Myths and Realities of "A Bridge too Far"

Page 1 of 1 [ 9 posts ] 

cnHans
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 30
Location: Lawrence, Kansas

24 Sep 2011, 11:34 pm

Frankly speaking, I don't think I have Autism, but some people seem I have similar conditions.
Maybe judging from the following article you might be able to find out why.

p.s. My nationality is Chinese. The whole article is fully amateur work that still continuing.

(1) Das Reich at Arnhem?

First, I must say, "A Bridge too Far" is one of the best war film so far, and that is one of my favorite. It is one of few grand epic movies that successfully illustrated a whole campaign of world war 2. Compared to it, "The Longest Day" only covered the first day of D-Day landing in Normandy, while "Battle of Bulge" was not realistic at all. A fully narrated campaign story together with the attracting theme of Allied Airbornes vs German Panzers gave me a lot of great childhood memories.

But anyway movie always could not represent the history. As many other films, "A Bridge too Far" also had many scripts and plots different from real history, giving many myths and stereotypes to audiences as well. Today we start with a simple one that many old fans might already discovered.

Actually, one flaw of this movie is it does not introduce German units involved in this campaign so clearly as the Allies, making audiences wonder that which unit stopped the Allies at Arnhem. The only information of that they give you is during a discussion in German Western Front HQ, when Rundstedt was talking to Model for the general situation. They placed a chess piece in a map to place a reserve panzer force in the city of Arnhem. That chess piece reads "II SS Panzer Div, Bittrich". But that was a mistake.

This small mistake might make perhaps thousands of people believe the Allies drop paratroopers into the head of the famous Das Reich Division, especially maybe in non-western areas like China. I once saw a movie comment in China that repeated this mistake with a unmistakably tone. Maybe the fame of Das Reich division made that more attractive.

Actually, the German SS unit fighting in Arnhem was II SS Panzer Korps, and that was exactly the unit Waffen SS Commander Willi Bittrich(Portrayed by Maximilian Schell in this movie) commanding during the Market Garden campaign. I am pretty sure that the film producer made a mistake to paint "Korps" to "Div" in that movie.

If you consult feldgrau (website) you will find the actual places of 2SS Panzer Division Das Reich during the Market Garden campaign. Undoubtedly, Das Reich Division was one of the best and most prestigious German division in all of World War 2, known for their deadly in tank battles. But the losses in Normandy seemed too much for them so that they spent almost all time in September and October refitting in Eifel, Germany, then took part in the Ardennes Counteroffensive. That is to say, during the time of Market Garden campaign, they were not even in Holland!

In reality, the two panzer divisions that formed II SS Panzer Korps during Market Garden were 9SS Hohenstaufen and 10SS Frundsberg. And it's Hohenstaufen in Arhem while Frundsberg fighting in Nijmegen. Compare to Das Reich, Hohenstaufen's fame was relatively inferior, but they were also battle-harderned veterans that once helped the relief of Hube's pocket in Eastern Front. No doubt it is their action in Arnhem made them forever remembered by the whole world.

(2) Was British paratroopers actually fighting German tank groups?

This has to be a very cruel post. Actually I don't deny and no one can deny the bravery and tenacity of British paratroopers in Operation Market Garden. Fighting against German infantry with great battle spirit instead of tanks in fact will not make their honor fade.

Everyone who watched that movie must be very familiar with the classic scene that Fuller shows General Browning the pictures of German tanks and are brutally turned down. I think the director or Cornelius Ryan himself was trying to portray Frederick Browning as a negative character so that it could become a legendary lesson for all military researchers. But now, the article of a British military history journal named After the Battls virtually turned down all the basic conclusions of this movie, using newest research material and results, making you feel that history can be changed so easily by humans' hand if they like!

Browning made two points in the movie, judging that most German tanks in that area would not be serviceable, and Germans stationing in that area are not first caliber elites. The film is absolutely eager to criticize that, but now I think I can make the conclusion that Browning was basically correct, if he really said like that.

Nominally, British 1st Airborne dropped into the head of two German panzer divisions. But do you know how many tanks these two divisions actually have? After the disastrous losses in Normandy, 9SS Hohenstaufen had 0 tanks. No tank at all! Even its panzergrenadiers(armoured infantry)'s strength was cut down to no more than a single regiment. 10SS Frundsberg is better with approximately 20 tanks. But they did not fight at Arnhem. After the Allied airdrop they were immedietely sent to Nijmegen to stop the 82nd Division and British XXX Corps.

Some other units added some tank forces, but still seems miserable to fight a division level battle. II SS Panzerkorps had a tank company "Mielke" with 12 medium tanks, but only 2 of them actually assaulted British positions. Another tank company "Hummel" had 12 tigers but they all stayed another side of the bridge and just kept firing, then also moved south to stop XXX Corps. Germans were also able to collect 9 old French tanks (B1Bis) and another assault gun battalion to join battle. In all, for most of times, British 1st Airborne Div is withstanding the assault of 11 tanks and 28 assault guns.

Such number is miserable compare to XXX Corps' tanks, as you can see it's almost line after line in the movie. I don't really think German tanks in this battle was very threatening. Most of the tanks joined battle in Arnhem was also knocked out by British paratroopers. But that is not to deny that Germans still hold much firepower advantage over British paratroopers. German panzer units still has a lot of halftrack vehicles making a wall that paratroopers could not surpass with their light armaments, while many German light AA guns deployed already in this area was also deadly to paratroopers when they attacked.

The tenacity of Germans combined with some technical insufficiencies of this campaign led to the demise of 1st Airborne and the overall failure of this operation. The British Drop zone was too far away from Arnhem and is was relatively small. As a result British paratroopers were unable to form enough strength to capture Arnhem within sudden when 9SS was surprised. Many communication facilities was destroyed during the drop, resulting severe coordinating problems of 1st Airborne Division during the fighting. That again shows the complexity of a airborne warfare. But the reason is not the ignore of the tanks the movie try to argue.

On the German side, they also showed incredible reflexes when they realized the seriousness of the situation. A division level unit temporary named by their commander von Tettau was formed, with subordinates came from all kinds of origins. SS polices, concentration camp stations, Navy personnels, and the best of them, SS NCO officers were sent to the front line with maximum speed. But their number was large enough to finish the encirclement of 1st Airborne Division.

Again, not to say the Red Devils did not fight well in this battle at all. Their supply was extremely limited but they still able to fight much longer than originally expected by Allies High Commands. Especially John Frost's 2nd Airborne Battalion was able to hold Arnhem Bridge longer than the scheduled time, with a small unit totally isolated from the division. That is no doubt an action of bravery that could make all soldiers proud.



nostromo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,320
Location: At Festively Plump

25 Sep 2011, 6:02 am

I must've watched this over 30yrs ago as a kid. I remember it being quite an exciting film that left an impression on me at the time.



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

26 Sep 2011, 5:04 pm

I read the book and saw the movie years ago.

One thing that struck me, and that I still remember, was that the final British radio message, "Out of ammunition, God save the King", wasnt even heard by the Allies and was only picked up by the Germans. Seemed quite sad.



cnHans
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 30
Location: Lawrence, Kansas

26 Sep 2011, 5:44 pm

simon_says wrote:
I read the book and saw the movie years ago.

One thing that struck me, and that I still remember, was that the final British radio message, "Out of ammunition, God save the King", wasnt even heard by the Allies and was only picked up by the Germans. Seemed quite sad.


Yeah. I have more impression that they kept calling XXX Corps while they already stopped advancing, also misread a German tank crossing the bridge to be XXX Corps' tank in the movie.



cnHans
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 30
Location: Lawrence, Kansas

27 Sep 2011, 11:45 pm

Actually, I love that movie a large part because of its theme music.. It really lift the spirits up for introvert persons like me.
Every time I start a boring airplane trip I will listen to that. :D



TheBicyclingGuitarist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,332

28 Sep 2011, 1:47 am

From the movie:

Gruppenfuhrer Ludwig (played by Hardy Krueger): "Market-Garden was a stupid plan."

Aide:
"Yes, but what if it had worked?"

Ludwig (looking at the mined Nijmegen Bridge):
"Even if it had worked, Market-Garden would still have been a stupid plan."


_________________
"When you ride over sharps, you get flats!"--The Bicycling Guitarist, May 13, 2008


Prof_Pretorius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,520
Location: Hiding in the attic of the Arkham Library

13 Oct 2011, 11:23 am

I don't think there are any movies dealing with WWII that stick to the actual details. Every one that I like has "Hollywood Scriptwriter" embellishments.


_________________
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow. I feel my fate in what I cannot fear. I learn by going where I have to go. ~Theodore Roethke


cnHans
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 30
Location: Lawrence, Kansas

04 Jan 2012, 10:29 am

Prof_Pretorius wrote:
I don't think there are any movies dealing with WWII that stick to the actual details. Every one that I like has "Hollywood Scriptwriter" embellishments.


You are absolutely right. At first even I believe that Band of Brothers stick to "official history" fairly well, until a 101st airborne veteran from another unit pointed out bunch of errors/prejudices.



cnHans
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 30
Location: Lawrence, Kansas

04 Jan 2012, 10:36 am

Surprisingly, that I later find Soviet movies, despite their political propaganda, their battle scenes are in fact much closer to the real war. For example, they use real armies to form skirmisher lines, real tanks and real tank formations, as if fighting military exercises.

However, I understand that should be attribute to that Soviet movies almost totally ignores budget and profit. Any western movie company directing in the same way would almost certainly bankrupt. Even the directing of scenes was obviously in a helicopter.