Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 4, 2022 6:55:44 GMT -8
I'm doing a 7-day trial of the ScreenPix channel. The movie selection is fair-to-middling. But, hey, if I want to watch all the old Planet of the Apes movies, I can do so. And the trick here is that the channel is just $3.00 per month. I can see that there are enough decent movies I want to watch, or to watch again, to keep me going for a couple months. And I freed up these funds by canceling Acorn TV. I pretty much had mined that for everything worth watching. But the real deal-breaker was that it technically didn't work very well. Close-captioning was consistently out-of-sync or would skip entire lines altogether. Worse, you could not continue a stream from where you left off. Theoretically that function was there. But it didn't work. Or, I should say, it seemed to work for the first week or two and then it just stopped working. This basically makes the service unusable. But the mechanics of ScreenPix works very well...outstandingly for such a small channel. It's even better than Amazon Prime in one crucial area: You can pause a show (for how long, I don't know...I was good for at least fifteen minutes) without being dumped out of the show (where you have to re-buffer, etc.) as in Amazon Prime. And this is, I think, a new backward feature that Prime introduced in the last couple of months. It didn't used to be that way. But now if you pause a video for more than about 2 minutes, it dumps you back into the previous menu where you have to basically re-buffer the film again. That is, it doesn't instantly re-start. And don't get me started on Netflix, perhaps the most annoying menuing system ever created. But ScreenPix seems to be the little engine that could. The picture quality is excellent, you can pause, and you can continue a stream where you left off. The movie descriptions are too brief, but that's a small point. I'm currently watching Steve McQueen in "Hell is for Heroes." It's a nice little war movie, and probably one overlooked by most. |
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Aug 4, 2022 20:24:11 GMT -8
It sounds like a reasonable channel, but I can't bring myself to pay for anything other than basic internet service. I watch little-to-no TV unless I go through a series with my son. We are presently watching the Hornblower series starring Ioan Gruffund. That is free on Roku TV. I believe there are eight episodes and after those are done, it will probably be a few days before we find something else of interest. Of course, Bob Ross is still on many different channels.  |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 5, 2022 7:21:10 GMT -8
Total outlay of premium channels outside of basic internet service: Currently $2.99 + tax. I leech off my ex sister-in-law's accounts for Amazon Prime and Netflix. But I almost watch nothing on Netflix. You could set that service us Exhibit One for the degraded tastes of our culture. But Amazon Prime has a surprisingly good selection of old movies and such. Still, I take your point that you don't have to shell out money if you have a Roku to find lots of good stuff. And certainly paying for it is no guarantee of quality shows. For instance, I stumbled across the "Sherlock Holmes Series" channel just the other day. It features the series with Ronald Howard as Holmes and Howard Marion-Crawford as Watson. Is this A-list entertainment? Probably not. But I find this Watson less irritating than the Nigel Bruce who played opposite to Basil Rathbone. I may watch a little more. Once in a while it pays just to look through their channel store. Not sure if I've seen that Hornblower series. |
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Aug 5, 2022 8:19:13 GMT -8
I watched a few of the episodes of this series some time back.
My main problem with Roku and Tubi (which is also free) is the way they present options. One heading could say "Mysteries" and have 200 listings. I then have to scroll right through the whole list to see what is on offer. Of course, I have little-to-no interest in most, but once in a while, I do find something interesting.
Both Roki and Tubi also have memories as to what you have been watching or may have watched before. I can't recall which one has a "Continue watching" mode for programs which you had to pause, but wanted to come back to later.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 5, 2022 8:41:31 GMT -8
The good channels will have a reliable "continue watching," as well as "recently viewed." Even so, the way most of these channels are organized, it would be easier to find a needle in a haystack.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 7, 2022 8:59:46 GMT -8
I did finish watching Hell is for Heroes. It's pretty good (even fairly gritty) with a good cast that includes Steve McQueen, Fess Parker, James Coburn, Bobby Darin, Harry Guardino (he's great as Sgt. Larkin), and introducing Bob Newhart who, of course, does some of his bits on a telephone.
I'd like to ask more experienced soldiers if a large concrete bunker like that would have been attempted without tank support. This bunker is right on the Siegfried line, complete with rows of dragon teeth.  |
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Aug 7, 2022 9:41:09 GMT -8
I cannot speak from experience, but I believe infantrymen sometimes attacked similar bunkers in the Pacific Theater without tank support. That said, I think everyone preferred the Sherman Tank converted into a flame thrower for the job. Seeing the photo of that bunker just turned on a switch in my mind. I had originally thought this was a film in which Steve McQueen was a B-17 pilot. Now I recall this was about infantrymen who used a satchel charge to get past a huge bunker. I thought the film gave a fairly good depiction of the horror and costs of war. |
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Aug 7, 2022 11:34:09 GMT -8
That said, I think everyone preferred the Sherman Tank converted into a flame thrower for the job. The problem of bunkers of this type is they have a wide field of fire and are protected by high cal machine guns, sometime even flamethrowers, making a frontal assault very dangerous. A tank equipped flame thrower is the best option. Next best is to flank the bunker and attack it from the rear. To prevent this most bunkers are set up in a triangle with overlapping fields of fire. Tanks or very accurate airstrikes are the best method. Artillery is also an option, but many bunkers are built to withstand any but the largest guns. The Marines liked to call in off shore fire from the big battleships. The 2000 HE from a 16 inch gun was more than enough to take them out through feet of rebar and concrete. On Okinawa the big ship would come to about a mile off shore and provide fire support for marines 20 miles inland with amazing accuracy. Just a reminder on this day in 1942 1st Marines landed on a hellish piece of dirt in the South Pacific called Guadalcanal. The fight lasted 6 months Col Chesty Puller was my father's CO. Puller would later be promoted to Lt General. He personally promoted my father from Staff to Gunny. My father refused promotion to 2nd LT. Good night Chesty, where ever you are. Semper Fi. |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 7, 2022 12:02:48 GMT -8
McQueen really took one for the team. And that was indeed a pretty good depiction of the horrors of war, and with very little blood.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 7, 2022 12:04:16 GMT -8
That's pretty amazing. And, of course, the Siegfried line was obviously way outside their range. It seems everyone is of the opinion that a tank with a flamethrower is the way to go. And in the movie, even after McQueen dove into the bunker with a satchel charge, the sergeant ordered Neil Sedaka (or was it Bobby Darin?) to take a flamethrower to it. That seemed like a waste of good fuel. Could anyone really survive in that bunker after the explosion?
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Aug 7, 2022 12:55:50 GMT -8
One thing the America armed forces are known for, across the world, is for having a superabundance of supplies. So much so that they can waste them without a second thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Aug 7, 2022 13:12:55 GMT -8
Speaking of whom. I liked the original version as a boy, but thought this version, which came out after I had graduated from college, was better. I can still sing this, except for one or two high notes. Need some training again. That is more my style of exercise. Breaking Up Is Hard To Do This is a very good album. Neil Sedaka |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 7, 2022 17:08:04 GMT -8
There I go. Thinking like a Kraut. Yes, of course, the Americans had a totally different perspective on supplies. I love that moment in (I think) "The Battle of the Bulge" where one of the German generals (Robert Shaw?) explains to a subordinate what they are up against (and thus why a lightning strike blow must be dealt). He shows the subordinate a chocolate cake wrapped in an American newspaper from just a few days ago.
Ahh...here's the scene. You can find a lot of scripts online:
A really good scene from that movie. And regarding the extra torching of the German bunker, in the context of the film I guess it could be a show of anger because of the sacrifice by McQueen.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 7, 2022 17:22:37 GMT -8
Speaking of Neil Sedaka, I was thinking of him because I had come across The Captain (now deceased) and Tenille (still going in her 80's) as a subject. I forget why. That's how the internet works though. C&T recorded quite a few Sedaka songs and made them hits, including "Love Will Keep Us Together" and "Lonely Night (Angel Face)". I always thought the Captain looked goofy in his outfit. But you can't argue with success. And those two had quite a run for a few years. If you can find a ticket, believe it or not, Neil Sedaka will be performing September 30 in New Jersey. Not sure why he's never won a Grammy. But then these award shows are all perverted and rigged. But surely a lifetime Grammy or something would be in order. This current crop of punks and narcissists are riding on (shitting on) the shoulder of giants as they spew out the crap they call music. |
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Aug 7, 2022 20:06:24 GMT -8
There is a scene in "A Bridge Too Far" in which Lt. General Bittrich, played by Maximilian Schell looks up at the countless rows of C 47s flying over him and he says something like, "If I had only a part of that material at my disposal, I could win the war."
Quantity has a quality all its own.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 8, 2022 8:56:10 GMT -8
There can be no more Devil's Advocate than to what-if about Nazi Germany, especially the military side of it. In February 1943, Goebbels calls for total war. It was somewhat a day late and a dollar short after poking the hornets' nests on two fronts. What I never fully appreciated until seeing some documentaries on this is that Hitler felt constrained not to have the homeland feel the brunt of the war. Had they gone total-war from the get-go, they might have had a chance. But without long-range bombers to pound the Russian factories east of the Urals, the material advantage was going to be hard to overcome. And yet, as we know, Albert Speer worked dark miracles in terms of actually substantially raising (if not doubling) production, all while their cities were being heavily bombed and much of their manufacturing was being done underground and in caves. Also, although I admit to not comprehending the full strategic picture, the Krauts should have bypassed Stalingrad. And, obviously, they should have started Operation Barbarossa a couple months earlier plus they should have prepared their men and equipment to deal with the cold. Britain should also have been bypassed. That was a lot of wasted effort which could have gone to the eastern front. I think to a large extent, Churchill baited Hitler into this. North Africa was also a generally ill-conceived operation. They never got control of the Suez Canal and never got all that close to seriously threatening it. Supplies and men were bled off here and there. But as we know, the German military doctrine was strong on Blitzkrieg (worked great in Poland and Western Europe) but had no real plan for long-term battles. Oh, and probably they could have taken a page from the Americans and made more good-enough toys instead of putting so much effort and expense into things such as the Tiger tanks, for instance. Also, from the book I just read on breaking the German codes, both Rommel and von Rundstedt believed their codes had been compromised because of a series of strange coincidences. And although the Germans, of course, did change some of their coding practices and equipment, they had no idea that the British were reading their mail, eventually in real-time. This cracking went to great lengths to counter the German's one yuge strength: U-boats.
Part of this sloppiness regarding their own codes, the author of the book noted, is probably because the Krauts had broken a number of British codes. So they figured that a military that couldn't keep it's own codes crack-free would have little ability to crack the codes of others. |
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Aug 8, 2022 11:19:29 GMT -8
Unlike what happened in the USA, Nazi Germany did not bring women into the work force. It was something Hitler did not want, thus it wasn't done.
I am not sure that was possible. But I believe Hitler's failure at Dunkirk was his second-biggest mistake of the war.
The plan had been to begin Barbarossa something like 6-8 weeks before it actually started. As I recall, the delay was due to Hitler having to recuse Mussolini's ass in the Balkans.
As to the clothing and equipment for the cold, as I recall, the Germans thought the operation would be over before the hard cold. More importantly, Goering had assured Hitler that the Luftwaffe could keep the Wehrmacht properly supplied in any case. Needless to say, this did not happen.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 21, 2022 8:06:18 GMT -8
Night AmbushI'm still surfing through the offerings of $3-a-month ScreenPix. I've watched some good/bad sci-fi including The Land that Time Forgot, The People that Time Forgot, and a terrible one with Vincent Price called Master of the World. But these are fun in their own way. Night Ambush is a respectable war film. It's a story about some British commandos, in coordination with Cretan partisans, trying to capture the island's German commanding general. It's a bit overblown with an almost unintentionally hilarious soundtrack that includes the Cretans singing patriotic songs wherever they go. They reminded me of "Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to work we go." Still, the movie is mostly competent and serious. Not great, but if you haven't seen it, it's worth a watch. Marius Goring is a stand-out playing the German general, Major General Kreipe. ![]()
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 21, 2022 15:12:32 GMT -8
Another minor gem on ScreenPix is the 1957 British WWII film, The One That Got Away. Hardy Krüger stars as WWII ace, Franz von Werra. He's been shot down over Britain and is taken into custody. Normally I would say bits of this are implausible, but it is based on a true story. One naive reviewer writes: No, he was a Nazi. There were times one is sympathetic with his struggle to escape because he's just trying so damn hard. But I never forgot that he was fighting for a regime that wanted to enslave the world. You'd have to be a dolt for this movie to have "a profound effect" and, I guess, suddenly realize that "Gee, Nazis are people too." No, they are Nazis. Still, the main interest of the film is to see this Nazi do what he can to escape the clutches of the British. It's a good cat-and-mouse film in that regard. The acting is pretty good. Definitely worth a watch.  |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 22, 2022 7:32:16 GMT -8
Next up on ScreenPix is the 1956 British war movie, Pursuit of the Graf Spee. Anthony Quayle plays Commodore Harwood whose task force is in pursuit of the Graf Spee which is preying on ships with very little resistance in the Atlantic and Indian oceans. The Graf Spee was a " pocket battleship" or "a form of heavily armed cruiser" built by the Reichsmarine. It was one of three ships built by the Germans in this class. It was more than a match for a cruiser or anything else but an actual British battleship. As I understand it, early in the war there was much more gentlemanly behavior toward survivors of torpedoed or sunken ships. Peter Finch plays the gentlemanly (anything but a rabid Nazi) Captain Langsdorff of the Graf Spee. Early in the movie he sinks the M.S. Africa Shell commanded by Captain Dove (Bernard Lee). Then commences a sort of gentlemanly love affair between the two captains because, gosh darn it, this Kraut guy is so decent. This aspect of the movie is a bit boring. Things pick up when Commodore Harwood's task force gets on the tail of the Graf Spee. There are, in fact, about three movies in one here: The gentlemanly love affair between the two captains; the pursuit of, and battle with, the Graf Spee; and finally the political intrigue/circus when the Graf Spee limps into a neutral port in Uruguay. This last part is actually pretty decent. Not the best of the best but certainly a war film you should check off on your list.  |
|
