Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Anyone planning to see the movie "Dunkirk"?
- Thread starter Albion my Albion
- Start date
Hillian1
( . ) ( . )
Won't compromise a thing for me, as I genuinely have no clue who he is or what he looks like.
DavidRyder
Well-known member
- Jul 23, 2013
- 2,930
Saw it on Saturday, bloody brilliant. The way they combined different viewpoints of the events was v well done. I recommend.
DavidRyder
Well-known member
- Jul 23, 2013
- 2,930
Harry Styles was actually pretty good. But not sure I agree with the 'fast track' way singers/models can get a big part on a big movie, ahead of proper actors. Still, probably got a few teenage girls in, and hopefully they learnt something about the war.
biddles911
New member
- May 12, 2014
- 348
Anyone planning to see the movie "Dunkirk"?
Great film but recommend seeing it on iMax or 4dx screen to get full impact. Went to Crawley as both Worthing cinemas only showing on their small screens anyway....why!?
Best bits were the Spitfires. You really felt you were flying with them.
God, these guys were amazingly brave......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Great film but recommend seeing it on iMax or 4dx screen to get full impact. Went to Crawley as both Worthing cinemas only showing on their small screens anyway....why!?
Best bits were the Spitfires. You really felt you were flying with them.
God, these guys were amazingly brave......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Silverhatch
Well-known member
Yep, saw it at Crawley in full IMAX and ear shattering Dolby. Brilliant and a real assault on the senses. Mark Rylance and Tom Hardy are so watchable.
jakarta
Well-known member
Just back from Horsham Capitol.
Good but not a Classic.
Mark Rylance was superb, as ever.
Having researched this in great detail over the years it was a little disappointing to see some of the flaws considering the money that had been spent. e.g. apparently Spitfires have infinite amounts of ammunition, if not fuel...
Harry Stiles - didn't even notice him.
Good but not a Classic.
Mark Rylance was superb, as ever.
Having researched this in great detail over the years it was a little disappointing to see some of the flaws considering the money that had been spent. e.g. apparently Spitfires have infinite amounts of ammunition, if not fuel...
Harry Stiles - didn't even notice him.
pastafarian
Well-known member
Is the imax in crawley a whopper sized screen?
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
Saw it last night at the Connaught Worthing.....didn't have problem re the screen...its a pretty small cinema upstairs and there new sound system did it proud ..glad you enjoyed it where you went
studio150
Well-known member
Saw the film today, wouldn't even make my top 20 of war films, and in my view far inferior to the John Mills Dunkirk film.#
I thought the opening scene was daft as I would have expected all the soldiers to have been picked off. Also Tom Hardy' spitfire can glide around for ages while still shooting down German planes. While the sound and effects were good, there was no development of the characters.
Average
I thought the opening scene was daft as I would have expected all the soldiers to have been picked off. Also Tom Hardy' spitfire can glide around for ages while still shooting down German planes. While the sound and effects were good, there was no development of the characters.
Average
Garry Nelson's teacher
Well-known member
First film I've seen at the cinema since Jurassic Park (is this an NSC record?) and it was worth the trip. Brilliantly orchestrated with very little by way of 'characters' (eg no love interest) and virtually no exposition (i.e no maps, no strategy, no Churchill impersonations). The film just really lets the action tell the story and I thought it was superbly done. Of course there's always going to be little things that you notice such as that the soldiers drowning did tend to look like male models. The use of music was very, very moving especially the splash of Elgar at the end. The aerial combat scenes were simply amazing. and the 'at-sea' ones were, er, immersive.
Things have come a long way since Jurassic Park!
PS don't want to sound pretentious here by I think the lack of characterisation was a deliberate attempt to catch a bit of the 'Britishness' at the time: the 'whole' was bigger than individuals. I thought it would have been diminished and used as a 'star vehicle' the way that Holywood might have traditionally treated it?
Things have come a long way since Jurassic Park!
PS don't want to sound pretentious here by I think the lack of characterisation was a deliberate attempt to catch a bit of the 'Britishness' at the time: the 'whole' was bigger than individuals. I thought it would have been diminished and used as a 'star vehicle' the way that Holywood might have traditionally treated it?
jakarta
Well-known member
Sadly loads of factual mistakes, the Luftwaffe would never have sent single bombers with two escorts to attack the beach, it would have been a whole Geschwader (wing) probably with two Gruppen of escorting Me 109's.
In addition the RAF never sent sections of 3 aircraft out to Dunkirk, it would almost always be a squadron of 12 aircraft. See Al Deere's and Robert Stanford Tuck's memoirs about air fighting over Dunkirk.
And yes I need to get out more...
In addition the RAF never sent sections of 3 aircraft out to Dunkirk, it would almost always be a squadron of 12 aircraft. See Al Deere's and Robert Stanford Tuck's memoirs about air fighting over Dunkirk.
And yes I need to get out more...
Return of the Rev
Well-known member
Monkey Man
Your support is not that great
I did think that there were surprisingly few aircraft in the sky with 400,000 troops as sitting targets. I guess the production budget can only stretch so far.
Still thought it was an amazing film, telling a story that was in danger of being all but forgotten and yet symbolises the best qualities of human spirit and is such an important chapter in the history of modern Britain.
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
GOM
living vicariously
There wasn't supposed to be any development of the chartacters, that was deliberate. The film was meant to be subjective about the event, not about the characters.
Read an interesting piece with a historian who only really picked up a couple of things. One, that for dramatic reasons, the role of the small boats is overplayed, having only effected around 5% of the rescue - and that the Royal Navy had a much greater presence than portrayed. Secondly, that Spitfires had a tiny amount of ammunition (could only fire for something like 12 seconds I think before it was Game Over gun-wise) making some of the dogfights unrealistic. Finally, that a Spitfire would not land on a sandy beach with its undercarriage down as it would sink in and crash heavily.
But, having said all that, he felt if captured the feel and the 'spirit' of Dunkirk brilliantly and, for a film, there were some very accurate portrayals. Looking forward to seeing it.
Last edited:
MattBackHome
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 11,875
Entirely OT, but my stepdad had a 39 year 'cinema gap' between Seven Brides for Seven Brothers and The Fugitive.
Charlies Shinpad
New member
A friend of mine is a film director and he said that the director of Dunkirk hates CGI with a passion and only uses it as a last resort
Hence you only saw a few small boats and when the minesweeper sunk the oil fire was very small etc
I agree with the Spitfire ammunition and gliding and landing bit but it didn't spoil my enjoyment of an old fashioned stiff upper lip British movie
Hence you only saw a few small boats and when the minesweeper sunk the oil fire was very small etc
I agree with the Spitfire ammunition and gliding and landing bit but it didn't spoil my enjoyment of an old fashioned stiff upper lip British movie
Garry Nelson's teacher
Well-known member
Entirely OT, but my stepdad had a 39 year 'cinema gap' between Seven Brides for Seven Brothers and The Fugitive.
Oh that's great. By Christ it's good to hold an NSC record - but massive respect to your step-dad!
On the historical accuracy of the film, I take the points (with interest) but wonder if there's ever been a war movie that couldn't be challenged on these grounds? I write as someone who grew up thinking that John Wayne had beaten the Japanese empire more or less single-handedly and that D-Day was actually fought in black and white as per the 1960s movie.