A few minor gaffes in what was otherwise a great film

there is no mistaking any type of "brodie" type helmet from either war for an adrian

and as far as the M16 Stahlhelm i didn't even see a single german soldier in the entire movie...

one other nitpick is in the scenes in the trench where they show some closeup shots of the rifles... the slings are green canvas which is incorrect for the time period... leather slings would have still been standard and WW1 era canvas slings were a khaki color

and the crook of the arm thing... i can comfortably carry a lee enfield in such a way however when marching through the trenches carrying a rifle in such a way is ill-advised as there's not much room in those trenches and holding a rifle perpendicular to the body puts part of your rifle in the way of people trying to walk past (as seen in the film with the wounded being taken the opposite direction ) this is why slings exist

overall this movie makes fewer errors than a large number of other war movies especially WW2(look at the many WW2 movies where they give american or sometimes russian tanks a german paint job... or watch enemy at the gates)

The British soldiers in the photos are definitely wearing Brodie helmets - they look like WW2 vintage to me. As the earlier post says it's difficult to mistake an Adrian helmet for a Brodie - they are completely different shapes. The helmets in the film were definitely WW2 Brodies - I should know - I've studied the British army's experience in WW1 for ten years and I manufactured reproduction WW1 Brodie liners for WW1 reenactments during the 1990s. But again, the point is not 'which steel helmet is wrong' - ANY steel helmet is wrong for 1915. A VERY few Adrian helmets were tested in 1915, but there is no way that so many of the photos being reviewed by the Kiplings would show any type of steel helmet - and if they did: i.e. if they were reviewing photos at a later point in the war, the photos showing a steel helmet should have been discarded at first glance because there is no chance whatsoever that their son could have possibly worn a Brodie steel helmet. The Kiplings are shown going through such photos again and again.

As for the German helmets, the image was dark at that point in the film, but again it's hard to mistake a pickelhaube for a late pattern stahlhelm. One thing is for certain - it was not a pickelhaube. The German soldier was lying dead in a trench. He may have been the film's only German soldier.

As for the notion that other films are worse, yes, that's true, but it's not a good excuse. British TV has had years of practice making WW1 dramas - I think it's about time they hired historical consultants who knew their job.

I think the timeline in the film was a little goofed up. John Kipling sailed to France the day after his 18th birthday (Aug 17th, 1915) but was not actually killed until six weeks later on Sept 27, 1915. The movie made it seem like he was killed the day after his birthday