Film Review: The Vietnam War - Ken Burns, Lyn Novick (2017)

Ken Burns' The Civil War is rightly regarded as a classic, and - in America at least - is revered not just in itself, but for the way it helped reawaken an interest in that bloody cataclysm of the mid-nineteenth century. That series was about five years in the making.

'Grunts' on patrol.

Local peasants hiding in a ditch (soldiers in the background).

The Vietnam War took twice as long to produce. Why was this? Well, I reckon the proximity to the present has to be a major contributor; the Vietnam war took place only 50 odd years ago, as opposed to Civil War, which was more like 150 years ago. And consequently, with many of those involved or affected still alive, it's still very much a live issue, touching many a raw nerve.

I watched the series as it got its UK premiere on BBC4, as a series of double-bill instalments. And I was glued to the TV each Monday evening whilst it ran. Rather intriguingly, LBJ - Lyndon Baines Johnson - who became president when Kennedy was assassinated, and was responsible for the major escalation of the war in Vietnam, was also the chief architect of the 'Great Society', a vision which included the creation in America of National TV institutions akin to our BBC, namely PBS and NPR (Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio). 

Lyndon Johnson.

Tricky Dicky: Richard Nixon.

And Ken Burns appears to be the American heir to David Attenborough, in relation to Attenborough's influence as head of BBC2, when he commissioned such landmark documentary series as Civilisation. These serious minded 'sledgehammers', as they came to be known, epic documentary series that really took their time to examine a subject, were subsequently taken up even by commercial channels (e.g. ITV's superb World At War), and now, with Burns, have crossed the pond. Interestingly, Ken Burns has even been described using the very same compliment/epithet that's so often been bestowed on Attenborough, a 'national treasure'!

The anti-war movement grows, Stateside...

... polarising feeling amongst fellow Americans.

Listed below are the episode titles and brief synopses, which I've taken from the Wikipedia entry on the series:

1. Déjà Vu (1858 – 1961) - After a century of French occupation, Vietnam emerges independent but divided into North and South.

2. Riding the Tiger (1961 – '63) - As a communist insurgency gains strength, President Kennedy wrestles with American involvement in South Vietnam.

3. The River Styx (January '64 – December '65) - With South Vietnam near collapse, President Johnson begins bombing the North and sends US troops to the South.

4. Resolve (January '66 – June '67) - US soldiers discover Vietnam is unlike their fathers’ war, while the antiwar movement grows.

Vietnam was very much a helicopter war, for America.

Awaiting aerial rescue.

Casualties were taken from battlefield to hospital in as little as 15 minutes.

5. This Is What We Do (July '67 – December '67 - Johnson escalates the war while promising the American public that victory is in sight.

6. Things Fall Apart (January '68 – July '68) - Shaken by the Tet Offensive, assassinations and unrest, America seems to be coming apart.

7. The Veneer of Civilization (June '68 – May '69) - After chaos roils [sic] the Democratic Convention, Richard Nixon, promising peace, narrowly wins the presidency.

8. The History of the World (April '69 – May 1970) - Nixon withdraws US troops but when he sends forces into Cambodia the antiwar movement reignites.

9. A Disrespectful Loyalty (May '70 – March '73) - South Vietnam fights on its own as Nixon and Kissinger find a way out for America. American POWs return.

10. The Weight of Memory (March '73 – Onward) - Saigon falls and the war ends. Americans and Vietnamese from all sides search for reconciliation.

Tim o'Brien, in Vietnam.

Tim o'Brien now.

The series uses a mixture of documentary footage from the times and interviews with participants from all sides and levels, plaiting together the various threads concerning the roots of the war, and the experience of it in Northern and Southern Vietnam and back in the U.S. Starting out with the story of France's decline as an imperial power, and their eventual loss of Vietnam, which split itself in half in the process of shaking off colonial rule. 

In all just shy of 80 people are represented, in talking heads style interviews, ranging from civilians to soldiers, and insurgents to the political or military bigwigs. Some of the soldiers of both sides are remarkably eloquent. And some of them just have a certain charisma; in an interview for Vanity Fair Burns said “I have this recurring thought that, if some evil genie took away all our interviews but one, the one we would keep would be John Musgrave, and we’d make a different film and call it The Education of John Musgrave”.

John Musgrave before 'Nam...

... and after.

There are many great characters making many pithy observations in this excellent series. But somehow Musgrave stands out, with his quiet delivery, and the control of his clearly very deep feelings. Another character who exerts an uncommon power, and as a casualty of the war, a power from 'beyond the grave', is Denton 'Mogie' Crocker, who we follow by proxy, through pictures, his letters, and interviews with his family.

But it's not all just about the Yanks. We hear from the Vietnamese of both North and South, and those who were caught between the two. The Vietnamese character who sticks in my memory most, stood out from the many others by dint of not having Nguyen (pronounced 'Win'!) appear anywhere in his name, oh... and his shock of white hair! He was author and former North Vietnamese soldier Bảo Ninh. But in fact there are many interesting testimonies, both from ARVN and other South Vietnamese sources, and those who sided with the Communist North.

Nguyen Nguyet Anh drove trucks along the Ho Chi Minh Trail...

 ... for the North Vietnamese Army,’68-‘70

The ten episode series clocks in, Stateside, at just short of 18 hours long. The version aired on the BBC is shorter. Much shorter; at just ten hours, I'd call that too much shorter. When you're dealing with true quality, as with Burns you usually are, I always prefer to get more, not less. It seems to me the BBC is losing its way. It used to be more typical to hear of things working the other way round: we'd make a film, and then when the Americans got hold of it they would trim off what they considered to be the fat.

I'll definitely be seeking ways to see the full length version. 

Tran Ngoc Toan served with the ...

... South Vietnamese Marines, '62-75.

According to the Wikipedia entry on the series, 'there are scenes covering 25 battles, ten of which are detailed scenes documenting and describing the action from multiple perspectives'. An excellent NYTimes online article (find it here) breaks down one particular battle sequence from the series, Binh Gia, which falls into the 'multiple perspectives' category, in detail. Going through this helps one realise why it took Burns, Novick and co. a decade to make this series, and drives home what an achievement it is.

Thích Quảng Đức, Buddhist monk, self-immolates in protest. [1]

'General Nguyen Ngoc Loan Executing a Viet Cong Prisoner in Saigon.' [2]

One of the most recognisable images of war... ever. [3]

After watching the series twice, once on TV, and then again on the BBC iPlayer, I started to Google it, to see what kind of response it was garnering. It was both very sad and yawn inducingly predictable to find elements of the U.S. right frothing at the mouth over it, seeing it as a liberal attack on American patriotism. 

Burns himself says that his role as a filmmaker isn't contributing to the defence of the nation per se, but to the quality of a culture that makes the nation worth defending. Touché! Merrill McPeak, a high ranking USAF figure, who took part in the war and this series, is one of those particularly eloquent servicemen, and he's clearly sympathetic to Burns' desire that the series might have a healing, reconciling effect, but concludes, in an interview elsewhere '[It's] Not going to happen.'

Keith Harris in 'Nam.

Keith Harris now.

In an interview with Gabrielle Gurley, for The American Prospect, Burns also says that in making The Vietnam War 'we didn’t have to say these people are right; these people are wrong. We just said, listen to all of this ... We have no political axe to grind. If you look at the underwriting credits, I went out and got funders from across the political spectrum.'

I originally gave this four and a half balkenkreuz. I mean, it's very good. But it's not perfect. Then again, in the real world, what is? Precious little. After seeing the series two, and now getting on for three times, however, I want to give it five. I think the massively cut UK version merits just four stars; not for the quality of what's on screen, but for the vast amount of what's lost. The American full fat version, I'd definitely give five stars.

----------

Ken Burns.

Burns himself became eligible for the draft in 1972 (the year I was born, as it happens!). Aged 11 when the U.S. involvement in the war started, and faced with being forced to take part in it when he didn't believe in it ideologically, thus has extra personal resonance. A quite long article online, from The Washington Post (here) goes into some detail about these issues, and Lyn Novick's role in the production, and is interesting reading.

NOTES:

[1] Read more about Thích Quảng Đức.

[2] This is another of those iconic images thrown up by this terrible conflict. Read more about it here.

[3] Phan Thi Kim Phuc is the naked young girl at the centre of the picture, taken by photograher Nick Ut. If you read about her you'll discover that she's now living in Canada - also, interestingly, the country Americans could go to in order to avoid the 'Nam draft - and is still undergoing surgery as a consequence of the napalm attack in 1972, 45 years ago.

Book Review: To The Gates of Moscow - Türk/Urbanke

NOTE: the images in this post are from the book, and are used with the publisher's permission. They are not to be copied or reproduced elsewhere. [1]

Wow! What a fantastic book. I'm really interested in both the Napoleonic and the German invasions of Russia, and have quite a lot of books on both campaigns. This large landscape format hardback is easily one of the best on the latter.

Türk (at left) and his men in their Horch 901, WH 95712 (14th July, 1941)

A rest stop, Türk, sitting centre, has been wounded (21st July, 1941).

Like Napoleonic soldier and war artist/diarist Albrecht Adam, who returned from the ill-fated expedition of 1812 long before the end of that disastrous campaign, medical officer Herman Türk returned to Germany, due to a serious leg wound received outside Moscow, long before the end of the Nazi debacle in Russia. So this is necessarily a truncated account of what went on to become an appallingly epic conflict, of far longer duration than Napoleon's ill-fated campaign.

Although this is only a partial account, for reasons already mentioned, it is nonetheless an epic tome, at 468 pages. There are 444 photos, most of them taken by either Türk or one of his associates of which 244 are in colour (he had two cameras, one using black and white and the other colour film); a truly fantastic record. The text, in both German and English, is based on Herman Türk's diary entries, starting with departure from Berlin for the Barbarossa jumping off point, and then, moving near the spearhead of the attack, almost all the way to Moscow.

The wounded doc's field surgery, (August 4th, '41).

Wehrmacht concert, Palitskaya (7th August, '41). [2]

As well as Türk's diary entries and photographs, there's an accompanying text, by Axel Urbanke, which helps contextualise the day by day detail of Türk's story, and lots of colour maps. Sadly the map captions are in German only. All in all this an amazing resource for those whow, like me, have a stronger than average interest in this most cataclysmic of conflicts. The photographs, both black and white and colour, are a real treasure trove. Even though they are of varying quality, some being quite blurred, nevertheless they are - the colour pics in particular - incredibly evocative.

They also cover things one doesn't usually see in books on this subject: thanks to Herman Türk's role as a medic, we both read about and see more of death and injury than in other accounts. It might seem odd to note this, but I've often been surprised myself at how little photographic evidence there is of the sanguine aspects of what was, after all, one of the bloodiest theatres of war in the world's bloodiest conflict ever. Urbanke points out that, whilst in WWI photographers were more or less free to picture whatever's they saw, during WWII official German policy was to not document death and suffering, for fear of effects on morale. I believe this was true of the Allies as well.

A typical Russian earthen road; what, when in military usage, Germans called a 'Rollbahn' 

(10th August, '41).

The interior of Türk's Horch 901 (August 10th) [3].

At the time of posting this I've just finished reading Türk's diary and the accompanying text. It's been intriguing to see how the darker side of the war on the Ostfront is dealt with. Right near the beginning Türk and several officer colleagues visit the Warsaw ghetto, where about 400,000 Jews were being kept in appalling conditions, prior to many of them being sent to even more terrible fates. Türk and his associates are shocked and disgusted by what they see, but there is no sign of any real sympathy/empathy, nor any deep-seated anti-Semitism.

Brief reference is occasionally made to the summary execution of the odd Russian prisoner or 'saboteur'. But the more hardcore stuff, what Alan Clark called 'the septic violence of Nazism', is notably absent, until, perhaps, they reach Tula, near the gates of Moscow. Summary executions and a policy of no quarter start to set in at this point. It's clear that Türk and his comrades in arms find this traumatic. But, as you'll often see depicted in more contemporary war films and documentaries, such normalisation of atrocities during war is not uncommon. [4]

Türk at work; replacements get their cholera injections.

Still early in the campaign, but look at the state of the roads! (August 31st, '41)

Indeed, not only Türk does not mention - until right at the end of his narrative (more on this later) - the 'not so much medieval as ... pre-Roman barbarism' (Clark), which undoubtedly occurred on a massive scale on the Ostfront, but instead he actually gives evidence that local contact was, initially at least, frequently quite friendly. This was a fairly widespread phenomenon in the early days of the campaign, and was perhaps even more so in Türk's case, due to his being in a medical unit.

In terms of the savage side of war, in general terms, what comes across most profoundly is the high level of suffering and loss within the German forces, and quite naturally so, given Türk's position as a German medic. Losses in units frequently reach near enough 100%; relatively early on in the campaign Türk's own unit, down to about 70 men, receives 500 replacements, to take the unit back to its original (albeit still understrength) numbers.

One might be surprised - I was - at how many photos in this book depict German graves. Türk doesn't only photograph these places where his fallen comrades are buried when they happen to be near at hand. He also goes out of his way to visit the graves of men he knew particularly well, and pay his respects. I wanted to include one of these grave pictures, but I was already pushing the envelope in terms of getting picture permissions with the ten pics I'm using here.

By October roads were truly appalling; teams of men haul trucks through 'rasputitsa' mud.

25th November, the snow starts to bite.

Having said all of this, as they near Moscow, towards the tail end of the book, things do get nastier;  Russian resistance stiffens, whilst concurrently the overextended German advance bogs down in the extreme Russian conditions, and due to very high rates of physical and mechanical attrition. Where before Russians were surrendering en masse, now Commissars, NKVD, and 'barrier' troops are executing 'cowards', and no quarter is given on either side in the particularly fierce fighting over Tula.

And where previously prisoners were interrogated and then sent to the rear, now the summary execution of captives starts to take over. Ironically this sort of thing frequently spirals in wartime, as much as a perceived tit for tat policy as a conscious embodiment of racist hatred. And once the spiral is initiated it tends to escalate.

Russian POWs (this pic is not from the book).

This is a nasty business, which Türk clearly dislikes, but does not necessarily disapprove of, excusing it as reprisals for Russian execution and mutilation of prisoners,and what many German troops refer to as Russian 'gangster methods', such as pretending to surrender and then shooting your would be captors, or hiding underground and only firing from very close when german troops have passed.

Retailing for around £70, plus or minus a bit - I got my copy in Folkestone, a the Euro Military Expo model show, for a whisker over £60 - this isn't cheap. But sometimes an expensive book is worth a higher than normal price. That's true of the gigantic and incredible Taschen complete works of Michelangelo, which we bought from Amazon for about £100. And it's also true of this very different but very compelling window into one of WWIIs most brutal campaigns.

----------

There are many grave site pics in this book (but this isn't one of them!).

NOTES:

[1] Normally I might've worked on them in Photoshop, to lesson the three-colour print process effects. But as I'd been asked by the publishers, Luftfahrtverlag Start, to add watermarks, I did so, and the left the pics as they appear here. They are in fact far nicer in real life!

[2] As noted in the body of my review, relations with locals weren't too bad at this point. And such seemingly innocent activities as communal musical festivities, or church services - both of which the Germans did indulge in whilst campaigning (there are pics of several church services!) - were not allowed in Stalinist Russia. Or, another way to look at it: not only did the Germans inflict their toxic racial policy on the natives of the Ostfront, they even forced their ghastly martial 'oompah' music on the hapless populace.

Oompah! (Not a pic from the book)

[3] The book is chock full of great pics for modellers to refer to when thinking of detailing, or dioramas.

[4] The complicity of the Wehrmacht in Nazi German racial crimes is not a topic this book explores. Nor do I, in my review of the book. Aside from the visit to the Warsaw Ghetto, and one or two references to the Commissar Order', such facets of the war in the East for lebensraum are nigh on invisible. That's not to say the Wehrmacht weren't at times and in places complicit, or that the crimes themselves didn't happen. Of course they did. And more so on the Eastern Front than anywhere else. But at the same time, I think we ought to have a balanced and open enough approach to sources such as Türk's diary, as presented here, to not tar all German's equally and all the time with the Hitler brush. It's clear from several comments in the diaries that Türk admired Hitler, and admired and trusted his military leaders. I'm currently reading Beevor's Stalingrad, in which Model is portrayed as an unpopular martinet. Maybe he went on to become one. But in the Türk diaries one gets the impression he's seen as a calm, unflappable soldier, and respected and admired by those under his command, who are often close to him. History is such a fascinatingly nuanced and complex topic!

Film Review: Fury, 2014

I just finished watching this. For the - I think? - fourth time. Each time I watch it, I like it a bit more. The first time I watched it, I just thought the 'macho pose' factor, and the final scene - gunfight on the Sherman corral - were just too much. More on this particular episode later.

In the picture above the cast/crew of Fury are, l-r: Jon Bernthal, Michael Pena, Brad Pitt, Logan Lerman (behind Pitt), and Shia LaBeouf, as, respectively: Grady "Coon-Ass" Travis, Trini "Gordo" Garcia, Don "Wardaddy" Collier, Norman "Machine" Ellison and Boyd "Bible" Swan.

However, with each new viewing I think it's a better film. The ending is a bit, er... no, make that very OTT. But I've gone from finding it merely ridiculous, to enjoying it for what it is, cinematic overstatement. And the characterisation? Well, the macho factor is hard to acclimatise to, and the Hollywood tradition of using 'good ol' Southern boy' accents as a shorthand for gritty authenticity, still irks me. Just less so. [1]

What makes the film better with each viewing are, for one thing, the abundance of little details. It's taken a long time. But these days it's much more usual for WWII movies to depict not just weapons and equipment more accurately, but also combat environments generally, and all the stuff that goes with them; bombed-out towns, refugees caught in the crossfire, behind the lines scenes, etc.

Director Ayers and Pitt, in a muddy camp scene.

And despite the über machismo caveat, the cast in this film are actually pretty good, giving good performances. Watching the extras on the DVD one realises that meeting real WWII veterans, and going to movie 'bootcamp', with genuine military guys on hand to train them, all had salutary and useful effects on the actors. And I think these things help make Fury better than it might, at first glance, appear to be.

Initially I thought some of the actors rather wooden.

On first veiwing I thought it was a pretty dumb film, frankly. Populated by wooden caricatures. But there's a degree of sad truth in the way men gravitate towards defined roles under duress. So the characterisation might not be as two-dimensional as I originally thought. Certainly the mixture of brutality and camaraderie, or the good and bad sides of humanity, as brought out by warfare, aren't easy or comfortable viewing. But in that respect, this film depicts war honestly and authentically.

Two major themes that resonate most compellingly within the film are: the struggle between the degrading animalistic violence of war, and our more civilised compassionate side; and the family like bonds that develop under such extremes of duress. Don 'Wardaddy' Collier is, both literally and metaphorically, the father figure in the tank (and the tank is the family home!). He dishes out tough love, but he earns the respect and loyalty of his crew.

'Wardaddy' in one of his several father figure roles, helping 'Machine' pop his cherry.

'Wardaddy' as bad dad, making Norm' pop a cap in a defenceless Kraut's ass.

In his role as father figure, 'Wardaddy' helps Norman 'Machine' Ellison both gain experience and lose his innocence, in two notable and significant ways: scoring with a pretty German girl, and killing a German POW. Both scenes are really quite troubling, in their own different ways. Some have said they find the interlude with the female German civilians improbable. Well, I dunno... my reading of war diaries (and histories), from conflicts in all eras suggests that fraternisation, all the way to intimacy - both consensual and otherwise - is very normal.

Whilst the moral issues in the film are certainly very complex, even if initially they appear to be handled rather too simplistically, there are technical aspects that military buffs such as us model-makers and wargamers are bound to love. Shot largely in England, they used Bovington's Tiger 131 for the deadly encounter with that famed German tank. How many films are spoiled because of inaccurate matériel? It's clear that Ayers and co really wanted authenticity, probably in all aspects, but certainly in terms of gear. And that really helps the movie.

Bovington's Tiger, 131, is magnificent.

Whilst Ayers tried to avoid CGI, he did use it for tracer round effects

A very moody production shot; location, Oxfordshire!

Shermans, also supplied by Bovington, in action.

Fury takes a hit. Fortunately not fatal.

The final shoot-out with 'Jerry' is brought about when Fury rolls over a mine and loses wheels/track. Their platoon, reduced to just one vehicle from four, after the encounter with the Tiger, is supposed to hold a cross-roads/sector. Given the suicidal circumstances, the seasoned crew want to get out. Jaded old 'Wardaddy' - with shades of a deathwish - wants to stay. Young 'Machine' decides to remain with him, after which the old crew are shamed into staying also.

The claustrophobia of conditions within the tank is superbly conveyed

'Gordo' drives whilst viewing the outside world through a tiny periscope vision slot.

The commander in his turret; looks quite roomy compared to the other crew areas.

Whilst this segment of the film is, well, speaking candidly, fun, from a shoot 'em up point of view, it's both rather silly, and - partially in consequence of the former fact - morally troubling. It really reminds me of the old Westerns, with the cowboys wasting hordes of faceless Indians. And the double standard in terms of the value of life, between 'goodies' and 'baddies', is only enhanced by the alternation between the constant noise and combat as Germans are massacred, and the moments of solemn silence whenever one of 'our boys' cops it. Whilst this is undoubtedly televisually very powerful, it's also a dramatic conceit that's both morally dubious, and highly unrealistic.

The ending owes much to this sort of thing.

And don't just take my word for this: Bill Betts, a British Sherman tank veteran, admires certain scenes in Fury, such as the Tiger pasting the Shermans [3]. But here's what he said about the end: 'I thought the film showed accurately how tough life could be in a tank, but the final scene where the crew hold out against a battalion of Waffen SS troops was too far fetched. The Germans seemed to be used as canon fodder. In reality they would have been battle-hardened and fanatical troops who would have easily taken out an immobile Sherman tank using Panzerfausts.'

The German cannon fodder, arriving at the crossroads.

This film does have its faults. But, where I would've given it three out of five stars/balkenkreuz after my first viewing, and four after viewings two/three, now, on the fourth time around, I have to confess I love it. And so, to reflect that, whilst my heart wants to give it five, I'll settle for four and a half: I do love it, but it's certainly not perfect. Indeed, it's fairly flawed, in some respects. But I love it nonetheless!

----------
NOTES:

Lafayette Green Pool, the original 'Wardaddy'!

[1] Having said this, I learned, during my online research for this review, that the nickname 'Wardaddy' was in fact the real nickname of a U.S. tank commander. And the 'real' Wardaddy, one  Lafayette G. Pool, was indeed a Texan (he even allegedly wore cowboy boots in preference to army issue boots!).

[2] Here's a short movie about Tiger 131's involvement in the filming of Fury.

[3] Betts also recalled, in relation to the scene showing the execution of a german POW, disarming a 55 year old member of the Volksturm, only to learn later that he was shot. Read the full article here.