This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please check out the entry of "Tanaka, Giichi" of Encyclopaedia of Britannica, The Columbia Encyclopedia, and so on.
They say Tanaka Memorial "has been shown to be a forgery", "proven to be a forgery", and so on. Kadzuwo 22:47, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
There are eight films listed. The Negro Soldier was the last added, so I guess it wasn't actually one of the originals? -- Kiand 16:49, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
I have never heard of "The Negro Soldier." I bought a boxed set of these, which contained seven films. Desegregation is never mentioned in the seven, and I know that the army was not desegregated until 1948, after the war was over.
"The Negro Soldier" was a 1944 War Department film encouraging African-Americans to enlist. It is unrelated to the "Why We Fight" series.- mobo85
The Internet Archive has 8 Why We Fight films available for download here: http://www.archive.org/details/cinemocracy. They also have 5 other related films from other directors. -- Hoosemon ( talk) 11:56, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
The article includes the word "propaganda" 15 times, in the body and from the sources. However, the purpose of the films as described by Capra, Chief of Staff Marshall, and most of the other sources involved with the creation, making, and distribution of the films never used that word. Nor are their statements cited anywhere. They generally and consistently used terms "war training films" and "war information films." Neither the word "training" or "information" is mentioned in the article. In fact, the stated purposes for the films, according to them, was to "counter" the hundreds of real propaganda films created by the Axis powers after WWI. Is there some need for balance in the use of the more subjective purposes, verses the objective impressions that the article focuses on, including the first sentence? -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 22:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
This sentence from the first paragraph in the lead has some issues that should be clarified before it's used due to its importance:
"Most Scholars agree the film is a prime example of ethical propaganda." [1] [2]
It's an absurd statement. Why We Fight is FULL of misrepresentations, from beginning to end.
For one thing, it relies heavily on Hermann Rauschning's Conversations with Hitler, which was exposed as a fraud by Wolfgang Haenel in 1983.
Beyond that, Capra also misrepresents film-clips. For example, he uses a scene of the Kuomintang executing some Communists as an alleged representation of Japanese atrocities. This was not a Japanese atrocity; it was Chinese killing other Chinese. Here's a video that somebody made to prove it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LbVeadjSbo
It is certain that Capra also used actors for some scenes. The Japanese officer spliced into the scene of Chinese shooting Chinese has to be an actor.
There's nothing "ethical" about Capra's propaganda. Your Buddy Fred Lewis ( talk) 16:32, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
References
These are clearly propaganda films, intended to convey a political message to the audience. It follows that they are called such in this article.
Frank Capra#Why We Fight series does its utmost to disconnect the series from dastardly "propaganda" films, calls them documentary. Could someone so inclined please correct the mistake? - 91.10.20.193 ( talk) 23:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
n/t — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.10.20.193 ( talk) 23:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
at 24:83 it shows the the molotov-ribbentrop pact sighing and at 37:54 it shows the Soviet invasion of Poland to so its not a ww2 propaganda film so I will fix this page up Jack90s15 ( talk) 03:33, 30 November 2018 (UTC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-y_oz06_cQ&index=2&list=PLugwVCjzrJsXwAiWBipTE9mTlFQC7H2rU Jack90s15 ( talk) 03:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
To exonerate the Soviets, the series casts even less important Allies, like the Poles, in the bad light, even repeating Nazi propaganda claims such as the Tuchola Forest myth or false claims about the Polish Air Force being destroyed on the ground but at 29:33 they say that planes did get of the ground and fight and does not show at in the Why We Fight: The Nazis Strike polish Cavalry charging at Tanks so I will fix this all and the only one that To exonerate the Soviets is the Why We Fight: The Battle of Russia that one does not talk about Soviet occupation of the Baltic States, Winter War Jack90s15 ( talk) 04:06, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrKDBFJoo2w&t=4251s Jack90s15 ( talk) 05:30, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
I added the full film the battle of Russia it is in 3 parts not find the full film — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack90s15 ( talk • contribs) 04:52, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please check out the entry of "Tanaka, Giichi" of Encyclopaedia of Britannica, The Columbia Encyclopedia, and so on.
They say Tanaka Memorial "has been shown to be a forgery", "proven to be a forgery", and so on. Kadzuwo 22:47, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
There are eight films listed. The Negro Soldier was the last added, so I guess it wasn't actually one of the originals? -- Kiand 16:49, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
I have never heard of "The Negro Soldier." I bought a boxed set of these, which contained seven films. Desegregation is never mentioned in the seven, and I know that the army was not desegregated until 1948, after the war was over.
"The Negro Soldier" was a 1944 War Department film encouraging African-Americans to enlist. It is unrelated to the "Why We Fight" series.- mobo85
The Internet Archive has 8 Why We Fight films available for download here: http://www.archive.org/details/cinemocracy. They also have 5 other related films from other directors. -- Hoosemon ( talk) 11:56, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
The article includes the word "propaganda" 15 times, in the body and from the sources. However, the purpose of the films as described by Capra, Chief of Staff Marshall, and most of the other sources involved with the creation, making, and distribution of the films never used that word. Nor are their statements cited anywhere. They generally and consistently used terms "war training films" and "war information films." Neither the word "training" or "information" is mentioned in the article. In fact, the stated purposes for the films, according to them, was to "counter" the hundreds of real propaganda films created by the Axis powers after WWI. Is there some need for balance in the use of the more subjective purposes, verses the objective impressions that the article focuses on, including the first sentence? -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 22:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
This sentence from the first paragraph in the lead has some issues that should be clarified before it's used due to its importance:
"Most Scholars agree the film is a prime example of ethical propaganda." [1] [2]
It's an absurd statement. Why We Fight is FULL of misrepresentations, from beginning to end.
For one thing, it relies heavily on Hermann Rauschning's Conversations with Hitler, which was exposed as a fraud by Wolfgang Haenel in 1983.
Beyond that, Capra also misrepresents film-clips. For example, he uses a scene of the Kuomintang executing some Communists as an alleged representation of Japanese atrocities. This was not a Japanese atrocity; it was Chinese killing other Chinese. Here's a video that somebody made to prove it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LbVeadjSbo
It is certain that Capra also used actors for some scenes. The Japanese officer spliced into the scene of Chinese shooting Chinese has to be an actor.
There's nothing "ethical" about Capra's propaganda. Your Buddy Fred Lewis ( talk) 16:32, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
References
These are clearly propaganda films, intended to convey a political message to the audience. It follows that they are called such in this article.
Frank Capra#Why We Fight series does its utmost to disconnect the series from dastardly "propaganda" films, calls them documentary. Could someone so inclined please correct the mistake? - 91.10.20.193 ( talk) 23:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
n/t — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.10.20.193 ( talk) 23:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
at 24:83 it shows the the molotov-ribbentrop pact sighing and at 37:54 it shows the Soviet invasion of Poland to so its not a ww2 propaganda film so I will fix this page up Jack90s15 ( talk) 03:33, 30 November 2018 (UTC) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-y_oz06_cQ&index=2&list=PLugwVCjzrJsXwAiWBipTE9mTlFQC7H2rU Jack90s15 ( talk) 03:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
To exonerate the Soviets, the series casts even less important Allies, like the Poles, in the bad light, even repeating Nazi propaganda claims such as the Tuchola Forest myth or false claims about the Polish Air Force being destroyed on the ground but at 29:33 they say that planes did get of the ground and fight and does not show at in the Why We Fight: The Nazis Strike polish Cavalry charging at Tanks so I will fix this all and the only one that To exonerate the Soviets is the Why We Fight: The Battle of Russia that one does not talk about Soviet occupation of the Baltic States, Winter War Jack90s15 ( talk) 04:06, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrKDBFJoo2w&t=4251s Jack90s15 ( talk) 05:30, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
I added the full film the battle of Russia it is in 3 parts not find the full film — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack90s15 ( talk • contribs) 04:52, 30 November 2018 (UTC)