And for anyone who complains that the characterization of something isn't as good as Band of Brothers, there is a simple reason for that.
|
I've actually got the Band of Brothers book by Stephen Ambrose as well as most of Ambrose's other histories.
In the forward, to Band of Brothers Ambrose mentioned that in all the interviews he did of veterans of WWII, the men of Easy Company stood out. He said they were unusually cohesive for a unit. He didn't witness the tightness of that company in the other thousands of veterans of the war in Europe he interviewed in his career. That alone made them interesting to him and worthy of a book.
So Easy Company was an anomaly and you were drawn into the characters, because they cared so much about each other. You really wouldn't have gotten that from any other series about any other unit from WWII according to Ambrose.
I've noticed a lot of complaints about The Pacific about not knowing the characters and thus not caring enough about them as you could in Band of Brothers. But The Pacific tries to give a picture of that side of WWII, but there was no Easy Company there, no one group of guys who trained together and stuck together from Guadalcanal to Okinawa. The casualty rates alone would have prevented that.
|
Responses:
|
