| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Anzacs: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==Is this the first "REAL" historically accurate series?== | ==Is this the first "REAL" historically accurate series?== | ||
I think ANZACS was the one of, if not THE, first series to make sure that weapons, uniforms, equipment, vehicles, and historical references were as close to historically accurate as possible. The unit and personnel were fictional, or amalgams of real people and units for the sake of story, but the rest was done as accurately as possible. | I think ANZACS was the one of, if not THE, first series to make sure that weapons, uniforms, equipment, vehicles, and historical references were as close to historically accurate as possible. The unit and personnel were fictional, or amalgams of real people and units for the sake of the story, but the rest was done as accurately as possible. | ||
For now with Band Of Bothers and The Pacific we take this for granted but for a 1980s | For now with Band Of Bothers and The Pacific we take this for granted but for a 1980s mini-series this shows a lot of care in the production. Watch the making of documentary after the series. | ||
With earlier movies and series, serious liberties were taken with history and equipment for the story, or very obvious replacements used because of a lack of historically accurate material (Hogan's Heroes for example). The only stand-ins used in ANZACS were German Mausers used by the Turks (close enough for most viewers) and the Mk IV tank is a replica (but a very good external replica). | With earlier movies and series, serious liberties were taken with history and equipment for the story, or very obvious replacements used because of a lack of historically accurate material (Hogan's Heroes for example). The only stand-ins used in ANZACS were German Mausers used by the Turks (close enough for most viewers) and the Mk IV tank is a replica (but a very good external replica). | ||
And if possible, watch the full miniseries (10+ hours!) than the movie-length version. There are far worse ways to spend ANZAC day (April 25). And once you start watching you'll find it impossible to stop. ''Wraith'' | And if possible, watch the full miniseries (10+ hours!) than the movie-length version. There are far worse ways to spend ANZAC day (April 25). And once you start watching you'll find it impossible to stop. ''Wraith'' | ||
Latest revision as of 04:02, 19 April 2011
You need to de-interlace your video shots
Also you want to present a letterbox format, you can crop excess image from the top and bottom like thus.
Is this the first "REAL" historically accurate series?
I think ANZACS was the one of, if not THE, first series to make sure that weapons, uniforms, equipment, vehicles, and historical references were as close to historically accurate as possible. The unit and personnel were fictional, or amalgams of real people and units for the sake of the story, but the rest was done as accurately as possible.
For now with Band Of Bothers and The Pacific we take this for granted but for a 1980s mini-series this shows a lot of care in the production. Watch the making of documentary after the series.
With earlier movies and series, serious liberties were taken with history and equipment for the story, or very obvious replacements used because of a lack of historically accurate material (Hogan's Heroes for example). The only stand-ins used in ANZACS were German Mausers used by the Turks (close enough for most viewers) and the Mk IV tank is a replica (but a very good external replica).
And if possible, watch the full miniseries (10+ hours!) than the movie-length version. There are far worse ways to spend ANZAC day (April 25). And once you start watching you'll find it impossible to stop. Wraith