(TV Series)

(2001)

User Reviews

Review this title
1 Review
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Above Average History.
rmax30482320 July 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Like the other episodes in the "Battlefield" series, the documentary is divided into clearly labeled sections -- "The Commanders," "The Weapons," and the like. There are no talking heads, no pitiful survivor stories. The war is treated for what it is, at some uber-abstract level of discourse -- a game of strategy. The material we see consists of newsreel footage and a few maps.

The first two seasons were by far the best. Seasons 3,4,and 5, of which "The West Wall" is a part, were generally inferior. The news footage became more repetitive and asynchronous with the narration. The chapters were more loosely organized. The maps were fewer and more murky and, for some reason or other, were superimposed on a distracting background photograph.

But this episode is an improvement over most of the others in the last 3 seasons. One of the reasons is that someone in charge paid more attention to the organization of the chapters and the accompanying narrative. Another is that this episode doesn't pull any punches in expressing an opinion or in describing the opinion of one warrior about another. I don't know how many time Field Marshall Montgomery is "hated" by General Patton. Lots.

Anyway, I've kept my eyes and ears open over the years where the Second World War is concerned, partly because I had older relatives who were deeply involved in it. Here's what I'd learned about the battle for the West Wall, which is what the German's called what we called the Siegfried Line. You know, that reverse Maginot Line that ran along Germany's Western border from the low countries to Switzerland? Okay. I knew the Allies had managed a successful landing on the Normandy beaches, then Montgomery was to lead the Commonwealth troops to a quick occupation of Caen on the eastern flank, but he was bogged down because he was cautious and because the enemy threw most of his weight against Montgomery. The Americans were to advance quickly on the Allied right and swoop down through France, but they were bogged down too because they had to fight their way, yard by yard, through the bocage. Everywhere, German resistance was stiffer than had been expected.

Fast forward through Market Garden and the Falaise pocket, and Montgomery is finally inching eastward through northern France while the bombastic Patton is sweeping through the country to the south and running out of fuel, as fast armored advances are wont to do.

Next thing we know, both parties are trying to get across the Rhine River into Germany. There has been hardly a peep about the dragon's teeth of the Siegfried Line. Apparently it was a cakewalk for the Allies. It's a blank spot in the shared vernacular data base.

That's the general impression conveyed by the bit of historical stuff I've read or viewed, and it's not very accurate. The advance through France was a tough nut to crack for Montgomery and for the Americans, and the Siegfried Line was a drastic bummer, expensive in both lives and equipment. This episode corrects the common belief that it was something of a route step through the country, through the obstacles and pill boxes and mine fields, with soldiers stopping to chat and brew up, and occasionally steal chickens from French farmers. There isn't much point in going into detail.

I kind of enjoyed it when the narration gives one or another leader a kick in the pants too. I'd guess it was written by a Brit -- I'm too lazy to look him up -- because Patton comes off worse than Montgomery, although Patton is given his due as an aggressive general. Patton probably deserved a little spanking for his sometimes grotesque posturing, a fighting general and an egomaniac.

And, for the first time I can think of, the German soldier is regarded as more disciplined, more motivated, and more skilled in tactics than most of the Allies, partly because they were now defending their homeland. The Allies, sensing the end of the war coming, were less likely to take risks, and many were green, poorly led, and used less effective equipment than the Germans. I don't know if it's true that the enemy in the main had better soldiers than the Allies -- the question is moot -- but it's unusual to hear it in a documentary written and produced by one of the victors. The narration calls it "depressingly obvious."
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed