The Pacific is an absolutely wonderful collection of stories - from 3 men who never met. Sledge, Leckie, and Basilone were from 3 different battalions, and because we focused on them we lost focus on the people surrounding them. Long story short: Band of Brothers detailed a single units journey through a war, and the Pacific detailed an entire war using various units.
In my opinion your spot on, I haven’t been able to really watch each episode of The Pacific. It’s confusing and since I haven’t read up on the timeline of the pacific part of the WW2 that’s to be expected. It could also be that I didn’t watch The Pacific until I did my last deployment and can’t focus much at all on the series.
Band of Brothers was lightning in a bottle, because of the chemistry of the cast, and the viewers investment in their camaraderie. The war was the backdrop. It was never what the show was about. The Pacific, the war was the story. The characters never had the chemistry, the banter, you didn't immediately become invested in any of the characters, because by the time you STARTED to remember names and faces, you had a new group you were following. I firmly believe that if the Pacific had just followed ONE story, and invested more heavily into the characters from that one group, the show would have hooked the audience more.
My first viewing of The Pacific I liked it alright, after a few months learning about the Pacific War and reading the memoirs the miniseries is based on I like it just as much as Band of Brothers if not more. @@kristiangoransson6104
Band of Brothers released 2 days before 9/11. I think the rush of patriotism looking for an outlet really helped with the popularity of the show. Still one of the best of all time
Never mind that a decade later, the US was becoming war-weary, winding down active military operations in Iraq. The fact that the production doesn't follow the same group of main characters through the series also hurts the narrative.
EXACTLY... I was numb that day... that LONG day... having my flight grounded and wondering if some of my friends were OK back in NYC. I will always remember watching the debut of Band of Brothers... and 9/11 as the same week. It was a salve for the soul... especially the main title theme: Requiem for a Soldier
Yes, I was about to write a similar comment but it's a bit more nuanced I think. I'd classify BOB and The Pacific as 'innocent' war shows in keeping with Speilberg's notorious sentimentality; we see violence but it's all served up with a slice of apple pie leaving us with a warm glow by the end, although he isn't catering to the flag-waving freedom lovers in the wake of 9/11 per se. That would have required something even cruder; more Chuck Norris than Maj. Winters I was a young man when I watched BOB and loved it, but I found The Pacific too sickly sweet when I was a decade older. Those years of the war on terror disillusioned me with Spielberg's 'innocent' take on war. By 2010, the Pacific seemed out of touch in tone, even close to propaganda. I expect my experience to be reflected in people of my generation (late Gen X/Millenial).
HBO should be proud of producing "The Pacific". It really showed the hopelessness that our Marines and Soldiers went through in those jungles were men were not meant to be, let alone fight each other. These are people that deserve our unconditional thanks.
Band of Brothers had a tone of heroism that was conveyed by the cheering, thankful crowds of liberated citizens: "Look at these heroes!!" The Pacific has a tone of hopelessness, in the middle of nowhere, with no cheering crowds to remind us that these are heroes. It's almost dystopian, with the guys just trying to survive one day after the next and never knowing if what they've accomplished was worth the sacrifice, and that's conveyed to the viewer. There's a scene after Guadalcanal where the cook tells the Marines they're heroes back home, and the Marines are trying to take that in after 6 months of hopelessness.
Even when there was cheering it was depressing. Basilone got into a bar fight in Australia and was so uncomfortable doing war bond promotion he petition to go back to the front lines despite having two outs (his Medal of Honor and a pre-war enlistment with an approaching end date). Sydney Phillips dated a girl in Australia who feared her Greek community may get wiped out with the number of men getting killed. Sledge couldn't bear to wear his uniform when he came home while his brother was showing off his war trophies from Europe.
That’s the Second World War though it’s literal boys thousands of miles from there home lands trying there damned best to not die. Of course there’s heroes but war isn’t heroic war is hell war is cruelty
Whether it made money or not, everyone I know who has watched it feels super grateful to hbo for making this show it’s awesomeness entirely what a story.
@@raypurchase801 Because they aren't. They were planning on it back in the early 2010s, but eventually Apple bought the rights. It is going to be an AppleTV exclusive when it comes out next year. It seems that HBO cannot compete with other streaming services anymore. It is very expensive and risky to invest so much into big-budget productions like HBO has done in the past. Apple has so much money that it doesn't matter for them. Their main objective is to try to build a subscriber base for their service as it is pretty weak at the present. They are placing themselves as the modern HBO with high quality television though so it could work.
Yep. I never saw it but I'm going to, even it means paying to see it. Sorry that it lost money, people I know and trust tell me it's great and I just haven't gotten around to it.
The Pacific is the greatest depiction of war that I've ever seen. Hits you right in the gut and doesn't shy away from the horrendous aspects of WWII such as civilian casualties, suicide, torture, disease, etc.
The best ww2 movie is the finnish movie "talvisota" from 1989 about the winter war, its the most realistic and horrific movie of them all. Also the soviet film of 1985, "come and see" is up there.
The sense of time - or lack thereof - is one the biggest issues in this series. You never really understand how much time has past when they are on these islands. As an example - When you see Basilone fight at the Battle for Henderson Field, it just looks like a man who held a machine gun, got burnt, ran through the jungle with some enemy, un-jammed a gun, and shot some enemy soldiers with his pistol. This appears to happen over the course of a single night. The reality is that the engagement lasted three days, during which he ran through enemy territory while being completely cut off from the supply line to get ammunition for the two gun emplacements. Before dawn on the second day, out of ammunition, he used his pistol and a machete to hold off the enemy. He was only one of three survivors from that engagement and he did it without sleep, rest, or food, for three days. None of this is properly conveyed in the show and without prior knowledge of the event, you don't really understand why he won the Medal of Honor, nor why he was being paraded around back home.
Completely agree. Also, the shifts in perspective only made this worse. I never got the sense that time had passed, I only understood based on what was told.
7 месяцев назад
This. I was like bro got a Medal of Honor for burning his hands? Some detail is missing...
To be fair, I think the writers were going for that a little. In Sledges book, he literally says, “the following events happened between [x period] and [y period] on Pelilu. I have no recollection of the exact order”
Yeah, the pacing, editing and structure of the entire show was all off. I found it almost unwatchable, and this is the exact kind of thing I like to watch
The Pacific showed the reality of the Pacific theater like nothing before or after. The episode with the battle for the air strip on Peleliu gives me chills every time I watch it.
Another favorite part of the show is how they tell the story of Sledgehammer when he comes back to the states after the war. He reports to those job placement people, and they are asking him what skills he gained from his military career in the Marine Core, and he is like, "small arms skills, demolition skills, hand to hand combat skills..." The lady cuts him off and is like. "Sir, I mean job skills. What job skills did you learn in the Marines?" Sledge replies, all angry, "My job in the Marines was to kill Japanes lady, and I got really good at it!" It really puts it into perspective how even though the war was over how hard they would all have to fight to readjust back in the world again.
HBO is to be commented for showing the American public what these marines went through to preserve our freedom and democracy .Sadly some Americans today fail to appreciate these sacrifices and are willing to cede our democracy to a fascist .
However much was spent, it honored the men who died, were wounded, and survived those island battles. Robert Leckie once walked out of the musical "South Pacific," because it had romanticized the war in the Pacific. The American people were so detached and perhaps still are to what was going on over there. This series did great justice to those guys.
You could argue it the other way too. The American public over estimate what actually happened in the Pacific. In terms of on the ground fighting, the Pacific was a TINY theater for the US. Regiments and single digit numbers of divisions were fighting for the most part, until the Philippines. There is a reason why the Soviet Union inflicted about as many irretrievable casualties on the IJA in 12 days of fighting, as the US inflicted on the entire Japanese military in 3 years, 8 months, 3 weeks and 5 days. China is often lost in the story of the Pacific War. Where, the Japan always considered China the main opponent and target. Where Japan committed upwards of 70-90% of their total war effort for most of the war, against China and the occupation of their conquered territories. The fighting was savage, but the scope, due to geographic limitations, was quite limited.
@@mercb3ast very interesting. Are you talking about the Russo-Japanese war or Russia vs Imperial Japan in WW2? Im not very well versed on the Pacific theater compared to the European theater of WW2.
@@bickyboo7789I believe they are referring to the ground operations the Soviet Union took against Japanese controlled Manchuria when it declared war on Japan just a few weeks before it surrendered in 1945.
@@noreply-7069While Battles of Khalkhin Gol ended Japanese defeat, it should be noted that it was an unsanctioned war started by the Japanese Kwantung army without authorization as the Kwangtung army was quite famous for. And as for the Soviet Union's involvement in the end, the Kwantung army was by then all but depleted as its forces were directed elsewhere and its ranked supplement by new inexperience recruits that weren't fit for service.
Imagine the series made by Disney. With lots of subplots about transgender and gay soldiers. Pitch the idea to Kathleen Kennedy and we got us a contract.
i enjoy both but would put BoB ahead of The Pacific in my personal rankings. One thing The Pacific did better than BoB, in my opinion, is cast actors that looked more age-appropriate for a typical WWII soldier/sailor/marine, etc. BoB can give the impression that the average solider was in his mid 30's or something like that. This is just my opinion, i could be off. But I felt like that aspect of casting was better in The Pacific.
I loved the series. One overlooked factor: A decade passed between The Pacific and Band of Brothers. My parents were both of the WWII generation. My Dad drove a landing craft onto the beach at Iwo. They both watched Band of Brothers. They were both no longer with us by 2010. First-hand experience can be a factor driving interest, both in individuals and in their families and friends. We lost a lot of that generation in the first decade of the 21st century.
This is a great point. I thought the same thing. The WW2 generation was almost totally gone by the time the Pacific aired. HBO's Band of Brothers was very much their swan song, and what a great one it was!
I think this was a factor as well, in a different medium for first-person shooter video games, 2001 was pretty much exclusively set in WWII, but by 2010 as the GWOT started to enter its second phase, the market had shifted towards modern settings, same with movies and TV
Agreed! Peleliu scenes were actually underdone. The Palau Island campaign was the bloodiest in the Island chain battles. Okinawa was also underplayed. Iwo Jima had some of the highest casualties rates of the Pacific war, too. I liked the series, personally. My older half-brother's father was on Peleliu.
To this day, the battle scenes of Peleliu and Okinawa from The Pacific are among the most harrowing depictions of combat I’ve seen on screen. It immerses the viewer in the sense of fear and filth from being thrown into “the meatgrinder” as Eugene Sledge described in his memoir. While not as beloved by many as Band of Brothers, the bleak scenes of Marines fighting in the rocky crevices of Peleliu and the miserable mud of Okinawa will live rent free in my head.
To me the biggest problem was a lack of focus. I don't hate the different stories or even the homefront stuff, but mixing them all together makes it hard to follow. In BoB, even if a storyline followed a specific character, it still had everyone else play a part and advanced their stories.
It has been years since I last watch The Pacific, but an aspect that resonates with my recollection is how a guy goes from being in civvies to the next scene of getting off a troop transport. Did the video of The Pacific I saw got edited down? Seems a lot was missing with in the storyline with regards to the prep work prior to climbing off the side of the troop transport.
Because that is exactly how the Pacific war was fought: disjointed and chaotic. You dont have one central unit like BoB to tell a consistent story because units in the pacific would get wiped out and replaced en masse. It is impossible to try and tell a story of the entire war on that side with one continuous unit, and needed stories to help display the horrors of that war. You have Helmet for My Pillow, With the Old Breed, and countless books written about John Basilone (which are a hell of alot of more accurate then Stephen Amrbose ever was) to tell a story of a massive and wide reaching war. It is the only way possible to do it. Blame HBO for not allowing the story to go past 10 episodes instead
The Pacific did focus on the 1st marine division (one of six not to mention 20+ army divisions and the navy) on that front. The thing is the battles were generally smaller as well as more intense and personal. And there were more breaks between battles overall.
I agree, I felt there was a lack of character development like there was no Bootcamp episode where you get to know the characters before the intense combat scenes and it felt a bit all over the place where BOB was more in unison as you said
I was one of the "local hires" when we shot in Qld. This was one of the most incredible experiences of my life. Mostly due to the sense of gravitas on set. EVERYONE knew how important these stories were, and how important it was to get it right. It wasn't about penny pinching, but also not about wasting money on frivolous stuff. What you see on screen is every dollar spent and the hearts of everyone who worked on that show. It was an honour.
The Pacific was tremendous and needed to be made, but i think it lacked the "brotherhood" journey that people loved in "Band of Brothers" and I think people are more familiar with the benchmark happenings in Europe (the English "Invasion", Dday, and the Battle of the Bulge) whereas the Pacific is a bit murkier and impossible to hit all the big events logically with one unit, some were naval battles (Midway), some were marine actions (Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal), and some were aerial (the atomic bomb)
I recommend you to watch the docuseries The Pacific war in Color from 2018, it shows several battles including tarawa that The pacific didnt mention and it was hell just like peleliu.
I thought from a story telling perspective that it was highly lacking. There was so much attention to details about uniforms, battle tactics and the color of ships that it got in the way of narrative. They obviously wanted to tell the stories about Leckie and Sledge but then shoe horned in other characters like Bastillone. I think they ought to have split it into two major stories. There should have been five episodes about both Leckie and Sledge since the both wrote reflective works about their collective experiences. On the other hand, there was a lot of technical precision with cameras, effects and details. I am really big on story telling and this does not work from a story perspective.
Band of Brothers is way easier to watch, but The Pacific should be mandatory viewing for anyone looking to hold public office. With Band of Brothers you get a sort of nostalgic, patriotic glow that outshines the more dismal and dark sections of the miniseries. It's easy to see how many people in post 9/11 America saw the show and were inspired to go fight in Iraq. The Pacific is ugly and brutal. Episode 9 is easily the most horrifying depiction of combat ever produced by an American studio. It does not even attempt to make you feel good about what's going on. You're supposed to leave it kinda sick to your stomach, but also appreciative of what those guys went through. Many of those GWOT vets have commented that the Pacific was a more accurate depiction of combat than what Band of Brothers portrayed, and that speaks volumes to me.
Because European Theater was less brutal & "tamer" compared to Pacific Theater. In Europe, even German-Americans & Italian-Americans met their relatives, many of Germans themselves were also against war or just there for duty not for Hitler. While the same couldn't be said for Pacific Theater where all Japanese society were so heavily indoctrinated and fanatic to their cause (the Emperor), their dehumanization toward enemies (as shown by their treatment of POWs & local civilians.. didn't regard the Geneva Conventions) eventually led to believe the US Marines should do the same to the Japanese. Think also about the wild tropical jungle environment, which affect the morale of both sides.
The other thing about "Band of Brothers" is that the narrative made YOU into one of the brothers from boot camp throughout Europe -- "Currahee" remains one of the greatest debut episodes of any show ever (and rehabilitated David Schwimmer forever in my mind) whereas with The Pacific you were more of a passive observer of historical events.
That is a wonderful way of putting it. Your description isn't something I wouldn't have been able to put my finger on, but after reading it I was like "oh wow, he's exactly right!"
I dont know I disagree with that. The whole series takes you through the journey each men had. And the growth and challenges they experienced. Nothing truer when you come back from deployment you expect to see everything the way you left it. You often forget people's lives continue while yours stays put while on deployment. Everyone wanted
I agree with everything you said. Curahee is an amazing episode. I've watched the whole series many times and that one episode over and over. Less than a minute in, we learn it is June 5th, 1944. I'll never forget the first time I watched it, how I sat up with excitement upon seeing that date.
What a wonderful depiction of the what the Marines went through. As a Marine, I was blown away by the acting, the realistic sense of what they went through. It was obvious to me that HBO and their execs, were paying tribute to those 'boys' that fought a tough fight. I can't imagine a better film than The Pacific.
The Pacific was INCREDIBLE. I was stationed in Okinawa when it came out and every Marine there watched it and LOVED it. I make my annual watch of it the first week of November.
the pacific was worth it episode 10 is probably one of the most punctual pieces of tv ever and did a lot better to understand what GIs went through than any other show ive seen
The whole series can be seen in the look of astonishment the newly trained soldier's faces as John is gunned down advancing in front of them. Forever assaulting forward.
That was the problem. The Pacific wasn't a 'bro' movie celebrating the service of the warriors it depicted so much. Instead, it told their story, which was horrific. Just like 1946, no one wants to hear about grown men crying because they came back from a war they won. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that's a fact that has always been true. I personally believe The Pacific was a far better 'war movie' to cover the real people and real events than BoB...but people don't pay to see real.
@@fortusvictus8297 you're right. But that last episode is like the movie Brian's Song, you don't watch it with anybody else so we can pretend we're tough. Eugene had to turn into a monster to survive the war and afterwards he had to figure out how to turn back. Snafu saves Sledge's soul when he tells him not to pull the dead soldier's fillings out. Everybody knew Sledge was better than that and he never could have forgiven himself for it.
Australian here. I loved both and bought the box set of both. The Pacific was more impactful because it was closer to home for me. I loved the heroism in BoB. I loved the realism of The Pacific. It matched the stories that veterans told me when I got to speak with them on ANZAC Day. Also, it was filmed just down the road from me so there is some hometown pride for me as well.
If you haven't read with the old breed (sledges memoir his part of the show is based on) its incredible and shows how close to the source material the show was
My father fought in the Pacific, US Army 1944 & 45, he was 18 at the time. He said if he had to do it again he would have chosen to fight in Europe. The Japanese had no place to withdraw to and didn't believe in withdraw or surrender, it was a kill or be killed fight. The casualty figures from Peleliu say it all, the Japanese lost an estimated 10,695 men, with an additional 301 taken as prisoners of war on an island approximately 5 miles long and 2 miles wide.
Problem is that as a soldier you didnt have a choice. You went where they sent you. If the train was going east they knew it was Europe, west was the war in the pacific. Most didnt know until they got on that train.
The vast majority of people don't realize the Army's role in the PTO, as soon a you mention the PTO to people it's always the Marine's most people bring up, and some the Navy but in fact a full ⅔rds of all the US military personnel who were killed or injured fighting in the Pacific were US Army, that's not exclusive to a single group like Infantry or something but all with the other ⅓rd being divided up between the Marine Corps and the Navy, it was actually the Army that took Peleliu, the truth is the 1st Marine Division couldn't take the island so they were called out and the Army's 81st Division was given the task of taking it, there was also an Army division that fought on Saipan, and beat back the largest Banzai charge in history, and Okinawa was mostly Army same with Guadalcanal. You also had the Army fighting in the air in a bombing campaign that rivals the 8th Air Force's campaign in Europe with multiple MOH recipients in it. I guess it's because the Marine's got all the press in the Pacific is why when you mention the PTO people's minds go straight to the Marine's, and Washington probably gave most of the press coming out of the Pacific because of the Army getting 100% of the press coming out of Europe is why they did that, but the fact is it was the Army that did ⅔rds of all the fighting and dying that took place there.
Also, US troops rarely spared prisoners in the Pacific theater. The inhospitable landscape, environment and the vicious fighting probably created alot of pent-up frustration. There are open secrets where surrendered Japanese soldiers were just gunned down. Hence, the low POW count.
I agree. I don't think it's ever fair to judge an artwork by its profitability. It defeats the purpose of art itself as a meaningful way to convey messages and expressions.
@@laaarsu I was just watching a video (or streamer) where this was discussed. It was how Disney is "failing" because they didn't have a $1bn film this year. At the end, the person speaking mentioned that the focus of movies shouldn't be on the $ value, but whether or not the film was good. We're so hyper focused on exponential profits and whether a movie bombed or not at the box office, rather than the actual movie itself. Somewhere along the line, as you said, we lost what making film was all about.
@@laaarsu This wasn't artwork for the sake of art.... it was a television show made by a company that does these things on a "for profit" basis. So the question is very valid. HBO spent a TON of money and did they actually recoup it or more importantly to them, did they make a profit?
Something I find between the two, the side characters in Band of Brothers, Martin, Malarkey, Perconte, Bull etc are so much more recognizable then the ones on the pacific. One of them, Hoosier, gets injured on Peliliu and I honestly had no idea he was supposed to be a big deal because I didn’t recognize him at all. When Toye & Guarneri lose their legs, that scene holds so much weight because despite being secondary characters, we still felt like we knew them
At first, after BoB, i didnt like TP as much. But TP grew on me over the years as a series that showed the inhumanity of the Pacific War. It has since taken over BoB in my heart.
As a combat veteran and soldier of 15 years so far I appreciate the love, care, and gritty realism of war that this show takes. It is truly amazing and I feel connected to these characters through similar experiences that I have had in my own time in the service. I know and feel their experiences and emotions. More so than band of brothers. Not to take anything away from band because they are different in tone. Given the choice I’ll watch The Pacific every time. I wish there were more episodes of each!
I feel the same way. The Pacific just hits me where it hurts in a way that Band of brothers, while a fantastic show just can’t. It affects me in ways that even the best movies and shows of the theaters I actually served in have never been able to.
To this day, The Pacific is still my favorite war series of all time. Coincidentally enough i rewatched it this past summer and I was still amazed with the insane amount of attention to detail and realism. They don’t make series like this anymore!
"They don’t make series like this anymore!" I mean..they do. It'll air 26th January next year. He mentions it a few times in this video, but Masters of the Air will be the last of Tom Hanks and Steven Speilberg miniseries. It's very unlikely (Altough not impossible I suppose) it won't hold the same standard as Brothers and Pacific.
I think one of the greatest assets for BoB was the fact that it followed one company of men. It really gave the audience the ability to get to know each and every soldier and connect with them emotionally. The interviews with some of the actual soldiers before each episode is also a fantastic choice. The Pacific was a little more unfocused in that regard, and the lack of that same “these are the real people who actually did the things you’re watching”. I know it was harder to do that, considering it was filmed nearly 10 years after BoB and 70 years after the actual war, and many of the actual soldiers depicted in the pacific sadly passed long before 2010, but it’s still something I find…lesser than BoB in that regard.
This series was phenomenal and regardless of what it made or didn't make, it was extremely well done and showed the brutality of the war in the Pacific where my grandfather served and he never spoke of it much but did say it was the most awful thing any human could witness in terms of the carnage and destruction not including the mental toll it took on these men in addition as you see with Sledge's in the series. Great series and looking forward to "Masters in the Air" coming in January.
Having a great topic doesn't make something good I'm afraid. I'm Australian, the Pacific war was closer to us than you and I was excited for the show. But it was slow, disjointed and generally shit.
@darkjudge8786 what an asinine take here in my opinion. And if not for America getting in this conflict, you and your family would be speaking German most likely today without the allies invading together in addition but the firepower of the U.S military without question was the main thing to put the Germans in check. The war in the Pacific was the most brutal combat of the war and this show featured some of those elements. To say the show was shit is your opinion but shows you don't necessarily have a good opinion or one that a majority of people would even agree with. I know Tom hanks and Steven Spielberg do not agree with you... lol
@@darkjudge8786 what a terrible take… and such a weird thing to say about how close it was to you vs the United States. Like why does that even matter? Lol.
I LOVED THIS SERIES. Where Band of Brothers focused on the camaraderie developed through warfare, The Pacific focused on true horrors and the dehumanization of war.
Great analysis. While The Pacific didn't have the lasting impact or success of BoB, its still a great series and the second to last episode (Part 9) which features Sledge on Okinawa was one of the best episodes of television I've ever seen. In the span of an hour Sledge goes from having some shred of humanity amidst the horror of war, loses it, then gains some of it back by the end in the scene with the Japanese civilians. Absolutely fabulous writing/acting in that episode.
One of the questions asked to Matt Damon on his Hot Ones appearance was WRT the "modern" finance aspects of movie making, and his response addressed the change to the industry when DVD sales became no longer a thing they could count on. An interesting and entertaining interview if you haven't seen it.
What I don't get about that is, what about streaming revenue? Ya back in 2000 you had a bigger dvd market, but you had zero streaming market. Surely a large portion of the demand for dvds has transferred over to digital rentals/purchases just as digital music like spotify/apple music has supplanted CD sales? Why does everyone seem to pretend that surely massive revenue stream doesn't exist when calculating movie profits? It's not just Matt btw, I've seen this same thing done all over when talking movie finances and I've always found it puzzling.
@@slayerhuh404How many times does a person need to stream a single movie to generate 20 bucks of revenue? 30? 60? Streaming is more like TV. Everybody respects a good movie, but most people on Netflix seen the Office more times than Pacific or BoB.
@@slayerhuh404 Streaming revenue is dwarfed by dvd sales. Streaming revenue accounts for cuts from subscriptions that have to fund the production of tens if not hundreds of shows/movies per streamer per year. The streaming pool of cash is bigger but so are their production costs (this will definitely shrink after the strike). HBO had double-dipped on your cash by making you pay them for the cable sub to see the show/movie there and then get you to buy the box set which streamers can no longer do. DVD box set for the BoB cost cca $60 - $80. Being very generous and assuming *only* 10% of that would go to the production company, it still means more for the success of a given show because while subscription cash can be correlated to an interest to watch a specific show, especially with the analytics that streamers have access to, the dvd sale/rent is pretty self-evident in the intent of the customer and therefore the success of the specific movie/show. Cost to rent it was cca $2 - $5 per disc so for a whole season of tv, this would be somewhat more and though the margins on renting would be thinner they still account for a very targeted interest. Streamers are also way more dependent on venture capital. The recent strikes had creators demanding seeing the analytics for their given shows because they thought they were getting raw deals on residuals but while that might be the case for bigger projects, it is also very likely the streamers don't want to show the data so it doesn't become obvious how badly many shows and possibly the whole industry are doing. Their stocks and analytics were running wild in late 2010s and covid times because of injections of venture capital and good economy during the former and people being stuck at home during the latter. Now they have neither.
DVDs I’m not mistaken cost $20+ A membership to a streaming service can be anywhere from five to $15. Usually people buy the DVD I’ve seen the series. You went on both fronts. Streaming is only one revenue stream.
@@slayerhuh404DVD profits are more direct. With streaming services, the service (say Netflix) pays what they think the show is worth to have it on their service. Even if a billion people watch it, the pay won't change until the contract is ended and they begin a new one. I think, at least.
My great grandfather fought in the 1st marine division in ww2. Watching The Pacific makes me feel like I'm catching a glimpse of what his life was like.
"The Pacific" is a masterpiece. I moved to Guam in 1972. That year, Sergeant Shoichi Yokoi, a Japanese Army straggler came out of the Guam Jungle! My mom met him and got his autograph. In the last three years, I found out that a cousin of mine, Donald E. Runyon, was the top scoring Wildcat ace of WW2, shooting down nine Japanese aircraft while assigned to VF-6 aboard the Enterprise. He bagged two more Japanese aircraft flying Hellcats. I was born in Okinawa to a Marine Corps officer and a Ryukyu Island mother. The war in the Pacific really happened as portrayed by HBO and the evidence of that is still apparent.
In some ways I thought this was a better series than Band Of Brothers. I thought the way they showed how the war affected the survivors when they returned back home was a big plus. Very well acted written and filmed. This series was very true to its source material.
Agreed. The BOB ending with the baseball game happily ever after life story fade away felt like a total white washes any PTSD they may have faced after the war. The Pacific theater was such a totally different vicious beast for combat veterans. Many veterans spent the rest of their lives absolutely hating the Japanese and drinking away their nightmarish memories. A lot of Japanese officers encouraged their troops to commit acts of horrific mutilation and brutality on captured soldiers hoping to create equivalent retaliation from the American, Australian etc allied forces so their soldiers would fight to the death instead of surrendering.
I really enjoyed both but for different reasons. I think both the relatively happy ending of band of brothers & the dark / more realistic end of The Pacific is necessary because not every soldier had the same experience
I've always had a special place in my heart for this show, I knew Dr. Sledge personally as a child and never once did I ever believe hehad lived the life he did when I knew him. I never once heard him talk about the war and always just knew him as a nice old man that was freinds with my father and he was always kind to me.
As a Marine, I must sheepishly admit that I felt detached from the battles the USMC fought in WW2 and Korea. Yes, we learned about the Battles for Guadalcanal, Peleliu, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa in boot camp (some 30 years ago), but The Pacific really fleshed it out for me and gave me a better appreciation (and adoration) for the Marines who preceded me. 24:16 My heart just swelled up hearing the Marine Corps Hymn even in this video. Semper Fi, Mac! 🫡🦅🌎⚓️
Fun Fact: the actor who portrays Eugene Sledge in The Pacific also played “Tim”, John Hammond’s grandson (who gets zapped by the electric fence) in Jurassic Park.
The problem with the Pacific was that it tried to tell too much and it lost that magic that Band of Brothers had, I bet you if they just focused on Eugene Sledge's unit (King Company, 3rd Battalion, 5th Marines) and all the characters in "With the Old Breed" and "Island of the Damned", it would've been more successful and had the following that Band of Brothers had. They left out so many interesting characters and insane stories because they couldn't cram them all between the different units that were featured in The Pacific. There's a story that Sledge tells about their first contact in Okinawa that would've made for unforgettable TV, his company is going through rolling hills with grass dancing in the wind and a cool breeze blowing on an overcast day when they took contact from a hidden machine gun, long story short they were pinned down until R.V Burgin charges out to get a better look of the gun, uses his arm as a sighting stake under fire and gets his mortar squad to blow it up. They also left out Sledge's mortar section annihilating a Japanese company on Okinawa that got Burgin a medal, then there's all the characters like Redifer, Santos, Sarrett who all got rolled into Shelton's character. The Pacific was alright but it could've been on the level of Band of Brothers, lots of lost potential.
BoB was lightning in a bottle. It was interesting because it was one unit that was involved in a lot of well-known battles. You get to follow the same characters throughout the war, and the casting was on point. The Pacific was slow in comparison, and a lot of the casting was quite bland. The guy who played Basilone was just generic handsome guy. I also could not be less interested in the bond drive stuff back in the US; I always skipped that. In a word, I thought the Pacific was dull.
Agreed, I understand wanting to cover John Basilone's story but the resulting focus on his courting, marriage, and family grief took up a LOT of the show. As a young war film fan at the time, I couldn't have cared less about the non-war parts of the show and The Pacific had a LOT of those. They ultimately tried to do too much and it suffered as a result.
You hit it. I was going to say the same thing. The story was so spread out that I got lost watching it figuring out what was going on. Band of Brothers also had more iconic battles. I never heard of some of the battles fought in the Pacific, and I'm a history major. I just would have preferred following a smaller group than what they did. I feel like the Pacific was really well shot and actually a good story, just the way they told it was its main downfall.
I think if they had cut John basilone, the show would’ve worked much better. I hate to say this about a real war hero, but I just got so bored every time he was on the screen. It just wasn’t a compelling story compared to the others.
"With the Old Breed" is a must-read book. And I agree with the video if the series had focused on this book, it would have been a much tighter, more focused, more relatable, and humanized series. Unfortunately, the horror of the Pacific War would have still been easy to show using the footage that they created for the Battles of Peleliu and Okinawa. God Bless them all. May they all rest in peace. Semper Fi.
The Pacific really should have just been a direct adaptation of "With the Old Breed". Then they could have used the title recognition of the book and therefore draw a larger audience. They could have easily made a 6-episode miniseries based on Eugene's memoir along with other accounts from the company he served with, especially because there was a lot from his time on Okinawa that they excluded from the show. But perhaps that was the issue. HBO may have required ten episodes and the studio wasn't prepared to fulfill that quota without bringing in more stories from other veterans.
I agree. The first time I watched it I got really confused when they switched the narrative from Leckie to Eugene. I also really struggled to empathize with Leckey. There's something about his Australian escapade that seems out of place with the whole series. Besides, Eugene and snafu steal the show later on, to the point where you forget Leckey was even a main character.
@@alejandrocruz5804 The Pacific bounced around waaaaay too much. You could never really get attached to a character. So if they got killed or something happened you really didnt care or even notice.
Agreed. They could have even followed K 3/5 from Guadalcanal to Okinawa… just that marine company. The dialogue was also garbage at time. All in all I’m glad they filmed it but I had BOB expectations after reading WTOB. Hopefully they make a Korean War show on the chosin
Maybe but the other source material was “Helmet for my Pillow” by Robert Leckie. In fact, the Peleliu landing scene was mostly lifted right from that book. Tangent: I have a special OLD illustrated version of that book and it’s one of my most prized possessions. I bought my first (modern) copy in 2010 immediately after watching the show but it was destroyed by water damage. I was kind of sad, but then I found this much older (and illustrated) copy years later… so I guess I got an upgrade. If this version gets destroyed I will in fact be very dustraughtZ distraught.
Exactly Right. This choice wasn't made. I think they pursued the justification of the atomic bomb use with the fighting savegery, just like they did in the Band of Brothers' episode "Why we fight". They pursued a meaning.
Easily my favorite series of all time. Band of brothers is incredible, the story line is easier to follow for sure. The Pacific, however does a great job displaying the brutality of combat and mental meat grinder that those boys went through hopping from island to island and fighting an enemy that shows no mercy. I've seen both series many times and will see them many more times!
Yes ALWAYS buy the DVD's of your favorites now before they edit or cancel them all unless you want cops in ET armed with "flashlights", or Doctor Zhivago joining the Bolsheviks at the end... 🙄
It HAD to be that expensive. The effects and realism is unmatched. Today’s CGI couldn’t even accomplish such a feat. I’ve never seen such realistic gunplay, pyrotechnics, gore, etc. the realise of war is something the public needs to see.
That is more difficult to do in the Pacific, probably the only group in with a long enough service across the whole war probably would have been the crew of USS Enterprise, and even then during WW2 was when air wings started being split from the ships. Which also has the issue of filming a ship would be a dramatic departure from the history of the production group.
I personally don't think the tone was a problem, or even that it was darker than Band of Brothers. I think it suffered tremendously from following several separate story lines, which took a lot of the immersion away, and one of which (the sergeant who goes back Stateside) soaked a massive amount of time for almost no payoff. They also didn't do a good job of tying the different battles together into a campaign or giving the series a sense of momentum. It felt like discreet events. You could see the characters changing but I didn't get the same sense of the overall war the way Band of Brothers seemed to have a distinct beginning (training and D-Day drop), middle, and end (the Battle of the Bulge to the end).
That “Seargent” Is Gunnery Seargent John Basilone, a literal Jesus Christ figure to Machine Gunners in the Marine Corps to this day. I understand it’s a tv show. But that’s the point. There is no pay off in war. An American hero wins the Medal of Honor. Is sent back to the states, wants to go back to war and be with his boys. And is killed at Iwo Jima. I understand to you it’s just a show. But to some of us it feels like a part our families history.
I tried watching this again yesterday, got two and a half episodes in, and quit. It’s just not as good as Band Of Brothers. With The Pacific, I got the distinct feeling I was watching a show with actors…
@QuasiMonkey That's what I did lol, I skipped a large portion of the episode where Leckie romances the Australian girl. The show spent way too much time on that element. And again they dedicated too much time showing Basilone's romance in a later episode. But when you skip the uninteresting portions of the series, it gets to what we're watching for. I didn't mind jumping back to Basilone because it didn't eat up too much screentime until the romantic subplot. Afterwards when he's back to training and serving, it's great.
The Pacific remains a favourite with me. I do however agree that the narrative was at times sketchy and lost focus. I certainly wasn't that interested in the "back in the USA" segments and always couldn't wait to get back to the action . The comment they might have done better to just focus on Eugene Sledge and his book "With the Old Breed" is a hits nail on head remark. Having said all of that I still tip my hat to HBO, Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg for providing me with some more than memorable TV in The Pacific.
You're dead on that we didn't need the "come home to sell war bonds" episodes... those played off as bad miniseries melodrama, whereas the battle scenes were incredible
I think your analysis of the two mini-series is spot on. I've watched both multiple times, but to watch The Pacific, I have to prepare myself for that darkness. BOB is more of a feel-good series. The two theaters of operation were looked at much differently by the soldiers. My father was in the Army late in the war. His unit was first scheduled to go to the Pacific. However, an accident involving his troop ship on leaving California, resulted in his unit being reassigned to Europe. The war in Europe ended on their voyage to Europe. My dad then became an occupation troop. He would tell us kids how relieved he was not to go to the Pacific. He said nobody preferred to fight in the Pacific theater. I guess that is reflected in the difference in the series viewership.
My grandfather was a US bomber pilot on Japan. The survival rates were shockingly low compared to US aircraft in Europe, so much it's hard to find any information about it likely still censored, but the atomic weapon was decided not just because of soldiers on the ground, but the immense cost to planes and personnel being shot down on bombing runs. You could get some idea of it from the end of Pearl Harbor movie where crashing in China offered higher chance of survival than inside Japanese territory who brutalised their prisoners.
Band of Brothers and The Pacific are both amazing. But The Pacific captured more of the horror of war. The battle scenes are truly epic and capture the grittiness and despair of combat under those conditions. The ending is much more poignant as the characters find themselves setting back to civilian life by themselves in an America that had already moved on from the war after VE Day. We are also shown the lingering after effects of war as Sledge battles his demons. SNAFU and Sledge went through some stuff.
ABSOLUTELY why Pacific is superior. B.O.B. makes war fun, its like NFL Films documentaries of 1960's Packers: the old veterans smile looking back on it. Like Football docs, B.O.B. makes guys feel good rewatching. REAL WAR NEVER FEELS GOOD. It's always terrifying, gruesome, inhuman barbarity, death and enormous suffering.
You CAN make entertaining REAL war flicks/shows: European made WW2 movie, esp German and Italian & many (not all) of the Russian ones made since '91. Maybe US public doesn't WANT realism, it wants confirmation of superiority. China is copying that lately, Chinese Rambo realism movies about 'beating' Japan in WW2, And 'winning' the Korean war against us war crime crazed Americans.
people in general are actually shallow & hollow. and only shallow hollow works nowadays makes big money. like an American friend of mine in the entertainment industry often say "Suckers are born every minute". I am convinced when i saw how popular twerking was back then from the outside of USA. And now there is Tik Tok. LOL
Band of Brothers worked so well because it followed a coherent group from training though D-Day, the Battle of the Bulge, to the Bavarian Alps, which made for a great and clear narrative. The Pacific did not give audiences such a clear story. The production and acting was not a problem.
Band of Brothers did an excellent job of setting out Easy Company's war very clearly. With minimal exposition we know where they're going and why they needed to go there. With just a handful of lines from Winters we get a good grasp of the strategic importance of capturing Carentan or holding Bastogne. We don't really get that with the Pacific. We're jumping from 1942 to 1944, and then 1945, and to and from different locations, without much context of what the significance was of Cape Gloucester or Peleliu. The result is it's quite disorientating, and it's difficult to get an idea of what the overall goal is.
@@VS-et4pn you're kind of making the point why the pacific did worse in financial terms. Truly good stories are more often about the characters and less about the events unfolding in the story.
In my humble opinion Band of Brothers should be shown in schools everywhere. Despite it being a 'dramatisation' it was very historically accurate and with the addition of the original old soldiers testimony before and after each episode, it was incredibly powerful.
I have that Box Set of Band Of Brothers. It deserves huge success, because it’s so good by every metric. But also because it gives a voice to the actual soldiers who fought that war, by including interviews with them inserted into the action at well chosen moments. It was as close to perfect as such a show could get in its time.
I felt The Pacific just didn't get you attached to any characters or moments. It didn't draw you in as BoB did. Me and my friends can all remember Captain Winters, Sobel, Compton, the storming of the 88s, the desperation during the winter, etc. In the Pacific I always struggle to remember anything. I recall the Japanese soldier trying to surrender to our protagonist (I don't even remember their names) but get shot by a newcomer. But most of the pacific is just a blur to me. And I watch war movies/series religiously. I like the pacific when I am watching it, but it never came naturally to recommend it to someone.
yeah it jumped around between units too much, couldn't be helped as its a massive theatre of war but you never got involved with the characters as much as BoB
I think a problem that came with the pacific campaign is that there isn’t a lot of story around it compared to Europe (or even fascination) but harder, there wasn’t actually that many units that survived any combat campaign that intact. The vast majority of units had such a high turn over that actually holding to a single one would be just as bad as your barely be able to get attached to any character outside of a single campaign.
@@allmodcons6What complicates the matter even further is that neither Leckie, Sledge nor Basilone (the 3 protagonists) served with their units for the duration of the war. The first was medically evacuated after Peleliu in 1944 (Ep. 6), the second only joined his unit after they left Cape Gloucester (Ep. 5), while the last went on a warbond tour after Guadalcanal, and rejoined another regiment before being killed on Iwo Jima, a battle neither of the other two protagonists were present at. The one scene where Sledge and Leckie interact with each other was completely fictional. In BOB on the other hand, some of the luckier characters from the beginning of the series were still present at the very end. This is absolutely not a jab at the real-life historical people involved in the Pacific, but rather shows why cramming 3 years and 4 completely separate companies in 10 episodes (as opposed to really only one year and one company in BOB) would cause some pacing issues. Regardless of who the main character in each episode in BOB is, the rest of the (surviving) soldiers are still present as side or background characters. In the Pacific, every scene which shows one of the main characters is a scene that doesn’t go into developing the others.
@@allmodcons6 I agree with Greg in that they needed a tighter focus. Honestly, they probably needed to follow just one character and make it a shorter series. BoB didn't try to tell you the entire war. Indulgent I think is a good description.
@@reecedignan8365 While I do agree that because Easy Company mostly made it through the war intact and therefore made it easier to build a narrative around them, that had less to do with where they fought and more to do with them being paratroopers as opposed to regular infantry. It also helps that Easy Company was only in combat for about 6 months.
This series was absolutely amazing. If you have not saw this it is a must see. I will say I only recently watched it, after watching BOB when it was first released, but was blown away by how well acted and produced it was. I have never been able to make it through BOB again, but I can see myself watching The Pacific over again. The fight scenes were brutal in this series.
Really? I thought BoB had much more likable characters and more interesting/diverse storyline. The Pacific Theater was more like the same style of brutal fighting in the same kinda jungle setting the whole way through so I think “The Pacific” just didn’t have much of a range to work with like BoB and fighting their way through Europe
@@Geojr815 Oh no, Band of Brothers was amazing. Its just that I have tried to watch it over and haven't been able to get past the first couple episodes. I should try again though, it is an amazing show, just doesn't seem to have the replayability like something like Game of Thrones has. I did really enjoy both The Pacific and Band of Brothers though. I also started Masters of the Air and haven't been able to get past half way through, I need to finish that one as well.
@@stephenhood2948 they need to make a high budget Game of Thrones style series but on all the major events of WW2. Like with CGI and good actors and all the main characters are the major figures of the war. And show all the different perspectives from around the world like GOT does from the different realms
@@Geojr815 I am super into history, that would be awesome!! There are many shows out there depicting events from WW2, and many documentaries on this subject, but a full on production of the entire event shown from all sides would be very cool. I would certainly watch that.
For me, in The Pacific, the battle scenes tended to blend with one another - which was probably the experience of those fighting that part of the war. Visually they were a monotonous blend of mud and rock. In Band of Brothers, each battle was a unique experience on film, distinct from the other battles, which lent interest and movement to that film.
Which is why “The Pacific” should have focused on other parts of the Pacific theater. Rather than just showing battles through random Marines perspective. When people think of the Pacific theater, it brings to mind naval battles and the Kamakazi. Even what the army was doing in the Philippines would have given the audience a sense of just how dangerous the Japanese were.
@@ChienaAvtzonYes! Thank You! Watching The Pacific (2010), you would get the impression that there were only Marines in the Pacific War but there were more Army than Marines. It would have made some sense to see something other than Pacific Island where nothing of note happens.
Yeah that's pretty much a main sticking point there. It's unfortunate, but you simply can't romanticize the hellish and monotonous Pacific island battles the same way you could with the battles to liberate and defend fallen European cities from the Nazis. At least with Western audiences, that is, which of course ties in to the whole European theater being more popular than the Pacific theater.
The style of the battle scenes has rather worn thin, all close in hectic, blood and gore everywhere, with no real sense of what was happening overall or the relative levels of casualties. Perhaps they chose to do the opposite of how the earlier generation of war movies depicted battles. All good in the moment, but doesn't stand up well when repeat watching the series.
I always wanted to watch this series after having watched Band of Brothers many years prior. It was worth it, but I also noticed the different, darker tone in the story telling, as you point out. Your analysis at the end about the differences between BoB and Pacific is spot on. We can be thankful that BoB generated so much income for HBO that they were able to produce a less profitable series like The Pacific!
Battles in the Pacific WERE darker than the European Theatre. Even as bad as the Nazis were, the Japanese of that period were far worse. One example being, most German soldiers didn't commit suicide rather than surrender.
My grandfather passed away before I was born from a heart attack when he was only in his 50s. From all accounts, he drank and smoke a helluva lot. And he spent most of his time on the road as a trucker away from his family. He was pretty aloof from his children. I knew he was a veteran, but only later in life did I learn that he was wounded on Okinawa. Based on the stories I've heard from relatives, it sure sounds like he suffered from PTSD. I wish I had been able to meet him. This series was the closest thing I have to feeling like I have any sense of what he went through. I am moved every time I watch it.
I grew up watching Band of Brothers and learning about Easy Company. I was about to graduate when The Pacific came out. Seeing it, even with its pacing difficulties and hard to follow narrative was enough to make me learn all I could about the pacific campaign and would eventually lead me to joint the Marines. I’d say it was pretty good
A lot more WWII vets, and even sons and daughters of WWII vets were alive in 2001 than there were in 2010. Understanding what dad went through has a lot more draw than what grandpa or great grandpa went through does.
I described the Pacific to my dad like this. Taking the opening of Saving Private Ryan and basically take that level of combat brutality into a miniseries and you get the pacific. It accurately captures the horrors of war without restriction and how the scars mentally and physically do not go away once the fighting ends. Watching Sledges character from the beginning to the end is a very different feeling from Major Winters in Band of Brothers. I thought Brothers really captured the brotherhood of soldiers experience in combat. The Pacific captured the heartbreak and the absolute randomness and luck involved when it comes to deciding who lives and dies in combat. The mental exhaustion it took on the Marines. Band of Brothers briefly touched on this with Buck Compton and Malarky and a random soldier trying to dig a foxhole with bare hands outside Bastogne. The Pacific showed it throughout almost every episode.
I think the reason Band of Brothers is more popular and successful is because it's much easier to watch. Yes, there are moments of loss. But it's very balanced with moments of levity and the glorification of brothers in arms. In the end, it's very feel good in a way. The Pacific had almost none of that. It was almost purely about the brutality of war and how it ruins people physically and psychologically. Band also premiered the day before 9/11, and I'm sure that everyone's patriotic feelings helped drive viewership.
I definitely liked Band of Brothers much better. It followed a specific company of soldiers from start to finish. The Pacific was jumping all over the place.
There was a Chinese writer who used to write a novel about US marines and Pacific war from the American perspective in 1980s. He created a fictional character who fought from Guadalcanal, Tarawa,Saipan, Okinawa and finally, witnessed the Japanese surrender in Tokyo Bay. He also used conversations and letters from friends of this character who serve in other units to introduce other battles. Maybe such a storyline would be better for telling a complete story and connecting all the important scenes naturally. It can satisfy entertainment and historical facts at the same time.
which author is that? it would be really nice to see a change of narrative. everything is pro CCP propaganda nowadays in the mainland and to be frank i am raised with 打鬼子 flicks. SICKENING. utter garbage.
As others have said, as a Marine I love the Pacific and what it does to show a different side of WWII. Many people will criticize the lack of “brotherhood” or narrative in the Pacific but in reality that was the difficulty of writing a series about this war. Easy Company trained together, jumped into Normandy, went back, jumped into Holland, and stayed in theater the rest of the war. On the flip side, the Marines had 3, eventually 5 divisions that at any point were landing on different islands all at different times. Not to mention the distinct lack of first-hand accounts and material. They had to make do with 3 different men who all joined separately and never interacted with each other. It's very episodic and self contained in a sense, which is what makes it different, yet also separates it from BoB even more.
The Pacific is my favorite show ever. They absolutely nailed it, had enough of everything to be gripping and memorable. Flop or not. I love it to bits.
@@pinkpenzu 😃 for me, it's tough to name one show. Obviously, band of brothers is way up there, but I enjoyed the early seasons of Lost, Dexter, and Game of thrones, but they fell off the cliff in later seasons. Boston legal, x files, star trek TNG, and Battlestar Galactica had some amazing episodes but also some not so good ones. I guess the one show that consistently stayed good from start to the end was Breaking Bad.
Greg - a brilliant piece of analysis and entertaining video. This is clearly a passion project, and you’re great at it. Don’t stop, it adds to the channel. Well done.
One of the things people need to understand that unless you earned your Eagle Globe and Anchor you will never be able to fully understand but we appreciate your support.
The "problem" with the Pacific was that it largely did far too good a job of showing just how horrible a reality warfare can be. As a wargamer and History grad, I loved Band of Brothers showing "the greatest hits of the Western front campaigns". And while it certainly had some realistic and graphic combat, I found it "easier to watch and re-watch than many Pacific episodes. The Pacific showed us realities such as ripping gold teeth out of corpses, flipping debris to exposed brains, Marines suffering battle fatigue - and the horrible fate of civilians on Okinawa. War is hell - and the Pacific is arguably the most accurate series in proving that - and that was one of the reasons it didn't do as well as BoB.
@@Cybop-xd9mm Absolutely. Watching segments of The Pacific, I better understand why many combat veterans choose not to talk about what they experienced - and why they struggle with PTSD. You get some of that in BoB, but much more in The Pacific.
Even if they didn't get all their money back it was worth making. I haven't finished it yet because I just found out about it a few days ago but it's amazing. If they had gotten a couple of big names to star in it I suspect it would have done much better.
Well, certainly worth it for us as viewers! That's for sure. God bless HBO for funding this. Whether or not it was a sound financial decision for them as a business is probably less clear.
I just started rewatching it again. The subtlety of the performances by James Badge Dale and Joe Mazzello are hitting me harder this time out. 5 is where it really starts getting tough.
I watched all these shows around the ages of 13-16. Both my grand parents har been in the military and they got me on to these shows. I loved them, didnt understand a single damn thing, and once the combat started I also didnt understand most of the words. But the love and appreciation for it was there in my heart. As I grew older, I rewatched the shows multiple times and eventually understood whats going on. It is a little rough for a non mil outsider to throw themselves into and understand. Consider, this was made in a different era, when people still had an attention span.
I loved Band Of Brothers, even loved Generation Kill. But The Pacific felt like a huge miss for me. While many things I liked, I overall felt like the show wasn't able too grab my attention the way BoB or GK did.
GK was entertaining, but overall GK sucks ass. I watched it twice and I'll never watch GK again, it's way too trope filled. TP was meh the first time I watched because I thought it would be BoB too. And that's where everyone was wrong and made mistake. TP is telling deeply personal stories of the horrors and psychological trauma of war. BoB was telling esprit de corps and heroism and rah rah. Over time, I've probably watch Pacific more now than BoB. I want the horror, not the rag rah flag waving,. especially after I experienced the bullshit of Army service for myself.
@@MonstersNotUnderTheBedGK didn't show a single US KIA despite the fact US lost 5k soldiers in Iraq, only one guy got wounded, that's what drew me off GK.
It’s always about the money in Hollywood but I like to think they created this show and BOB to show us what it’s really like for these men, and the bonds they create.
Regardless what they made in profits I'm just glad to have heard their story. This was the "greatest" generation for a reason. The things these young men saw and had to endure to give us average folk the freedoms we take for granted everyday deserves attention. I loved this series and even though it seemed all over the place I still got a sense of the person we were following. Watching Sledge turn into the hardened soldier while Snafu began to show his humanity. Basilone going back to war just to end up dying when he had glory and praise at his footstep has got to be one of the most selfless acts you hardly hear of these days. Point is these were real men. Real stories. They deserve to be told and I'm thankful for their sacrifice.
I remember hearing people complain about “the Pacific” because they “kept changing the characters”. That they didn’t fallow the guys all the way through the war as in Band of Brothers. I felt like telling them I’m sure the men that fought and died are really sorry about not making it through the war so that you wouldn’t have to learn about another man who probably died as well in the Pacific. I personally loved the Pacific and I have watched it many times over since then. The reason is probably because I deployed with marines not army guys. And at the end the cab driver tells Lecky his war was nothing compared to you Girenes.
it was a true hell. flags of our fathers was 1/1000th as graphic as the book. The horrors they went through with a fanatical enemy is amazing. the greatest generation for sure.
I loved the Pacific as well, but for different reasons than Band of Brothers. The latter had a distinct focus on the comradery amongst the men of Easy company and follows the journey of the 101st through the war. The Pacific seems to highlight the war itself, rather than a particular story or unit. While the confusion of the characters and pacing may turn off certain viewers, I always viewed it as an artistic choice. One, to capture the scale and loss of the conflict, but also as way of demonstrating the toll on the psyche. That becomes a key focus toward the end of the show and the confusion leading up to it, in my opinion, makes it deeply resonate with the viewer.
@@scoobydoo7275 they might have but they didnt handle the brunt of it like the marines did. I love to dog on the crayon eaters but the hell they went through in the pacific is unparalleled. This was even touched on when the cab driver in the pacific admitted as such.
I just watched this video. I’m a huge fan of both Band of Brothers and The Pacific. I own both titles, and watch them frequently. I must say that this analysis of ThePacific was spot-on, and very well done. Although I feel that my attraction to Brothers was much more personal, than it was to Pacific, I could never put my finger on just why that was. This video perfectly explains why (although I don’t particularly care about the money). Well done, and thank you. I can now watch each without questioning why they feel so different.
The other factor was the timing. Band of Brothers aired just before, and then during, the height of patriotic fervor surrounding 9-11. When the Pacific released in 2010, our country had been at war for almost nine years. A lot fewer people were excited to see an unflinching view of one of the most brutal campaigns of the most brutal war in history at that point. If we wanted to see horribly hurt people, we could turn on the news...
Major issue was that BOB followed one company. The Pacific tried to take on three distinct stories within the same 10 episode format. It felt disjointed.
I enjoyed the realism and appreciated the effort to make The Pacific look as realistic as possible. It may have a better overall look than Band of Brothers. But I think you hit the nail on the head with your last comments about the writing. The stories were not as well written and they were not as engaging as the previous show. One example: the episode at the end of Band of Brothers, where the German General asks if he may address his men one last time was outstanding. It was a poignant and heartfelt bit of writing which eclipsed anything in The Pacific. This is the main reason, I believe, that viewership dropped so precipitously. I watched the entire series but it became increasing difficult to remain engaged in the story lines. I also thought Peleliu was the highlight of the series.
Pacific was a really good series, same with Generation Kill. However, Band of Brothers was without a doubt the greatest miniseries ever produced so the pacific was bound to fall short in one way or another.
"Generation Kill"... really? That was just a giant string of WOKE Anti American crap. In the entire series all the Americans did was shoot children and old women I think they might have shot 2 armed "bad guys" in the entire series. Just typical anti American Bull Shit.
I agree about Band of Brothers. While realistic, I think the Pacific lost itself in the chaos of war instead of showing the viewer the chaos. It also tried to cover too much scope of the pacific theater for ten episodes especially when they took at least 20% of the time away from the front.
"the Pacific is the forgotten front - for Americans" he said as he forgot the Africa front, the Pacific is remembered a lot, especially for it's naval warfare, island hopping and Japanese warcrimes, while Africa is basically never mentioned/shown just usually a skip to mention Italy, but never how they got there, the only real showing of the African front in a war film from what I can recall was in Patton, showing the aftermath of patton's predecessor's failure and Patton being picked to replace him.
There are quite a few movies that take place in Northern Africa during WW2.The Desert Fox, Rommel and The Battle of El Alamein come to mind. And for what its worth, The Aleutians is truly the forgotten theatre.
Most Americans don't know much of anything about history, our own or world history, even if they majored in it in college! What we all should know is that WW2 was the great unnecessary war.
I loved both series, I love that they show the back home drama , stuff that B.O.B did not , the Eugene Sledge family drama, of a mother conflicted between pride of her child’s decision to serve his county and the fear of losing him. The father who served during WW1 and his apprehensions of his son experiencing similar horrors. The conflict of interest for an American hero who no longer serviced next to his brothers but too perform less heroic acts drumming up war bonds. The dysentery, the food and water shortages, the gruesome antagonistic Japanese military . The mini-series might be named Pacific, but the viewers most assuredly will be able to see these men may have fought in a different campaign, but they also, were “A Band of Brothers.”
Dang Greg of Little Wars, you hit the nail of the head with your commentary near the end of explaining my exact feeling of The Pacific. Great production value all around but yes, the storytelling was a mess which made it harder to connect as a viewer. Yes, looking back I too have rewatched Band many more time than The Pacific. Nicely done vide!
Excellent analysis of the Pacific! Great video. I didn’t like the Pacific when I first watched it because it was so different than Band of Brothers, but watching it later (and then a third time) I came to deeply appreciate the series. Not as tight as BoB, but the acting and historical realism were top notch.
I’d say it’s also important to note the difference in available options at the time. In 2001 people were limited on options and by 2010 streaming services were growing people started watching things more on their own time and there was a lot more on the backlog of shows and movies to watch.
Not to mention things not available in 2001 now easily available in 2010, like DVR recording, cheap DVD box sets, broadband internet piracy, rise in popularity of other entertainment like online video games.
Despite the fact that all those other 2010 shows were made for less yet made more, I think The Pacific will be rewatched for decades since it's an important artifact about actual events and real people -- it's history. Other than Boardwalk Empire- a period piece about a rarely depicted era in New Jersey- I can only imagine a few people will be rewatching Hung and True Blood in 2035. In my opinion, the value of its legacy will outlast everything else. For war film fans, I think the most appreciated shows are often those that show the reality of war (i.e. Platoon, Apocalypse Now, Band of Brothers, etc).
