Jump to content

"Dunkirk" movie - Warner Bros - Christopher Nolan


antek
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm with Garth as well. I went with a collector buddy and we were entertained. Cinematography was great. Had a number of discussions about historical lapses. Didn't take away from the entertainment value. A comment of no real value: I had an Irish uncle that was in the RAMC-BEF evacuated at Dunkirk after having"two ships blown out from under him" Met him once - didn't talk about his wartime experiences. Pity. BTW - I think this thread is more entertaining than the Shelton Helmet threads! Just my 2-Cents. Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the air combat scenes were the only thing that kept me awake, I actually dozed off for short periods during the last half of the movie

 

it seemed like a patriotic movie for the Brits, thats probably the main audience , most Americans prefer movies about US involvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I paid my $8 for the week day matinee, bought my drink and popcorn, sat back in the plush seats the theater had just up graded to and was entertained for a couple of hours. That is exactly the point of going to the movies. Historical facts I get from books. The armchair experts can go pi$$ off.

 

what he said!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe it's a generational thing. I think though that with Saving Private Ryan and BoB the bar on war films has been raised so high where too many people try to compare each new film to previous ones.

 

I think it is a combination of a generational thing (I have always loved all of the movies Beast mentioned) and the internet. Now people can search the internet to look at WWII pictures. They believe looking at pictures on-line and reading small historical blurbs makes them an "expert" on anything to do with WWII.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely pointless argument is talking that "Red Tails" is poor due to CGI applied but Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" is good movie because its viewer can see authentic airworthy Spitfires and their dog fights. Really? How many seconds these authentic Spitfires can be seen? 10, 20 or maybe 25 in entire movie? The rest are RC models (ditching Spitfire) and Spitfire cockpit mock-up on the ground. By the way, Spitfire (RC model) ditching in "Dunkirk" is as artificial, unnatural as possible. "Dunkirk" producers did not do their own homework. Not to compare with Spitfire ditching in "Pearl Harbor" movie for instance.

 

Dog fights in "Dunkirk" were taken between Yak-52 and Hispano Aviación HA-1112 and it is clearly seen in this movie. So, where are these "values" of "Dunkirk"? Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" has much in common with history as abstract LC code letters painted on Spitfires in this movie.

 

"Dunkirk" is a very poor movie also from technical point of view. Boring movie for the children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely pointless argument is talking that "Red Tails" is poor due to CGI applied but Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" is good movie because its viewer can see authentic airworthy Spitfires and their dog fights. Really? How many seconds these authentic Spitfires can be seen? 10, 20 or maybe 25 in entire movie? The rest are RC models (ditching Spitfire) and Spitfire cockpit mock-up on the ground. By the way, Spitfire (RC model) ditching in "Dunkirk" is as artificial, unnatural as possible. "Dunkirk" producers did not do their own homework. Not to compare with Spitfire ditching in "Pearl Harbor" movie for instance.

 

Dog fights in "Dunkirk" were taken between Yak-52 and Hispano Aviación HA-1112 and it is clearly seen in this movie. So, where are these "values" of "Dunkirk"? Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" has much in common with history as abstract LC code letters painted on Spitfires in this movie.

 

"Dunkirk" is a very poor movie also from technical point of view. Boring movie for the children.

You're taking this way to far. It's a movie get over it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely pointless argument is talking that "Red Tails" is poor due to CGI applied but Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" is good movie because its viewer can see authentic airworthy Spitfires and their dog fights. Really? How many seconds these authentic Spitfires can be seen? 10, 20 or maybe 25 in entire movie? The rest are RC models (ditching Spitfire) and Spitfire cockpit mock-up on the ground. By the way, Spitfire (RC model) ditching in "Dunkirk" is as artificial, unnatural as possible. "Dunkirk" producers did not do their own homework. Not to compare with Spitfire ditching in "Pearl Harbor" movie for instance.

 

Dog fights in "Dunkirk" were taken between Yak-52 and Hispano Aviación HA-1112 and it is clearly seen in this movie. So, where are these "values" of "Dunkirk"? Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" has much in common with history as abstract LC code letters painted on Spitfires in this movie.

 

"Dunkirk" is a very poor movie also from technical point of view. Boring movie for the children.

 

Meanwhile, Poland is just cranking out the technically correct movies, please give us a glass for your whine Gregory. Or as Vintage said, make your silver screen epic. At least Owen did that. Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CNY Militaria

Completely pointless argument is talking that "Red Tails" is poor due to CGI applied but Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" is good movie because its viewer can see authentic airworthy Spitfires and their dog fights. Really? How many seconds these authentic Spitfires can be seen? 10, 20 or maybe 25 in entire movie? The rest are RC models (ditching Spitfire) and Spitfire cockpit mock-up on the ground. By the way, Spitfire (RC model) ditching in "Dunkirk" is as artificial, unnatural as possible. "Dunkirk" producers did not do their own homework. Not to compare with Spitfire ditching in "Pearl Harbor" movie for instance.

 

Dog fights in "Dunkirk" were taken between Yak-52 and Hispano Aviación HA-1112 and it is clearly seen in this movie. So, where are these "values" of "Dunkirk"? Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" has much in common with history as abstract LC code letters painted on Spitfires in this movie.

 

"Dunkirk" is a very poor movie also from technical point of view. Boring movie for the children.

Since we are talking about cinematic masterpieces, I believe a reference to the movie "Stripes" is appropriate...

 

"Lighten up, Francis."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're taking this way to far. It's a movie get over it

 

 

yah its getting redundant man. Get over it, move on. World has bigger problems and you are taking this MOVIE way to personally. sheesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely pointless argument is talking that "Red Tails" is poor due to CGI applied but Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" is good movie because its viewer can see authentic airworthy Spitfires and their dog fights. Really? How many seconds these authentic Spitfires can be seen? 10, 20 or maybe 25 in entire movie? The rest are RC models (ditching Spitfire) and Spitfire cockpit mock-up on the ground. By the way, Spitfire (RC model) ditching in "Dunkirk" is as artificial, unnatural as possible. "Dunkirk" producers did not do their own homework. Not to compare with Spitfire ditching in "Pearl Harbor" movie for instance.

 

Dog fights in "Dunkirk" were taken between Yak-52 and Hispano Aviación HA-1112 and it is clearly seen in this movie. So, where are these "values" of "Dunkirk"? Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" has much in common with history as abstract LC code letters painted on Spitfires in this movie.

 

"Dunkirk" is a very poor movie also from technical point of view. Boring movie for the children.

This is getting ridiculous. If you keep scrutinizing every movie you go to, the way you do with this Dunkirk movie there won't be much fun to be had in the cinema. It is very clear that you don't like it and that's fine. But to categorize this film as 'boring movie for the children' is taking it one step too far in my opinion. (Luckily I still haven't lost my inner child :lol:)

 

Just my 2cts.

 

 

Rene

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time to get over this stuff. One of my favorite movies was Patton. I managed to get over the M-48(German) Pattons getting destroyed by the M-47 and M-48(American) Pattons in an epic Patton on Patton depiction of Patton fighting Rommel in North Africa with his own namesake tanks. If I can do it, ya'll can get over the Yaks.

M-48 Patton used in movie.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Retired Army Noncom

Time to get over this stuff. One of my favorite movies was Patton. I managed to get over the M-48(German) Pattons getting destroyed by the M-47 and M-48(American) Pattons in an epic Patton on Patton depiction of Patton fighting Rommel in North Africa with his own namesake tanks. If I can do it, ya'll can get over the Yaks.

OH NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That nightmare will start all over again now!!! Thanks a bunch!!! :unsure::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

yah its getting redundant man. Get over it, move on. World has bigger problems and you are taking this MOVIE way to personally. sheesh.

Love it! Scott.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely pointless argument is talking that "Red Tails" is poor due to CGI applied but Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" is good movie because its viewer can see authentic airworthy Spitfires and their dog fights. Really? How many seconds these authentic Spitfires can be seen? 10, 20 or maybe 25 in entire movie? The rest are RC models (ditching Spitfire) and Spitfire cockpit mock-up on the ground. By the way, Spitfire (RC model) ditching in "Dunkirk" is as artificial, unnatural as possible. "Dunkirk" producers did not do their own homework. Not to compare with Spitfire ditching in "Pearl Harbor" movie for instance.

 

Dog fights in "Dunkirk" were taken between Yak-52 and Hispano Aviación HA-1112 and it is clearly seen in this movie. So, where are these "values" of "Dunkirk"? Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" has much in common with history as abstract LC code letters painted on Spitfires in this movie.

 

"Dunkirk" is a very poor movie also from technical point of view. Boring movie for the children.

 

ad nauseam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely pointless argument is talking that "Red Tails" is poor due to CGI applied but Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" is good movie because its viewer can see authentic airworthy Spitfires and their dog fights. Really? How many seconds these authentic Spitfires can be seen? 10, 20 or maybe 25 in entire movie? The rest are RC models (ditching Spitfire) and Spitfire cockpit mock-up on the ground. By the way, Spitfire (RC model) ditching in "Dunkirk" is as artificial, unnatural as possible. "Dunkirk" producers did not do their own homework. Not to compare with Spitfire ditching in "Pearl Harbor" movie for instance.

 

Dog fights in "Dunkirk" were taken between Yak-52 and Hispano Aviación HA-1112 and it is clearly seen in this movie. So, where are these "values" of "Dunkirk"? Nolanꞌs "Dunkirk" has much in common with history as abstract LC code letters painted on Spitfires in this movie.

 

"Dunkirk" is a very poor movie also from technical point of view. Boring movie for the children.

 

I like it more because you dislike it so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just made it to see it today! Overall i found it to be very entertain and worth my 2 hours and the 10 bucks it cost! As many stated i felt the aerial combat scenes were very good and i enjoyed them the most! I do agree for someone who isn't a military history buff it might be a little hard to catch on to what is actually going on at first!

I think the movie did a fairly good job portraying the hardships of the British Army during the evacuation. One thing i didnt see mentioned anywhere was if any of these people are portraying actual veterans? The cinematography i felt was very good and the movie at times had a lot of suspense!

 

Another part i had a hard time getting was when the french kid drowned, did the one british soldier trap him or was he somehow caught in the rigging ?

 

Overall a decent movie worth watching if you are interested in Dunkirk. I felt the ending was very good and i liked how the incorporated Churchill's famous quote!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did find that Commander Nolan portrayed Captain William Tennant, the main pilot's story (Tom Hardy character) loosely portrays Pilot Alan Deere who was from New Zealand. Though he was never captured and escaped in a life boat, he was awarded for heroic action and continued to fight on even when he knew he would run out of fuel. He landed wheels up on one of the evacuation beaches!

 

post-160496-0-13813800-1503119839.jpgpost-160496-0-26446800-1503119851.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BILL THE PATCH

The movie might have triggered memories, and maybe that's why he got emotional. Not the movie itself, who knows for sure

 

Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one way of judging how good a movie was is do you actually remember the movie? some movies seem to be forgotten easily if it's not a great movie

 

I saw DUNKIRK about three weeks ago, and I already forgot about it or dont even think about it anymore, it only took a few days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...