OT: Dunkirk the Movie!

[Reg]

I went to see Dunkirk today and I thought it was quite good.

Not your standard war movie but isn't that what cinema is all about. The three different story lines running at different time rates and constantly crossing over was an interesting story telling device and worked well.

I think that those who did not like this film were expecting a Captain Kirk to come sweeping in to save the day. Sorry guys it didn't happen.

I guess they would not get the movie "The Snow Goose" either... [:(]

[Jorge_Stanbury]

ORIGINAL: Reg

I think that those who did not like this film were expecting a Captain Kirk to come sweeping in to save the day. Sorry guys it didn't happen.

Well in the end it was Britannia herself, personified by brave common men and women who came sweeping. German planes retreated as soon as they arrived. Even the sun started to shine.

Without spoiling it for those that haven't seen it. It's neither a historian movie nor a dialogue/ well developed character movie. Instead it is a series of vignettes showing how was the evacuation experience like, assuming very bad luck... Because if this had been the standard I doubt more than a few thousands would had been saved

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

ORIGINAL: Reg

I think that those who did not like this film were expecting a Captain Kirk to come sweeping in to save the day. Sorry guys it didn't happen.

Well in the end it was Britannia herself, personified by brave common men and women who came sweeping. German planes retreated as soon as they arrived. Even the sun started to shine.

Without spoiling it for those that haven't seen it. It's neither a historian movie nor a dialogue/ well developed character movie. Instead it is a series of vignettes showing how was the evacuation experience like, assuming very bad luck... Because if this had been the standard I doubt more than a few thousands would had been saved

warspite1

Firstly I respectfully disagree with Reg - I can't recall that any of the comments, from people that don't like Dunkirk, that suggested its because of that kind of reason.

But equally, in order to make any money and be in any way interesting, no film is going to show the elements that ran well because it would be dull. Men on mole, destroyer arrives, men get on destroyer, men get home.

Even had the film concentrated on the destroyers (which saved 2/3rd of the men) then the film makers would still be concentrating on those journeys that suffered the bad luck. They would, like the film actually did, concentrate on those that were mined, bombed, strafed, sunk - and sadly there would be plenty to choose from. An obvious example would be HMS Wakeful that sunk with all but one of the troops she was rescuing - and only 25 of her crew. And these were picked up by HMS Grafton that was in turn sunk.

[zuluhour]

saw it last night, there was a preview of a "Churchill" movie I want to see, I thought Dunkirk was.......so.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

saw it last night, there was a preview of a "Churchill" movie I want to see, I thought Dunkirk was.......so.

warspite1

You mean this one? This has a quality cast and a half - really looking forward to this.

Darkest Hour
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4555426/vid ... _=tt_ov_vi

[zuluhour]

yes sir!

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

saw it last night, there was a preview of a "Churchill" movie I want to see, I thought Dunkirk was.......so.

warspite1

You mean this one? This has a quality cast and a half - really looking forward to this.

Darkest Hour
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4555426/vid ... _=tt_ov_vi

There was a TV serial about Churchill that also had Gary Oldman as star. I thought he was very good in the role. The new movie looks like a similar portrayal.

[joey]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I saw it and I didn't like it. Felt like a disaster movie, with the Germans taking the place of cloverfield monster. And although there was beautiful cinematography, it was too slow and repetitive. Only the air scenes paid the ticket and even those were too predictable, Germans easily killed

Top 5 war movies IMO:
Das boot
Dr Strangelove
Platoon
Full metal jacket
Black Hawk down

Honorable mentions: admiral Yamamoto, letters from Iwo Jima, battle of Britain, Tora Tora Tora, band of Brothers,

I would had added Det untergang, Apocalypse now and paths of glory, but these are not true war movies IMO, more like something happening during the war

I think my number two after Private Ryan would be Apocalypse Now. This would be follow by the Good Doctor Strangelove. My wife's favorite is Das Boot. Too bad that most films today are more Hollywood and less real wood....

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: joey

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I saw it and I didn't like it. Felt like a disaster movie, with the Germans taking the place of cloverfield monster. And although there was beautiful cinematography, it was too slow and repetitive. Only the air scenes paid the ticket and even those were too predictable, Germans easily killed

Top 5 war movies IMO:
Das boot
Dr Strangelove
Platoon
Full metal jacket
Black Hawk down

Honorable mentions: admiral Yamamoto, letters from Iwo Jima, battle of Britain, Tora Tora Tora, band of Brothers,

I would had added Det untergang, Apocalypse now and paths of glory, but these are not true war movies IMO, more like something happening during the war

I think my number two after Private Ryan would be Apocalypse Now. This would be follow by the Good Doctor Strangelove. My wife's favorite is Das Boot. Too bad that most films today are more Hollywood and less real wood....

You mean the "1941" scene with the naked lady clinging to the periscope and the Japanese sailor sighing "Horrywood" wasn't good wood material? [:D]

[Jorge_Stanbury]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

saw it last night, there was a preview of a "Churchill" movie I want to see, I thought Dunkirk was.......so.

warspite1

You mean this one? This has a quality cast and a half - really looking forward to this.

Darkest Hour
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4555426/vid ... _=tt_ov_vi

There was a TV serial about Churchill that also had Gary Oldman as star. I thought he was very good in the role. The new movie looks like a similar portrayal.

I also saw the trailer yesterday; and I will definitively watch it, but so far, I am a bit disappointed Gary Oldman couldn't match Churchill's powerful voice; his "we will fight on the beaches" speech pales compared to the real deal

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Reg
I think that those who did not like this film were expecting a Captain Kirk to come sweeping in to save the day. Sorry guys it didn't happen.

Ummm...no. My reasons for thinking the movie was mediocre were (I thought) well spelled out above. I don't need the condescending 'expecting Kirk to come sweeping in' claptrap nonsense just because I voiced a reasoned contrary opinion.

[Chickenboy]

Events in the Far East are making me need to watch the first 20 minutes of "By Dawn's Early Light" again. Not in a good way either. [:(]

[IdahoNYer]

Saw Dunkirk today, and have been looking forward to it from the first trailers.

Gotta say, I was underwhelmed....

Didn't convey the scale of the operation, and the director's editing drove me batty....day - night - day....wait? The scenes are tied in?? Was kinda similar to the "Thin Red Line"

Did enjoy the aerial scenes a bit, although not sure the Spitfire carried enough ammo to down what....5 or 6 planes I lost count?? And that Heinkel had to have had the longest bomb approach on that minesweeper in history!

And by the time Tom Hardy's Spit's glide after running out of fuel finally ended, all the Brits had been evacuated!!! Wow!!!

Guess my taste in war movies goes in a bit of different direction....my top five, in no real order...

- Das Boot
- The Cross of Iron
- The Train
- The Longest Day
- Tora Tora Tora

Plenty others better than Dunkirk......I'd rate Dunkirk slightly below "Fury"...

At least it didn't try to overwhelm the audience with over the top CGI effects, I'll give it that.

[Footslogger]

You know what I find interesting about these movies though. When I ask co-workers have you ever heard of Joseph Stalin, Dunkirk or D-Day, they are completely clueless. Both young and middle-aged. I actually marvel how most people don't know history in general. In my opinion, these movies help educate what they didn't learn or forgot in school.

[patrickl]

Can't blame them. History esp military history is not everyone's hobby. Same as geography or all other sciences. Live and let live.[:)]

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: patrickl

Can't blame them. History esp military history is not everyone's hobby. Same as geography or all other sciences. Live and let live.[:)]

Gotta disagree here. If you want to have a vision of where we are going you need enough history to understand how we got here and what mistakes were made along the way. Then you need to know enough geography to understand how it affects relations between countries and groups, especially trade and security.
People who think only their own neighbourhood matters will get a rude shock when the rest of the world comes calling.

[spence]

People who think only their own neighbourhood matters will get a rude shock when the rest of the world comes calling.

+1

[warspite1]

Dunkirk spoiler alert

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

....although not sure the Spitfire carried enough ammo to down what....5 or 6 planes I lost count?? And that Heinkel had to have had the longest bomb approach on that minesweeper in history!

And by the time Tom Hardy's Spit's glide after running out of fuel finally ended, all the Brits had been evacuated!!! Wow!!!

warspite1

I'll need to see it a third time to try and confirm how many aircraft were shot down by Farrier. Remember we see the same scenes more than once from different perspectives - so I don't think he shoots down that many. But regardless, yes he does seem to have too much ammunition.

As for the landing - there is nothing that I can recall that says Farrier landed on Dunkirk beach - in fact that would seem somewhat unlikely given that it would have been full of troops. But you know there is more than one beach in Northern France/Belgium [;)]

[ElvisDaKing]

came yesterday to Watch movie, and a bit disappointed...

Well it s a nice movie with some great scenes and the 3 mixed stories - air-sea-land- is interesting, but i think Nolan missed 2 critical points :
- It doesnt show the large scale of the situation : we are talking about hundred of thousands soldiers trapped on the beaches and we can see hardly hundreds, especially that Nolan likes to make large views...
- We don t feel the critical moment it was during the war, especially for the british government which had to repatriate its professional army from the continent when all the odds seemed to show that it was to be captured and almost nothing left to protect UK...


Just to add, as a frenchman, after seeing some remarks on the Net and even on some french publication, blaming Nolan's movie for ignoring the french fighting during Dunkirk battle...
Well as a personal note, i don t have this feeling as the movie is not about the full battle itself but about 3 specific and different points of view, but i can understand that some people felt a missed opportunity to give justice back to french army which fought bravly and efficiently during these days, but again it was not the purpose of the movie...
Unfortunately after armistice signed, Vichy regime propaganda used Dunkirk events to pretend that french army was abandonned by its former allies in order to raise anti british feeling among public opinion, and when Republic reinstalled after liberation, everybody wanted to forget about the defeated 1940 army and celebrate the 1944/45 army which participated in Europe liberation ...

Actually it could be a nice war movie by itself, fighting an unwinnable battle, trying to delay as much as possible the unavoidable defeat, just to protect the evacuation of the rest of the army, trapped on the beaches of dunkirk...
But not sure that a 1940 french soldier war movie would attract an international interest, required for a today movie success...

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: ElvisDaKing

came yesterday to Watch movie, and a bit disappointed...

Well it s a nice movie with some great scenes and the 3 mixed stories - air-sea-land- is interesting, but i think Nolan missed 2 critical points :
- It doesnt show the large scale of the situation : we are talking about hundred of thousands soldiers trapped on the beaches and we can see hardly hundreds, especially that Nolan likes to make large views...
- We don t feel the critical moment it was during the war, especially for the british government which had to repatriate its professional army from the continent when all the odds seemed to show that it was to be captured and almost nothing left to protect UK...


Just to add, as a frenchman, after seeing some remarks on the Net and even on some french publication, blaming Nolan's movie for ignoring the french fighting during Dunkirk battle...
Well as a personal note, i don t have this feeling as the movie is not about the full battle itself but about 3 specific and different points of view, but i can understand that some people felt a missed opportunity to give justice back to french army which fought bravly and efficiently during these days, but again it was not the purpose of the movie...
Unfortunately after armistice signed, Vichy regime propaganda used Dunkirk events to pretend that french army was abandonned by its former allies in order to raise anti british feeling among public opinion, and when Republic reinstalled after liberation, everybody wanted to forget about the defeated 1940 army and celebrate the 1944/45 army which participated in Europe liberation ...

Actually it could be a nice war movie by itself, fighting an unwinnable battle, trying to delay as much as possible the unavoidable defeat, just to protect the evacuation of the rest of the army, trapped on the beaches of dunkirk...
But not sure that a 1940 french soldier war movie would attract an international interest, required for a today movie success...

warspite1

Nice measured view sir! [:)]

But I would pick up on three points

- It doesnt show the large scale of the situation : we are talking about hundred of thousands soldiers trapped on the beaches and we can see hardly hundreds, especially that Nolan likes to make large views...

I think this is down to style - I mean there is the 'lay it on with a trowel, bash them over the head with it' approach or there is a more subtle way. Not saying that either is necessarily right or wrong (I guess it depends on the movie). But I think it is made clear in the limited dialogue that there are "400,000 men on that beach" and later at the end when they discuss the fact that "almost 300,000 have been evacuated so far". So I don't think its missed - perhaps the point could have been made in a more obvious way?

- We don t feel the critical moment it was during the war, especially for the british government which had to repatriate its professional army from the continent when all the odds seemed to show that it was to be captured and almost nothing left to protect UK...

Similarly I don't think this was missed, but once again could have been made more obvious - e.g. a shot back to Churchill in the House of Commons or at the War Cabinet spelling out the problem. But, as I say, it wasn't missed. When the Admiral comes over and talks to the SNO and the Colonel, he makes clear that "we need our army back" because "the Germans won't stop here" and something along the lines that we are next. Again, its a more understated approach for better or worse, but it wasn't missed.

- but i can understand that some people felt a missed opportunity to give justice back to french army which fought bravly and efficiently during these days

I'm interest to know; as a Frenchman, did you not get the sense that the French were recognised:
- during the opening scene the French were defending the perimeter while the retreating English soldier was motioned away to the beach (a look of contempt on one Poilu's face).
- Reference was made numerous (three?) times to the fact that the French were holding the perimeter - and must have been fighting to the end because Branagh makes the point he is not leaving the mole as he's waiting for the French. Again I think its a matter of degree, but did you not feel that to be the case?

Thanks.