Originally Posted by tony123
Hello to all.
Greg, we did watch "Gallipoli" a few weeks ago. The first half nearly put us to sleep, but the second half was better and well, downright emotional in the final scenes. It's a bit of history that I knew nothing of and it was educational in that respect. Thanks.
Originally Posted by Dingaling2004
Hey there Tony, nice to see you back on here and that work is keeping you busy. I certainly would not describe the movie "Gallipoli" being "entertaining" and on many levels it is not enjoyable. It is plain gut wrenching at the end but is a milestone point in Australian military history and today ANZAC Day is perhaps our most revered and sacred day of remembrance. I am glad that you watched it. Strange how we celebrate a day here for a battle that our troops lost in WW1.
Tony and Greg,
Were you guys speaking of the 1981 version of GALLIPOLI (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082432/
), the one with Mel Gibson early in his career? I remember seeing that film a long time back and thinking about what a tortuous battle that was.
Coincidentally, I had watched a documenary just this
week which detailed the Gallipoli campaign. The program recently began airing on the Smithsonian Channel and is still repeating every few days. Don't know how much longer it will continue to be shown. If the Smithsonian Channel is part of your TV packages, I highly recommend the program. I found the documentary just as affecting and more informative than the 1981 flick.
It's intersting that a young politician named Winston Churchill was one of the supporters of the World War I Gallipoli campaign. Because he felt so traumatized by the result of this amphibious operation, it's not at all
surprising that, nearly 30 years later as Prime Minister, Churchill recoiled from the necessity of the D-Day amphibious assault during World War II. It turned out that Roosevelt was empathetic to Churchill's concerns about an amphibious landing in the teeth of fortified beaches. So, even though the American military leadership favored landing a year earlier (1943) with the aim of pushing straight for Berlin, the two heads of state inisisted on a later date (June 1944), hoping for conditions that would minimize the blood-letting and be more conducive to success. We can't know if the 1943 plan would have ultimately ended the war sooner, but we do know that the decision made by Churchill and Roosevelt eventually led to victory for the Allies and liberation for Europe. Unfortunately, we also know that a blood-letting could not be avoided.
In case you're interested, here is a link to the Smithsonian Channel web page concerning GALLIPOLI: http://www.smithsonianchannel.com/si...do?show=135944
Future airings should be accessible somewhere on this page.
By the way, Greg, I'm a native Texan, so I don't find it strange that you commemorate a battle lost. We still remember and revere the Alamo, a battle we also lost. To the very last man, in fact. I suppose the moral of the story is that final victory seldom comes without bitter and tragic defeats along the way. Good on 'ya, mate.