Acc to the caption it's October 1916, but after 15" an FT can clearly be seen. The French soldiers who are punished for self-inflicted wounds are cast adrift in No Mann's Land in Jan 1917, which is obviously still too early for an FT. I'm asuming the battle scene is a flashback to even earlier. Is this a Movie Mistake, or have I misunderstood something?
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Hi James, Never really watched it with dates in mind and I think it doesnt really matter from the audiences perpective, the battle scenes are all flashbacks in some cases mistaken memorys and details of the story changes depending on whose telling it..
Thought it was very good and Audrey Tautou is a knockout...
I think this is one of the best WW1 films made; so am perfectly happy to ignore historical errors (in fact I hadn't noticed them... ha!) as for once, it has a proper story and isn't corny (like "Passchendaele"). Up there with "Hill 60" in my opinion.
I'm supprised at how few people saw the film, I only saw bits and pieces of it on TV so I bought it. I was supprised to see Jody Foster in a French film.
It's nice to see a good expensive film where they have the money for expensive sets and lots of properly dressed extras. I also liked Hill 60, one day a guy is working in the underground in London, a day or so later he's digging a mine under a German trench.
Jim
__________________
the large print giveth, the small print taketh away Tom Waits