By Michael Wisotzkey (Afireinside) (24.171.107.160) on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 11:34 pm:

Which do you prefer? I personally like the mini series because the perfection of it is so good. It really follows the story and after the first epsiode you feel like you know the guys like best friends. The book is good, but is way too fast paced.It dosent have as much detail as the mini series did. Even though the mini series left out/put in a few things to make it more intresting, its truly the best view of WWII ever made into a motion picture.

By John B. Arzadon (Poster193) (202.8.224.134) on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 04:01 am:

true, but there are some things in the book that are not in the mini series including some easy men

By Marigold Papa (Marigold) (203.160.183.79) on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 09:38 am:

i'll say the two of them are the best together

gold

By joao leonel (Joao) (200.163.13.55) on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 09:40 pm:

I dont think that the mini series has more details
Its just because we can see them.

By potatomasher (61.9.84.104) on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 07:00 am:

I think I prefer the mini-series than the book. It's visual ( realistic also) and has background music to stir you up. But the book is a good companion to the mini series.

By yvette thomas (Bettyb) (194.117.133.182) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 02:17 pm:

i was quite disapointed with the book-not the actual retelling of events, but how Ambrose wrote it-in some bits it was a bit higgeldy-piggeldy, and it just didn't read smoothly. Also, his constant references from "Gray" were really quite annoying-the book would have been half as long if he didn't keep using his thoughts, instead of Ambrose's own.

Also, i thought that the writings of Webster, were at times, more interesting and useful, than things that Ambrose wrote.

With regards to the mini-series, it was for the above reasons that i found this more interesting. Although i am glad i read the book to get the majority of the real facts, i think that is one of the few instances where the Hollywood interpretation is better than the book.

By Katie Hargreaves (Lil_Dl_Fan03) (68.14.80.156) on Sunday, January 26, 2003 - 11:10 pm:

I thought that the book gave a whole lot more details than the miniseries. I did enjoy the miniseries, but the book elaborated on the whole company, whereas in the miniseries, it was simply focused on six or so main characters.
-kate-

By Janine (Janine) (139.134.64.157) on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 12:30 am:

I loved both. The book is more accurate, more detail and more stories about E Company. Also you get to read about characters that are not mentioned in the miniseries. On the other hand you get to learn more about certain characters in the miniseries than you do in the book (eg. Perconte)

Well that's just why I love them both

By col (Grateful) (194.74.230.27) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 10:49 am:

I personally believe it was the fantastic and incredibly inciteful idea to put the veterans on for a little comment before each episode and then after the series ended to dedicate a whole episode to these men that made the whole book and movie so personal to everyone .....dont u agree??? I think without that it would have been another piece of very well made historical drama or writting and not the high impacting emotional realisation that it was. When we stand alone together started and the veterans recited their names and introduced them selves after watching the entire series, I swear the hairs on the back of my neck stood up and thats when it hit me..........also the book concentrates on the men rather than the events of course so is more detailed, in holland for example and bastogne the series skipped a lot of events and battles. The book also told the full story, maybe the series was alittle afraid of the more grim facts of war like wildbill and liebgott shooting prisoners who tried "something" while under guard, I think we all would have done the same in those circumstances...i.e. surviving a battle and being killed by a prisoner, like liebgott's buddy almost did when he got his throat slashed (sorry I just cannot think of his name right now.)

By Marigold Papa (Marigold) (203.160.183.79) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 10:42 pm:

I agree with ya Col.
You must be talking about Tipper in episode 3, Carentan?

gold

By Janine (Janine) (139.134.64.153) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 12:38 am:

I agree. The miniseries who not have had the same impact without the vets. They're like a reminder to the audience that the experiences brought to the screen are based on the reality of their experiences of war.

By Janine (Janine) (139.134.64.153) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 12:38 am:

I agree. The miniseries would not have had the same impact without the vets. They're like a reminder to the audience that the experiences brought to the screen are based on the reality of their experiences of war.

By John M. Thomas (Jthomas) (24.222.66.47) on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 03:38 pm:

I have to say the series is more inspiring than the book simply because of the emotional performances by an exceptional cast. The interviews of the vets are powerful. If only there could be a follow up to We Stand Alone Together with additional or expanded footage.

John T

Please visit a sponsor and help keep this site free!