This movie is a very nice piece of fiction. The facts, however speak for themselves.If it wasn't for America, WWII would still be going. It was US involvement that ended the stalemate and not the piddly little peace keeping force protecting Australia as depicted in this film.If you look at the bulk of movies in the 20th century, it is the USA that always saves the day. Not Australia. So this film is basically highly inaccurate.
share[deleted]
I'd say you're about half right. to be technical, I hardly doubt WWII would still be going on 80 years later, with or without the US. And also, in reality, the USSR did a lot of "saving the day" for the allies as well as the US. Some even argue that USSR had the means of eventually winning the war even without the help of the US. had it gotten to that point.
<i>but aside from that, my main question would be. when exactly did this movie, at any point, give the idea that Australia was the war ender?</i>
For real. I JUST watched it (and really liked it, actually), and the only real relation it seemed to have to WWII was Darwin getting the its butt handed to it. It didn't seem to highlight Australia's part in the war at all. The city gets bombed, and they all evacuate. That's about it. Which, by the way, didn't seem to have any good point to it.
It's like, "Hey, I'm afancy pants english person and I gotta somehow get cows across the outback, and I meet this rugged and manly cattle driver and a cute little kid, and though it was no easy task we got the cows where they needed to go before the big bad guy who wanted to take our ranch could. Yay! Oh, and then afterwards, there's a war."
It didn't make any sense to include it, y'know? Except for the fact that they hadn't really fleshed out endgame for the characters at the end of the cattle drive.
Still, it was good. I enjoyed watching it.
drinking turtle: I agree with most of what you said. Australia certainly had nothing to do with winning the war. It played it's small part but that's not what this film is about.
I'll explain the addition of the war story.
(a) From an Australian perspective, that story has never been told before on film and a lot of Australians didn't know about it, so it made sense to add it in.
(b) Baz wanted a multi-genre film. He wanted comedy, romance, action, drama.
(c) The war part was the drama.
That's why it was included.
OP is either a troll or just plain ignorant.
shareEXACTLY. CAN'T THESE GUYS SPOT A TROLL BY NOW?! THE O.P. IS JUST TROLLING--AND LOOK AT HOW MANY PAGES HE GOT GOING...GOOD GRIEF, PEOPLE!! :( JUST LET THE THREAD DIE FFS. ENOUGH OF THE YANK-BASHING ITS GETTING OLD, SURELY WE CAN FIND A NEW FAVOURITE TARGET FOR THE NEXT DECADE OR SO?! :/
Why does the Earth have colours? - The New World
when exactly did this movie, at any point, give the idea that Australia was the war ender?
^ Yeah, this. Who would have guessed that merely acknowledging that Darwin was bombed by Japanese aircraft could prompt posts of such stupefying silliness?
_____
I suppose on a clear day you can see the class struggle from here.
I agree. Nowhere in the film was Australia overstated as the lone winner of the war. Obviously this American didn't watch the movie, but is jumping to the usual concludion these right-wingers always do. Talk about over-compensating. And I'm another yank, by the way.
shareIf you look at the bulk of movies in the 20th century, it is the USA that always saves the day. Not Australia. So this film is basically highly inaccurate.
Wow first off you should not be learning history from movies,pick up a book. I won't say they weren't heroes but the soviets the brits heck anyone who fought on the side of the allies has just as much right for recognition (Although I lack to see how this film shows Australia winning the war.).
Buy the ticket take the ride
Agree with the first 3 replies.In no way did I ever inturpret this film as stating 'Australia saved the day'.Far from it,and I wouldnt be gaining my perspective of history from hollywood movies,seriously,how old is the first poster?
shareWhat are you even talking about?
"it is the USA that always saves the day. Not Australia. So this film is basically highly inaccurate."
Nowhere in the movie does it say Australia was the leading cause of victory in WWII.
No Australia didn't win the war but we did make back a lot of ground through out Asia...we pushed the Japanese forces back a fair way. However Australia didn't and never could win the war because of luck of man power the Japanese would eventually over powered us. However it is you understating Australia's role in the war. If you wanna keep thinking the US won single=handedly maybe Pearl Harbour is more upto your speed (not that I thought this film was particularly good anyway)
shareGood post, slainmonkey. Yank here. While I think it is true that America's contribution to the war was decisive, the role of allied countries, especially ones who were on the ropes before we got involved, can't be understated the way it sometimes is by Americans. Australia hosted a large number of U.S. marines, army, and naval forces in an area that was invaluable to us, and also provided an incredible wealth of intelligence from people it had planted on islands around the pacific. And of course, the large number of troops who fought and died in the war was game-changing and it couldn't have been done without them, or the British, for that matter. It was a team effort, and it was interesting watching the re-enactment of the bombing of Darwin in this movie - something I am sure many people didn't even know happened. Americans and Australians are historical bretheren, in spite of the animosity that can exist between us (most of which I hope is good natured), and have more in common than most nations, including a terrific film industry!
shareThe OP was/is an obvious troll and his hit and run tactic shows it.
Aside from that, Australia did their fair share in WWII for a large country with a very small population compared to the major powers. Britain seemed to have a habit of sending their commonwealth partners on some questionable suicide missions during both WWI and WWII.
As an American it always bothers me when Americans gloat about WWI, WWII, and saving Europe. Every country who participated and especially the Commonwealth nations did what was asked and beyond. As a Vietnam veteran I think many people forget that Australia was right beside us in that war and also the Korean War. Truly, Australia is a great friend of the United States and has had our back when it wasn't popular. Sure we've had a few disagreements over the years but overall it has been our favorite nation (after the Mudderland of course).
And now it looks like the ANZUS Treaty is getting revitalized with half our Department of Defense moving to northern Australia and actions similar to NATO.
I watch a lot of dramatic Australian films almost always with the subtitles on so I can understand your strange take on English and one of my favorites other than "Australia" is "Ned Kelly".
***************************************************
My favorite: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
"I watch a lot of dramatic Australian films almost always with the subtitles on so I can understand your strange take on English.."
Ha ha ha!!! Yes, it is not always for Americans to understand us, especially if the Aussie in question is more of an 'ocker' type like Hoges (Crocodile Dundee)!! Australia is one of the most urbanised countries on earth and as such, most don't speak ockerish with the sort of old fashioned 'strine' language (strine means Australian btw). Now that we are more of a multi cultural nation, kids aren't being brought up that way.
It's funny though. The situation isn't the same for Aussies understanding different American speech patterns because we have been brought up on a steady and large dose of Hollywood movies and TV programs over the years, and you've just seen a few of ours.
I watch a lot of dramatic Australian films almost always with the subtitles on so I can understand your strange take on English
Me-->I watch a lot of dramatic Australian films almost always with the subtitles on so I can understand your strange take on English
You-->Sorry, but that's just downright offensive. Americans are always watching British, Australian, everything films with subtitles. Some exposure to something other than the 'Murican accent is sorely needed.
Actually Australia, and Australians, played decisive roles in WWII. Had the Japs taken over Australia, they would have had access to the manpower (to build roads, landing strips etc.) and resources (cattle, food) of the country. This would have tipped the war in favor of Japan/Germany. Britain without access to food and soldiers from Australia could have keeled in much earlier.
In addition, Australian soldiers made sure the Japs (who had taken over virtually all of South East Asia) didn't make headway on the Kokoda Trail in Papua New Guinea (then part of Australia). It was a long, hard and brutal campaign that made all the difference as to how WW2 played out in that part of the world.
Japan's first loss in a land battle during World War II was against Australian troops in New Guinea. Read some history books that were not written by Americans.
shareOr films that were not made by Americans. ("U-571", anyone?)
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
Quote: "Japan's first loss in a land battle during World War II was against Australian troops in New Guinea. Read some history books that were not written by Americans."
While the Aussies were slugging their way north from Port Moresby, the Yanks were 800 miles east at Guadalcanal. Both were doing their part to win the war in the Pacific
Milne Bay was won on September 1 1942. The first US victory on Guadalcanal was not until later that month.
shareDon't you love it when the original poster makes a lame statement and then disapears?
The attack on Darwin was Feb. '42 and the Australians were shown as being more defensive than agressive. There was nothing in the movie about the War events after that.
I feel that every country had a role in the WW2 end. Many countries played a vital part. It is difficult to project what would have happened if one country was absent. I feel that Russia had a big role in it, as it was the first major defeat for Germany and they lost a lot of manpower to Russia. However, one important thing to point out is how some countries are NOT mentioned. For instance, India had 2 million soldiers fighting under the British. They fought all over North Africa and Europe. The number of soldiers who participated and were lost was more than Australia or Canada. One of big battles for Japan was the attack on Kohima where they had suffered 50,000 casualties out of the 84,000 troops involved. Do see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kohima
The Soviets, not 'Russia'. Millions of non-Russian Soviets fought and suffered and died. Russia doesn't deserve the credit.
shareThe film never makes any statement about the size of Australia's contribution to the war effort. It simply uses some of the Australian preparations for war in the Northwest Territory as backdrop.
As such it cannot be construed to either overstate or understate Australia's contributions.