100 Years of Law
The ABA Journal looks back on 100 years of publication.
Quite a long time, a distinction it shares, although its a year younger, with The New Republic, which turned 100 last year.
Friday, January 2, 2015
Old Picture of the Day: Prospectors
Old Picture of the Day: Prospectors: Today's picture shows a couple of prospectors with their donkeys all packed up, ready for the gold rush. The picture was taken in ...
New Year's Resolutions for Other People
Yeah, I know its rude. But if you are in the public eye, I guess you are open for public content. So here's some resolutions for folks who might miss these obvious ones.
So, here goes:
Congress. Let's just assume that your audience is intelligent and can follow an intelligent argument. I bet it can. And after assuming that, whether you are in the left or the right, conduct your public debates that way. If you can't do that, you ought to not be there.
Congressional Judiciary Committees: Avoid appointments to the bench from Harvard or Yale for the entire year. Not a single one. Don't we have enough of them already? There are lawyers from other places.
For that matter, how about not appointing any sitting or retired judges to appellate benches. Branch out. You'll be glad you did.
And put a retirement age on the Federal Bench. These are public jobs for the American public, not jobs for life for one single benighted generation. Appointments for life no longer make any sense.
Country Music. If you aren't actually from the country, please sit this one out or admit you are a "pop artist". It's different.
And cut out the sap, too, will you?
ISIL Open your minds up, at least a bit. And get a calendar and see what century this is.
Kim Jong-un. Kim, you are on your way to being remembered as a complete clown. You could be remembered as a hero. Take the bold move, open the borders, and announce that you intend to peacefully reunite North Korea with the South by letting the Republic of Korea take over.
You could go into comfortable retirement in Switzerland within a year, and be a hero for life. The way you are going, you are going to be remembered as one of the all time biggest doofuses ever.
People with the last name Bush or Clinton. Enough already, the country can function fine without you as President. Sit this one out, and the next several as well, and surprise people by not running for President.
Barack Obama. Go outside and see where you live. You are not a law school professor anymore. Yapping at people doesn't equate with action, and getting mad and assigning things to the class you can't deal with isn't going to work either. Quit studying Wilson. Study Roosevelt, Truman, Reagan, Bush I or Clinton and see how to get some things done.
New York: Hello New York and things New Yorkish. We still love you, but you aren't "Number One" anymore, and you haven't been for a really long time. Just because you pass a bill or collectively think something doesn't make it the up and coming thing, it probably is viewed by the rest of us as stale and a little moldy, which is how we also view New York. You are going to have to get over yourself. Your resolution is to have a little humility this year. Think of yourself as, oh. . . Labrador.
The People's Republic of China. You can only pretend to be a "people's republic" while ignoring democracy so long. Read the history of your own country, and realize that China's always only a second away from a revolution, and take the next step to open the politics of the country up. Your excuse for not doing so is long gone. And stop acting like a 19th Century colonial power too.
Pop-Tarts You know who you are, you collection of women famous only for being famous, or for your appearance alone. Stop acting like your for sale on the street and have a little big of dignity. Spend their year dressing modestly and really shock people. Read a book. Go outdoors with some outdoorsy close on. Just be something, for goodness sake.
Television. Hello television, you are stupid. Get an education and quit broadcasting crap.
This is particularly the case regarding anything billed "Entertainment", or that appears on "TLC". Enough already. But it applies to the rests of television as well. Time for some remedial classes.
So, here goes:
Congress. Let's just assume that your audience is intelligent and can follow an intelligent argument. I bet it can. And after assuming that, whether you are in the left or the right, conduct your public debates that way. If you can't do that, you ought to not be there.
Congressional Judiciary Committees: Avoid appointments to the bench from Harvard or Yale for the entire year. Not a single one. Don't we have enough of them already? There are lawyers from other places.
For that matter, how about not appointing any sitting or retired judges to appellate benches. Branch out. You'll be glad you did.
And put a retirement age on the Federal Bench. These are public jobs for the American public, not jobs for life for one single benighted generation. Appointments for life no longer make any sense.
Country Music. If you aren't actually from the country, please sit this one out or admit you are a "pop artist". It's different.
And cut out the sap, too, will you?
ISIL Open your minds up, at least a bit. And get a calendar and see what century this is.
Kim Jong-un. Kim, you are on your way to being remembered as a complete clown. You could be remembered as a hero. Take the bold move, open the borders, and announce that you intend to peacefully reunite North Korea with the South by letting the Republic of Korea take over.
You could go into comfortable retirement in Switzerland within a year, and be a hero for life. The way you are going, you are going to be remembered as one of the all time biggest doofuses ever.
People with the last name Bush or Clinton. Enough already, the country can function fine without you as President. Sit this one out, and the next several as well, and surprise people by not running for President.
Barack Obama. Go outside and see where you live. You are not a law school professor anymore. Yapping at people doesn't equate with action, and getting mad and assigning things to the class you can't deal with isn't going to work either. Quit studying Wilson. Study Roosevelt, Truman, Reagan, Bush I or Clinton and see how to get some things done.
New York: Hello New York and things New Yorkish. We still love you, but you aren't "Number One" anymore, and you haven't been for a really long time. Just because you pass a bill or collectively think something doesn't make it the up and coming thing, it probably is viewed by the rest of us as stale and a little moldy, which is how we also view New York. You are going to have to get over yourself. Your resolution is to have a little humility this year. Think of yourself as, oh. . . Labrador.
The People's Republic of China. You can only pretend to be a "people's republic" while ignoring democracy so long. Read the history of your own country, and realize that China's always only a second away from a revolution, and take the next step to open the politics of the country up. Your excuse for not doing so is long gone. And stop acting like a 19th Century colonial power too.
Pop-Tarts You know who you are, you collection of women famous only for being famous, or for your appearance alone. Stop acting like your for sale on the street and have a little big of dignity. Spend their year dressing modestly and really shock people. Read a book. Go outdoors with some outdoorsy close on. Just be something, for goodness sake.
Television. Hello television, you are stupid. Get an education and quit broadcasting crap.
This is particularly the case regarding anything billed "Entertainment", or that appears on "TLC". Enough already. But it applies to the rests of television as well. Time for some remedial classes.
Thursday, January 1, 2015
The Wyoming Tribune: January 1, 1915
ArchivalWare
And some grim news from the Wyoming Tribune.
I had yesterday's up, in 1914, for the Tribune, but seem to have wiped it out somehow. It had the interesting headline that the Japanese were not going to "invade" Europe, which strikes me as an odd concern for the era.
And some grim news from the Wyoming Tribune.
I had yesterday's up, in 1914, for the Tribune, but seem to have wiped it out somehow. It had the interesting headline that the Japanese were not going to "invade" Europe, which strikes me as an odd concern for the era.
Friday, January 1, 1915. Mexican land reform.
A Mexican land reform program was announced by the Carranza administration which promised to distribute land to those most in need. In reality Carranza was reluctant to implement land reform and therefore it was done haltingly at best during his administration, in spite of the topic being a major cause of the Mexican Revolution.
The Panama–California Exposition officially opened in San Diego in spite of World War One going on in Europe, Africa and to some degree in Asia. President Wilson opened the event by pushing a telegraph button in Washington, D.C. that turned on the power and lights at the park.
The exposition celebrated the opening of the Panama Canal, which of course has been much in the news recently.
The bizarre and misnamed Battle of Broken Hill took place in New South Wales, Australia, when Muslims Mullah Abdullah and Gool Badsha Mahomed took shots at a passing train in aid of what they believed to be a jihad ordered by the Ottoman sultan. The attacked killed several passengers and provoked a military and police response which killed the two perpetrators.
The HMS Formidable was sunk by a German U-boat U-24 off of Dorset.
Last edition:
Monday, December 28, 1914. Ottoman advance slows.
Wednesday, December 31, 2014
Random Snippets: Western law schools
The University of Wyoming's College of Law was founded in 1920 with classes being held in the library.
Denver University's College of Law was founded in 1892.
Denver University's College of Law was founded in 1892.
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Today In Wyoming's History: December 29 Updated
Today In Wyoming's History: December 29:
2014 The Special Master issues his report on Tongue River allocations in Montana v. Wyoming. Wyoming newspapers report this as a victory for Wyoming, but Montana papers report that both states won some points in the decision, which now goes to the Supreme Court for approval or rejection.
2014 The Special Master issues his report on Tongue River allocations in Montana v. Wyoming. Wyoming newspapers report this as a victory for Wyoming, but Montana papers report that both states won some points in the decision, which now goes to the Supreme Court for approval or rejection.
Je Ne Regrette Rien et Je Me Souviens: Resolutions and Regrets
This time of year, I'll frequently hear "I don't do New Year's Resolutions". That's fine, and that's your business, but I do.
These two attitudes might best be summed up by the two French phrases, which sounds so much more poetic in French than in English, from two different sources.
The first phrase if from Édith Piaf's classic, and defiant, song by that title, which freely translates as "I don't regret anything". It starts out:
In contrast, there's the defiant motto of Quebec. "Je me souviens", or "I remember".
To remember, and to remember accurately, is to have regrets, at least some minor regrets. And to have regrets requires us to attempt to adjust to avoid creating new regrets if we can. As a learning intelligent being, we must face our regrets and act where we can. And those are resolutions.
Of course, some regrets are unaddressable. Things we regret from eons ago, or regrets about situations which are permanent. Those kind of regrets, we're told, can be disabling. There's no point in crying over spilled milk, we're told as children, and there certainly isn't any point in crying over milk that's spilled and then spoiled. But, as a person with a long memory, I'm sometimes conscious of those old regrets.
But I don't view that as a bad thing. We are a species which weighs and measures things, including mistakes, and mistakes that stick with us do so for a reason. We've no doubt always been that way, as in "I regret whacking that bison on the head. . . I shall not do so again."
And I do make resolutions. I'm a work in progress for sure, and I know that. As we all have a backdoor view of ourselves, which nobody else does, I"m sure that most people acknowledge that. Indeed, a person who thinks that they're near perfection is a pain, and laboring under an illusion. Few do that, however.
Which doesn't mean the content should not be. Some do better than others at their lives and some also are blessed with fortune, opportunity, or a personal makeup that allows for them to be contented. Indeed, I suspect all are.
Which is why regrets well chosen, and resolutions well made, are useful. And January 1 is as good of time to make those as any other, whether they be large, as some people's are, or small, as most of our resolutions really are.
So, Happy New Year!
These two attitudes might best be summed up by the two French phrases, which sounds so much more poetic in French than in English, from two different sources.
The first phrase if from Édith Piaf's classic, and defiant, song by that title, which freely translates as "I don't regret anything". It starts out:
Non... rien de rienThat translates as:
Non je ne regrette rien
Ni le bien... qu'on m'a fait
Ni le mal, tout ça m'est bien égale..
No, nothing at all,I can see why this defiant song was sung by defiant French Legionairres as they went into captivity following their failued uprising in Algiers.
No, I regret nothing
Not the good things. . . they did to me
Nor the bad. . .may it's all the same to me!
In contrast, there's the defiant motto of Quebec. "Je me souviens", or "I remember".
To remember, and to remember accurately, is to have regrets, at least some minor regrets. And to have regrets requires us to attempt to adjust to avoid creating new regrets if we can. As a learning intelligent being, we must face our regrets and act where we can. And those are resolutions.
Of course, some regrets are unaddressable. Things we regret from eons ago, or regrets about situations which are permanent. Those kind of regrets, we're told, can be disabling. There's no point in crying over spilled milk, we're told as children, and there certainly isn't any point in crying over milk that's spilled and then spoiled. But, as a person with a long memory, I'm sometimes conscious of those old regrets.
But I don't view that as a bad thing. We are a species which weighs and measures things, including mistakes, and mistakes that stick with us do so for a reason. We've no doubt always been that way, as in "I regret whacking that bison on the head. . . I shall not do so again."
And I do make resolutions. I'm a work in progress for sure, and I know that. As we all have a backdoor view of ourselves, which nobody else does, I"m sure that most people acknowledge that. Indeed, a person who thinks that they're near perfection is a pain, and laboring under an illusion. Few do that, however.
Which doesn't mean the content should not be. Some do better than others at their lives and some also are blessed with fortune, opportunity, or a personal makeup that allows for them to be contented. Indeed, I suspect all are.
Which is why regrets well chosen, and resolutions well made, are useful. And January 1 is as good of time to make those as any other, whether they be large, as some people's are, or small, as most of our resolutions really are.
So, Happy New Year!
The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men: Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: $40/barrel?
I've been bumping up this thread from time to time:
I was amazed by the prediction, but in reading the article I found one of the knowledgeable folks in it noting that all the planning was done before the current crash in the price of oil. In other words, the planning basically was done with $100/bbl oil in mind, in perpetuity. Not oil that's dropping below half that price, and falling. Indeed, planning aside, this state now faces a decline in oil that represents about 50% of this value six months ago, and its still falling. Coal in the meantime has been steadily declining in production. Natural Gas prices collapsed some time ago. And actual demographic information is that the state lost about 1.5 times the number of people that the county plans stated would come into the county each year for 25 years. Wyoming's population slightly increased last year, but due to births by residents.
Now, I'm not getting after the planners nor the industry, but pointing out that all such planning has some inherent folly to it, as the assumptions that are made are frequently highly invalid. Looking at the basic industries of the state, all extractive save for tourism and agriculture, what we actually have is an economy based upon the production of three things, gas, coal, and oil, and all three are may be, or might not be, in some long term trouble Oil is the most stable, sort of, as the consumption of it will go on for some time, but even long term trends there are not comforting for those who would base an economy solely on it. The old habits of the country which saw fuel consumption dramatically rise every time the price at the pump went down are really over. People seem now fully committed to accepting rising CAFE standards and ever more fuel efficient cars, and turning away from petroleum entirely seems to be a widely shared goal. During this period, Saudi Arabia, whose economy entirely depends on the sale of petroleum, can afford to keep the price low and keep the money coming in, until it can hope to shift to something else in the future. They seem fully aware of that now and committed to that course.
The irony of that is that, but for the Saudi Arabian gambit, the oil economy did appear to have been fairly stable, which the planners no doubt noted, as consumption will go on, the cyclical nature of prices seemed over, and after the drilling was relatively complete, the infrastructure will of course remain and need to be serviced. But nobody planned on Saudi Arabia essentially knowing the same thing, and also knowing that it could drop the price and crowed the domestic industry out. That shows, I suppose, the inherent risks in any sort of long term planning. You can never really fully account for such things.
Gas, which did create a booming economy in some Wyoming counties, sort of endured a price crash awhile back which was more predictable, but also seemed to take people off guard. The reason for that is that the new gas pockets were, in some areas, easy to exploit, but once the infrastructure came on line, which was regional in extent, it put a lot of gas on the market. Gas used to be basically consumed here locally, as that's all the infrastructure that there was, and the thought, reasonable enough, was that once our gas was put into a national infrastructure, the price would rise. It did, but then all the regional gas including the Canadian price came into the system too, and then the price at the wellhead fell.
Coal's problems are much deeper, but without going into them, here we can say that everyone has been pretty good in deducing that and essentially planning for decline. That's a good thing in that while the decline is perhaps at least somewhat inevitable, it hasn't really caught anyone by surprise too much. It's a huge problem for State government, however, in that much of the state's revenue comes from coal.
At any rate, what that now means is that all the local planning may be really out the window. That would suggest, in my view, the planning was too early, and much too unimaginative in its nature. The risk now is that we'll go on for some time with plans that have every appearance of being obsolete, and that perhaps we ought to plan for a period of decline, or perhaps we should have been planning for that possibility all along. What if prices stay this low, or lower, for a decade? That's something we better start planning for. The industry itself likely is, as it's good at planning for such things as a rule, and has learned from the shocks of the past.
Also, while it places me in the camp that some regard as radical, in doing the planning, there's nothing wrong with trying to keep a lid on some aspects and byproducts of growth as well, which isn't the planning we've always been doing. We always seem to believe we can have everything we want, but we can't, or that everything is simply inevitable and capable only of some direction. By this point in time, we should be aware of that and strive to keep the things that make any one place nice in some ways and control things in a planning sense to our advantage, when we can, which in part might build in an element of delay that would allow for a cushion should plans go awry.. Nearly every place that people seek to escape in the US today got that way as the only plan was to encourage things to come in, or just assume that was inevitable, and they did, until people weren't happy about what had developed but could do nothing about it. Some forethought of that type should be made, even thought that means not building all those roads, etc., or at least not doing it right away We can afford to be smarter than we usually are when times are good and plan accordingly, and when things go badly, the motivation for effective planning usually goes out the window with the economy.
Of course, the folly of planning is that its very difficult to really make a rational plan of this type more than ten years out, if event that long. Early predictions for the state held that the population of the state would be double its current population early in the 20th Century, which obviously were incorrect, but which were built on the assumption that Wyoming's economy would mirror Pennsylvania's then industrial economy. A plan made 25 years ago would still be somewhat valid, if wisely done now, as not that much has changed in spite of the fact that we think it has. But would a plan drafted in 1925 have been valid for 1950? Probably not. Or a plan in 1950, in 1975? Planning is a must, but not accepting that generally most plans go out the window and planning itself is more valuable than the plan is something that should always be taken into account.
Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: $40/barrel?: A couple of weeks ago I posted this: Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: $40/barrel? : Lex Anteinternet: $40/barrel? : Driven by Sau...Related to this, in yesterday's Tribune there was an article about the county's plans for infrastructure, based upon the (frightening) estimate that the county will gain 30,000 residents over the next 25 years. Well, this brings to mind:
But Mousie, thou art no thy lane,Excerpt from Robert Burns, To a Mouse, on Turning Her Up in Her Nest with the Plough
In proving foresight may be vain:
The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!
I was amazed by the prediction, but in reading the article I found one of the knowledgeable folks in it noting that all the planning was done before the current crash in the price of oil. In other words, the planning basically was done with $100/bbl oil in mind, in perpetuity. Not oil that's dropping below half that price, and falling. Indeed, planning aside, this state now faces a decline in oil that represents about 50% of this value six months ago, and its still falling. Coal in the meantime has been steadily declining in production. Natural Gas prices collapsed some time ago. And actual demographic information is that the state lost about 1.5 times the number of people that the county plans stated would come into the county each year for 25 years. Wyoming's population slightly increased last year, but due to births by residents.
Now, I'm not getting after the planners nor the industry, but pointing out that all such planning has some inherent folly to it, as the assumptions that are made are frequently highly invalid. Looking at the basic industries of the state, all extractive save for tourism and agriculture, what we actually have is an economy based upon the production of three things, gas, coal, and oil, and all three are may be, or might not be, in some long term trouble Oil is the most stable, sort of, as the consumption of it will go on for some time, but even long term trends there are not comforting for those who would base an economy solely on it. The old habits of the country which saw fuel consumption dramatically rise every time the price at the pump went down are really over. People seem now fully committed to accepting rising CAFE standards and ever more fuel efficient cars, and turning away from petroleum entirely seems to be a widely shared goal. During this period, Saudi Arabia, whose economy entirely depends on the sale of petroleum, can afford to keep the price low and keep the money coming in, until it can hope to shift to something else in the future. They seem fully aware of that now and committed to that course.
The irony of that is that, but for the Saudi Arabian gambit, the oil economy did appear to have been fairly stable, which the planners no doubt noted, as consumption will go on, the cyclical nature of prices seemed over, and after the drilling was relatively complete, the infrastructure will of course remain and need to be serviced. But nobody planned on Saudi Arabia essentially knowing the same thing, and also knowing that it could drop the price and crowed the domestic industry out. That shows, I suppose, the inherent risks in any sort of long term planning. You can never really fully account for such things.
Gas, which did create a booming economy in some Wyoming counties, sort of endured a price crash awhile back which was more predictable, but also seemed to take people off guard. The reason for that is that the new gas pockets were, in some areas, easy to exploit, but once the infrastructure came on line, which was regional in extent, it put a lot of gas on the market. Gas used to be basically consumed here locally, as that's all the infrastructure that there was, and the thought, reasonable enough, was that once our gas was put into a national infrastructure, the price would rise. It did, but then all the regional gas including the Canadian price came into the system too, and then the price at the wellhead fell.
Coal's problems are much deeper, but without going into them, here we can say that everyone has been pretty good in deducing that and essentially planning for decline. That's a good thing in that while the decline is perhaps at least somewhat inevitable, it hasn't really caught anyone by surprise too much. It's a huge problem for State government, however, in that much of the state's revenue comes from coal.
At any rate, what that now means is that all the local planning may be really out the window. That would suggest, in my view, the planning was too early, and much too unimaginative in its nature. The risk now is that we'll go on for some time with plans that have every appearance of being obsolete, and that perhaps we ought to plan for a period of decline, or perhaps we should have been planning for that possibility all along. What if prices stay this low, or lower, for a decade? That's something we better start planning for. The industry itself likely is, as it's good at planning for such things as a rule, and has learned from the shocks of the past.
Also, while it places me in the camp that some regard as radical, in doing the planning, there's nothing wrong with trying to keep a lid on some aspects and byproducts of growth as well, which isn't the planning we've always been doing. We always seem to believe we can have everything we want, but we can't, or that everything is simply inevitable and capable only of some direction. By this point in time, we should be aware of that and strive to keep the things that make any one place nice in some ways and control things in a planning sense to our advantage, when we can, which in part might build in an element of delay that would allow for a cushion should plans go awry.. Nearly every place that people seek to escape in the US today got that way as the only plan was to encourage things to come in, or just assume that was inevitable, and they did, until people weren't happy about what had developed but could do nothing about it. Some forethought of that type should be made, even thought that means not building all those roads, etc., or at least not doing it right away We can afford to be smarter than we usually are when times are good and plan accordingly, and when things go badly, the motivation for effective planning usually goes out the window with the economy.
Of course, the folly of planning is that its very difficult to really make a rational plan of this type more than ten years out, if event that long. Early predictions for the state held that the population of the state would be double its current population early in the 20th Century, which obviously were incorrect, but which were built on the assumption that Wyoming's economy would mirror Pennsylvania's then industrial economy. A plan made 25 years ago would still be somewhat valid, if wisely done now, as not that much has changed in spite of the fact that we think it has. But would a plan drafted in 1925 have been valid for 1950? Probably not. Or a plan in 1950, in 1975? Planning is a must, but not accepting that generally most plans go out the window and planning itself is more valuable than the plan is something that should always be taken into account.
Monday, December 29, 2014
Sunday, December 28, 2014
Movies in History: Stalingrad, Enemy At The Gates, and Stalingrad
By some accounts the battle of Stalingrad is the largest battle in human history, although that unfortunate status is not unchallenged, and therefore it isn't surprising that the battle would be the subject of a variety of films, not all of which I've seen by any means.
Stalingrad. 1993
The best of these movies is the 1993 German production, simply called Stalingrad. This film follows a squad of German soldiers who are of a specialist, stormtrooper, variety, joining them just as they receive a new officer to replace an officer with a severe head injury. He joins the squad in Italy just as they receive orders to ship out to the Russian front. From there, the squad is followed over a period of months as the situation in Stalingrad deteriorates.
This film is a surprising one in some ways as it is by far the best of the ones about this battle I've seen. A German film looking at the battle from a post war German prospective as a terrible German tragedy, the film doesn't shy away from depicting German actions as barbarous, although, as is typical for German films about World War Two, it concentrates that in a fashion limited to certain individuals and it distinguishes those individuals from average Germans, a distinction that is not fully warranted by any means. The Russians, in contrast, are generally portrayed sympathetically.
Combat scenes are highly realistic and this film scores very high in terms of material details, something that's somewhat surprising as this film predates Saving Private Ryan, but it compares favorably with it in these regards. Artillery and armor, as well as small arms, are accurate for the armies and period, something that is not often the case for pre Saving Private Ryan films. As in at least one other German work, German soldiers are depicted using Soviet small arms, which must be at least based on some element of truth as it seems to show up fairly frequently.
The story, I'll note, is really grim and depressing, which isn't surprising given its topic.
Enemy At The Gates
In start contrast with Stalingrad, Enemy At The Gates is flat out awful.
This is a British production that uses the title of a fairly well respected straight history on the battle which is now little read. That's all it shares, however, with the book. This film instead follows what is supposed to be a fictionalized story of real Soviet snipers who fought in the battle.
That's a bit of a problem in and of itself, as the Soviets fictionalized the stories of their own snipers during the war for propaganda purposes, so basing a fictionalized drama on them is basically basing a story on something that's somewhat fictionalized already. Indeed, at the time this movie was released it started a bit of a boom amongst history fans on the topic of Soviet snipers, which in turn gave rise to some re-analysis of the love story angle between the male and female snipers, showing the extent to which the story of the snipers in general was exaggerated, which isn't to say that the Soviets didn't use snipers a great deal.
The further "sniper duel" aspect this is real Hollywood schlock, even if this isn't a Hollywood film. The German sniper is even made to be an officer, who is a super sniper. Again, while the Germans used snipers, they were enlisted men.
Just about everything I can think of in regards to the story is bad, and makes this movie worth avoiding. What about the material details?
Well, the weapons are all correct, I'll give it that. And a scene that depicts a Luftwaffe bombing run is nicely done.
Stalingrad, 2013.
My suspicion is that there is more than one Russian movie about Stalingrad, but this is the only one I've seen. Indeed, it's only the second full length Russian movie I've ever seen in full. So, when I saw it the other day, I had somewhat high expectations for it.
Those expectations were somewhat let down, but perhaps I was expecting too much of the film.
This movie is centered around a drama involving the story of a 19 year old girl who is the sole remaining resident of a ruined apartment building in Stalingrad. Everyone she's known before the war in her apartment, including her family, has died in the battle and she won't leave. Early in the film the German occupied apartment changes hands and we're introduced to five Soviet fighting men who strive (with other Soviet soldiers at first) to retain possession of the building from the German forces that have been pushed out. As the movie progresses, all five of the Soviet fighters develop strong attachments to the girl.
That may seem odd, and odder yet the film actually commences in modern Japan, where an elderly Russian man is a on a crew seeking to rescue stranded German girls from the rubble of a building brought down by the recent tsunami. In this we learn that the Russian man has "five fathers", and as the story develops it becomes apparent that the five Russian fighting men, four soldiers and one sailor (the Soviets did use sailors as infantry on occasion, and the film is accurate in those regards) are his "fathers" (with one being his actual father).
Added into this mix, a subplot involves a German officer who pays his attention to a Russian woman, against her will, and then by force, with that subplot developing into a really odd love story.
None of this sounds, of course, like a war movie, but it is, and during the film the Russians fight desperately against the more numerous Germans. Early in the film the fighting is in fact spectacular, with some special effects that are truly dramatic.
As a story, this tale is oddly Russian. It's not a bad story, it's just sort of peculiar. The subplot is extremely odd from our prospective, as the concept of physical force giving rise to a love story would be regarded as repellent by nearly any modern western audience.
Departing from there, in terms of material details, the film isn't too bad, although it falls in this are somewhere between the best materially accurate films of the 1970s and Saving Private Ryan. All the weapons are correct or nearly so. This movie also includes an offhand example of German troops using Russian equipment, so that shows up again. An effort to make replica Panzerkampfwagen IVs isn't too bad, if not entirely successful. Use of the weapons, however, is highly exaggerated with some weapon performance being silly.
In regards to historical accuracy and portrayal of the armies, a much poorer job was done. On some things, the movie is surprisingly accurate. The barbarity of the Soviet army is accurately and surprisingly portrayed. In one scene, one of the "fathers" has a sailor shot simply because the sailor is indicating he's going to return to the rear. That is pretty accurate. In another, another "father" shoots the German officer's female love interest in the head, which again, is pretty indicative of how Soviet troops generally regarded things. On the other hand, the Soviet soldiers are impossibly capable. The Germans are portrayed with varying degrees of evil intent, which isn't surprising, but the tolerance shown by a senior officer for his junior's dalliance is way off the mark in the way portrayed, and would probably have resulted in the junior's court martial. Chances are the woman who that officer is interested in would have met with a bad end way before she did as well.
On a somewhat interesting note, the Russianess of the film is demonstrated not only in the story line, but in the way it is portrayed. Less blood and gore is shown than in American films, even though the film is very violent. In these regards, it is probably actually more accurate than American movies, which tend to be overboard in that aspect. However, almost all of the male female contact is merely suggested. There's some scenes in which this isn't entirely true, but only barely, and the film recalls American movies of the 50s and 60s in this fashion. A little more, but not a lot more, is shown than was shown, for example, in From Here To Eternity. This harkens back to Soviet production values, in which such portrayals just weren't done, but it also is refreshing in that it takes more skill to suggest something than to just exploit it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)