortunately nobody ever gives credit to these forgoitten heroes.

  • @indonippon what kind of indian the one the drink the slurpee or the one that drink the lysol.

  • @TOASTTUBE1 The ones that naively volunteered to fight for the same brits under whose oppressing rule they were.The ones that formed the LARGEST volunteer army ever nearly 2.5 million strong to fight for the same people who would later deny them independence after winning the war on the backs of these Indian people.The ones who should have fought the same war,but on their soil to get independence which is what anybody else would have done.These are the Indians I am talking about...

  • @indonippon so u mean the pakis that surrendered in 90 percent of battles?

  • Comment removed

  • @TOASTTUBE1 well there was no pakistan that time so paki is not the correct term.A racist prick like you can use the word curry muncher if you wanna refer to Indians of ww-2.you are talking about the cowardly whites from a non descript island in northern europe called..Britain...also the cowardly albinos from a huge minefield called canada who have let the USA take care of their defence.Ask any previous generation brit or italian and they will tell you of the Indian valour,we liberated europe.

  • @TOASTTUBE1 Besides most of those Indians and Gurkhas were dead,which is when your brave British decided to surrender.The way BRITAIN surrendered the channel islands without a fight for example.The way the Gibraltar of the east,singapore was surrender to Japanese despite having thousands of British(white for a segregationist like u)troops garrisoned there for example! Coalition from US came at the end of the war,russians liberated Europe.Americans got the credit.Canada was useless as always..

  • @indonippon slurpee slurpee hot dog hot dog paki paki

  • @TOASTTUBE1 Lame

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • We saw this in History and we are reading the book in English, it's so sad... I wonder if the soldiers experienced this much horror in recent wars...

  • @Chennaigirl123 Hi I have done some reading about the world wars and am a bit of a history buff. IMHO trench warfare in ww-1 is nothing like what we have today.It was truly terrifying and lacked the kinda mobility today's armies have with multiple forces such as the airforce and naval destroyers aiding them,gps,satnav,radars and other such tech help which make the antisipation a lot lesser nowadays.They know what they are getting into unlike these boys.It is still scay but ww1 is a diff league!!

  • @indonippon I´ve meanwhile read about 6 or 7 books, war diaries and stuff about WW1. They all say the same: The biggest horror was that the soldiers barely saw the enemy but were under constant fire. So they were almost waiting for the moment to get out of their trenches to fight the enemy. By the way, charges like that in the vid didn´t happen on a daily base. It was only at planned offensives and predominantly done by the Allieds as the Germans were in the comfortable position to defend!

  • I always thought this was a good remake of the 1930 classic