RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie!

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie!

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie!

Page: << < prev 6 7 8 [9] 10 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 7/31/2017 5:03:54 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

perhaps the point could have been made in a more obvious way?

Yes. Could have been. Or at least a way that was more compelling to the viewer.

quote:

its a more understated approach for better or worse, but it wasn't missed.

Mostly for the worse. Anything that leaves doubt as to the fate of England without an Army to defend it is counterproductive. Especially assuming that people ("average viewers") have some sense of the historical context of Britain's plight that a passing remark about its vulnerability is sufficient? "Understated" is itself an understatement.

_____________________________

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 241

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 7/31/2017 6:19:01 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

its a more understated approach for better or worse, but it wasn't missed.

Mostly for the worse. Anything that leaves doubt as to the fate of England without an Army to defend it is counterproductive. Especially assuming that people ("average viewers") have some sense of the historical context of Britain's plight that a passing remark about its vulnerability is sufficient? "Understated" is itself an understatement.

warspite1

Except of course the UK's fate would still have been in doubt. i.e. it was not a black and white situation - successful evacuation = Guaranteed survival - unsuccessful evacuation = Guaranteed surrender because there were of course various shades of unknown grey - the Battle of Britain for one thing, the political fall-out from a partial evacuation, does the lack of an army make Hitler grow a set and give the order for Sea Lion? etc.

But understandably that is for the grognards - not the average cinema goer who likes to keep things simple. So to make it more black and white Nolan would need Churchill or someone similar basically coming out with some dramatic (but false) line when addressing the cabinet: "We get our army back - or we must surrender". This works of course in terms of getting the seriousness of the situation over to the paying public - albeit at the cost of being a true representation.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 242

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 7/31/2017 6:55:33 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

its a more understated approach for better or worse, but it wasn't missed.

Mostly for the worse. Anything that leaves doubt as to the fate of England without an Army to defend it is counterproductive. Especially assuming that people ("average viewers") have some sense of the historical context of Britain's plight that a passing remark about its vulnerability is sufficient? "Understated" is itself an understatement.

warspite1

Except of course the UK's fate would still have been in doubt. i.e. it was not a black and white situation - successful evacuation = Guaranteed survival - unsuccessful evacuation = Guaranteed surrender because there were of course various shades of unknown grey - the Battle of Britain for one thing, the political fall-out from a partial evacuation, does the lack of an army make Hitler grow a set and give the order for Sea Lion? etc.

But understandably that is for the grognards - not the average cinema goer who likes to keep things simple. So to make it more black and white Nolan would need Churchill or someone similar basically coming out with some dramatic (but false) line when addressing the cabinet: "We get our army back - or we must surrender". This works of course in terms of getting the seriousness of the situation over to the paying public - albeit at the cost of being a true representation.

Churchill had only been PM for a short time before Dunkirk, and he had many enemies in Parliament, plus a public that still remembered the fiasco at Gallipoli (few cared that it was not Churchill's fault that the operation was botched). Had the evacuation at Dunkirk not turned into a huge inspiration for the British people, and Churchill given a forum to wax eloquent, he would probably have been ousted by his own party. That would have been a disaster for Britain's morale.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 243

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 7/31/2017 7:13:54 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

its a more understated approach for better or worse, but it wasn't missed.

Mostly for the worse. Anything that leaves doubt as to the fate of England without an Army to defend it is counterproductive. Especially assuming that people ("average viewers") have some sense of the historical context of Britain's plight that a passing remark about its vulnerability is sufficient? "Understated" is itself an understatement.

warspite1

Except of course the UK's fate would still have been in doubt. i.e. it was not a black and white situation - successful evacuation = Guaranteed survival - unsuccessful evacuation = Guaranteed surrender because there were of course various shades of unknown grey - the Battle of Britain for one thing, the political fall-out from a partial evacuation, does the lack of an army make Hitler grow a set and give the order for Sea Lion? etc.

But understandably that is for the grognards - not the average cinema goer who likes to keep things simple. So to make it more black and white Nolan would need Churchill or someone similar basically coming out with some dramatic (but false) line when addressing the cabinet: "We get our army back - or we must surrender". This works of course in terms of getting the seriousness of the situation over to the paying public - albeit at the cost of being a true representation.

Churchill had only been PM for a short time before Dunkirk, and he had many enemies in Parliament, plus a public that still remembered the fiasco at Gallipoli (few cared that it was not Churchill's fault that the operation was botched). Had the evacuation at Dunkirk not turned into a huge inspiration for the British people, and Churchill given a forum to wax eloquent, he would probably have been ousted by his own party. That would have been a disaster for Britain's morale.

warspite1

Maybe. Against removing Churchill was that he had been Prime Minister for less than a month - and so blame for the defeat in France would be difficult to reasonably pin on him.

But moreover, who is going to replace him? I think there is a reasoned argument to be made for Halifax not wanting the job enough when Churchill took it - is he going to want it now?

I suppose it comes down to: would failure to get the army back mean the doves gained ascendancy - or would that trait (not exclusively peculiar to the British) come through - you know the one where the anger at what has happened courtesy of some big bully (in this case defeat of the army) actually makes the populace even more determined to stick it out?

Interesting question.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 244

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 7/31/2017 7:52:23 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

warspite1

Maybe. Against removing Churchill was that he had been Prime Minister for less than a month - and so blame for the defeat in France would be difficult to reasonably pin on him.

But moreover, who is going to replace him? I think there is a reasoned argument to be made for Halifax not wanting the job enough when Churchill took it - is he going to want it now?

I suppose it comes down to: would failure to get the army back mean the doves gained ascendancy - or would that trait (not exclusively peculiar to the British) come through - you know the one where the anger at what has happened courtesy of some big bully (in this case defeat of the army) actually makes the populace even more determined to stick it out?

Interesting question.

There is a reason that the British Bulldog is a symbol for her people!

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 245

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 7/31/2017 9:32:53 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
But understandably that is for the grognards - not the average cinema goer who likes to keep things simple. So to make it more black and white Nolan would need Churchill or someone similar basically coming out with some dramatic (but false) line when addressing the cabinet: "We get our army back - or we must surrender". This works of course in terms of getting the seriousness of the situation over to the paying public - albeit at the cost of being a true representation.

Something like that would have been absolutely warranted. We should not lose sight of the fact that there were any number of examples of-ahem-alternative facts / representations in the name of 'director's license' in the movie. Another added atop these that put the importance of the scale / scope of the mission in context for the average viewer would have been welcome and / or necessary.

_____________________________

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 246

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/1/2017 3:03:25 AM

stuman

Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

I saw it this weekend and thought it was well made. It gave an interesting perspective to a portion of the war that many, many people today just don't know anything about. I must admit that I was happy just to see a new, pretty well made movie about WW2 make it to the big screen.

My parents, wife and I went to see it on Sunday afternoon at the first matinee and the place was packed !

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 247

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/1/2017 12:00:40 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
But understandably that is for the grognards - not the average cinema goer who likes to keep things simple. So to make it more black and white Nolan would need Churchill or someone similar basically coming out with some dramatic (but false) line when addressing the cabinet: "We get our army back - or we must surrender". This works of course in terms of getting the seriousness of the situation over to the paying public - albeit at the cost of being a true representation.

Something like that would have been absolutely warranted.

warspite1

Fair enough - I think we can agree to disagree on this. You think this aspect was underplayed and I think it was perfectly well done

.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 248

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/1/2017 12:40:48 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
But understandably that is for the grognards - not the average cinema goer who likes to keep things simple. So to make it more black and white Nolan would need Churchill or someone similar basically coming out with some dramatic (but false) line when addressing the cabinet: "We get our army back - or we must surrender". This works of course in terms of getting the seriousness of the situation over to the paying public - albeit at the cost of being a true representation.

Something like that would have been absolutely warranted.

warspite1

Fair enough - I think we can agree to disagree on this. You think this aspect was underplayed and I think it was perfectly well done .

No worries. I think that's a fair assessment of this particular quibble of mine.

I will say that I'm pleased-like stuman-that a WWII movie is still drawing solid international audiences. Hopefully this will grease the wheels of Hollywood (and other regional movie production conglomerates) for more such films in the future.

_____________________________

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 249

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/1/2017 12:47:44 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
But understandably that is for the grognards - not the average cinema goer who likes to keep things simple. So to make it more black and white Nolan would need Churchill or someone similar basically coming out with some dramatic (but false) line when addressing the cabinet: "We get our army back - or we must surrender". This works of course in terms of getting the seriousness of the situation over to the paying public - albeit at the cost of being a true representation.

Something like that would have been absolutely warranted.

warspite1

Fair enough - I think we can agree to disagree on this. You think this aspect was underplayed and I think it was perfectly well done .

I will say that I'm pleased-like stuman-that a WWII movie is still drawing solid international audiences. Hopefully this will grease the wheels of Hollywood (and other regional movie production conglomerates) for more such films in the future.

warspite1

I'd second that emotion

. At the first screening I saw, the cinema was reasonably full. But at the second, the following week at the imax, the cinema was pretty much chocca. That can only be a good thing for potential future productions

.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 250

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/2/2017 6:07:04 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Here's a new wrinkle on the movie - some are claiming Kenneth Branaugh's naval officer character on the Mole was a Canadian. I am sure there was more than one naval officer on the Mole, so I think they are stretching to state such certainty. Here's the story:

http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/inspiration-for-summer-blockbuster-dunkirk-an-unsung-montreal-hero

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 251

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/2/2017 6:16:34 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Here's a new wrinkle on the movie - some are claiming Kenneth Branaugh's naval officer character on the Mole was a Canadian. I am sure there was more than one naval officer on the Mole, so I think they are stretching to state such certainty. Here's the story:

http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/inspiration-for-summer-blockbuster-dunkirk-an-unsung-montreal-hero

warspite1

Nice story. Personally I think its less of a shame that he is not named in the film - for the simple reason that he is not being singled out for that treatment - than the fact that his story is not known more generally. That is the real shame.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 252

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/2/2017 9:12:33 PM

pontiouspilot

Posts: 1127
Joined: 7/27/2012
Status: offline

I assumed that Branagh represented Cpt Wm. Tennant....same unlucky dude who ended up skipper of Repulse. What rank was Branagh?...I didn't note it.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 253

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/3/2017 12:45:49 AM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

quote:

I assumed that Branagh represented Cpt Wm. Tennant....same unlucky dude who ended up skipper of Repulse. What rank was Branagh?...I didn't note it.

I assumed the same thing however he seems to be a Commander (three full sized strpes). I believe USN and RN rank insignia are equivalent except IIRC they use squiggly half stripes.

(in reply to pontiouspilot)

Post #: 254

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/3/2017 3:34:48 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

I assumed that Branagh represented Cpt Wm. Tennant....same unlucky dude who ended up skipper of Repulse. What rank was Branagh?...I didn't note it.

I assumed the same thing however he seems to be a Commander (three full sized strpes). I believe USN and RN rank insignia are equivalent except IIRC they use squiggly half stripes.

Not the RN. The squiggly stripes were the "Wavy Navy" - the Volunteer Reserve. The professional RN and commonwealth navy officers mostly looked down on the VR as amateur officers, but many were as good as the pros.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 255

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/3/2017 4:40:53 AM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

quote:

Not the RN. The squiggly stripes were the "Wavy Navy" - the Volunteer Reserve. The professional RN and commonwealth navy officers mostly looked down on the VR as amateur officers, but many were as good as the pros.

I notice that you're in Canada.

The officer in the article from the Gazette has 'egg' on his cap so it would seem he could well be the unacknowledged Commander in the movie.

Just wondering: do or did they have "Wavy Navy" in Canada too or was that just in England?

< Message edited by spence -- 8/3/2017 4:42:20 AM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 256

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/3/2017 6:23:49 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

Not the RN. The squiggly stripes were the "Wavy Navy" - the Volunteer Reserve. The professional RN and commonwealth navy officers mostly looked down on the VR as amateur officers, but many were as good as the pros.

I notice that you're in Canada.

The officer in the article from the Gazette has 'egg' on his cap so it would seem he could well be the unacknowledged Commander in the movie.

Just wondering: do or did they have "Wavy Navy" in Canada too or was that just in England?

Canada too - and I presume other Commonwealth countries with navies built on the RN model. My dad was RCNVR, but not an officer. He finished up as a CPO2, second highest enlisted rank.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 257

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/4/2017 6:05:41 PM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

I finally saw the movie last nite with my wife. I might be "a history nerd" but my wife definitely doesn't so qualify. We both found the movie intensely interesting and exciting.
I think that the fore-warning I got here about the non-sequencial events portrayed in the film was very useful in interpreting what we saw and in our enjoyment of the film.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 258

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/5/2017 1:13:37 AM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

Again, not having read all said since I was here last.

Since I can't say it any better, this pretty much sums up how I felt about the show.

quote:

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.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 259

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/5/2017 1:17:40 AM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

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/videoplayer/vi818329881?ref_=tt_ov_vi

Really looking forward to this one. Hope I'm not getting too excited about it so as to be disappointed if not what I expect. The trailers that I've seen do appear promising though.

_____________________________

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 260

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/6/2017 10:26:49 AM

KenchiSulla

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

Interesting movie, interesting topic and well made...

_____________________________

AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.�
� Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 261

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/8/2017 5:39:03 PM

RFalvo69

Posts: 1380
Joined: 7/11/2013
From: Lamezia Terme (Italy)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

I assumed that Branagh represented Cpt Wm. Tennant....same unlucky dude who ended up skipper of Repulse. What rank was Branagh?...I didn't note it.

I assumed that he was a composite character: Tennant and Wake-Walker. They worked hand-in-hand at Dunkirk, but in very different places (Tennant organising the evacuation on land and Wake-Walker the ships' flow). By creating a composite character, Nolan avoided unnecessary cuts to different scenes all over the place.

I mean, it is Kenneth Branagh, at Dunkirk, with a spiffy Navy Uniform and looking grim... it is just obvious who he portrays...

_____________________________

"Yes darling, I served in the Navy for eight years. I was a cook..."
"Oh dad... so you were a God-damned cook?"

(My 10 years old daughter after watching "The Hunt for Red October")

(in reply to pontiouspilot)

Post #: 262

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/8/2017 5:46:19 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

quote:

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

I assumed that Branagh represented Cpt Wm. Tennant....same unlucky dude who ended up skipper of Repulse. What rank was Branagh?...I didn't note it.

I assumed that he was a composite character: Tennant and Wake-Walker. They worked hand-in-hand at Dunkirk, but in very different places (Tennant organising the evacuation on land and Wake-Walker the ships' flow). By creating a composite character, Nolan avoided unnecessary cuts to different scenes all over the place.

I mean, it is Kenneth Branagh, at Dunkirk, with a spiffy Navy Uniform and looking grim... it is just obvious who he portrays...

warspite1

Remember Wake-Walker did not arrive until the last couple of days - and he commanded from aboard ship/boat.

I still think Branagh is supposed to represent Tenant (who stayed until the end) - although probably wasn't on the mole the whole time.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to RFalvo69)

Post #: 263

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/8/2017 6:13:47 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

quote:

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

I assumed that Branagh represented Cpt Wm. Tennant....same unlucky dude who ended up skipper of Repulse. What rank was Branagh?...I didn't note it.

I assumed that he was a composite character: Tennant and Wake-Walker. They worked hand-in-hand at Dunkirk, but in very different places (Tennant organising the evacuation on land and Wake-Walker the ships' flow). By creating a composite character, Nolan avoided unnecessary cuts to different scenes all over the place.

I mean, it is Kenneth Branagh, at Dunkirk, with a spiffy Navy Uniform and looking grim... it is just obvious who he portrays...

warspite1

Remember Wake-Walker did not arrive until the last couple of days - and he commanded from aboard ship/boat.

I still think Branagh is supposed to represent Tenant (who stayed until the end) - although probably wasn't on the mole the whole time.

Well, I'll yield to what Nolan actually showed us rather than what he 'intended'. Branaugh is listed as "Commander Bolton". So either Nolan dropped the ball in historical accuracy or this was yet another alliterative.

_____________________________

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 264

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/8/2017 6:23:50 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Or, something we are familiar with: abstracted.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 265

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/8/2017 6:27:19 PM

RFalvo69

Posts: 1380
Joined: 7/11/2013
From: Lamezia Terme (Italy)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Remember Wake-Walker did not arrive until the last couple of days - and he commanded from aboard ship/boat.

I still think Branagh is supposed to represent Tenant (who stayed until the end) - although probably wasn't on the mole the whole time.

I know about the different contribution that the two gave to the evacuation. What I mean is that it is a classic cinematic "trick" to compose together different characters, if unity of time and space, and the need to tell the story in a limited time (like a movie) are more important that a precise historical reconstruction.

IMHO, Kenneth Branagh represents the officers of the Royal Navy who were at Dunkirk - the way Tom Hardy and his mates represent the many pilots who fought in the skies. The exact names/characters are not really important like, for example, in "The Longest Day" - because Dunkirk wants to tell his story in a different way.

I'm amazed by how many English/American reviewers, for example, think that the name of the character played by Fionn Whitehead is "Tommy". Even I know that "Tommy" was the name for any generic British soldier (like "Fritz" for the German ones).

Mark Rylance's character is based on Titanic's (yup, that one) Second Officer, who jumped on his ship along with his son and a sea scout. He had already lost another son who served in the RAF, again like Rylance's character - yet, the names and other details (not to mention what happened to them) are different. Nolan created characters for the purpose of telling his story, and then mixed in historical facts and figures to make them more believable. I think that the result was good.

_____________________________

"Yes darling, I served in the Navy for eight years. I was a cook..."
"Oh dad... so you were a God-damned cook?"

(My 10 years old daughter after watching "The Hunt for Red October")

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 266

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/8/2017 6:49:57 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Remember Wake-Walker did not arrive until the last couple of days - and he commanded from aboard ship/boat.

I still think Branagh is supposed to represent Tenant (who stayed until the end) - although probably wasn't on the mole the whole time.

Mark Rylance's character is based on Titanic's (yup, that one) Second Officer, who jumped on his ship along with his son and a sea scout. He had already lost another son who served in the RAF, again like Rylance's character - yet, the names and other details (not to mention what happened to them) are different. Nolan created characters for the purpose of telling his story, and then mixed in historical facts and figures to make them more believable. I think that the result was good.

warspite1

As per the attached.

https://www.historyanswers.co.uk/people-politics/the-hero-of-titanic-who-survived-two-sinking-ships-and-served-in-two-world-wars/

quote:

IMHO, Kenneth Branagh represents the officers of the Royal Navy who were at Dunkirk.

Yes I agree. I look at the character and 'see' Tennant - no doubt because I kind of got the idea that was who Branagh was supposed to be before seeing the film. But yes, I understand what you are saying - and in keeping with the way Nolan presents the film and the characters.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to RFalvo69)

Post #: 267

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/8/2017 7:39:16 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Or, something we are familiar with: abstracted.

Meh. Tom-ay-toe, tom-ah-toe.

_____________________________

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 268

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/8/2017 7:39:34 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenchiSulla

Interesting movie, interesting topic and well made...

Finally saw it.

I cannot summarize any better.

Enjoyed - worth the admission.

That alone is something I cannot say about all too many of the "few movies" I actually go to see in a theater environment (or Drive in in this instance).

It will never make my top 10 list (war movies or otherwise) but then the older I get I do find I am harder to please...

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to KenchiSulla)

Post #: 269

RE: OT: Dunkirk the Movie! - 8/31/2017 5:37:03 PM

Kursk1943

Posts: 445
Joined: 3/15/2014
From: Bavaria in Southern Germany
Status: offline

I enjoyed the movie, too. But as a former professional soldier and reading a lot about air war in WW II I was annoyed about two things. Firstly, the German air tactis was NOT to attack with a single Stuka or HE 111 bomber protected by one or two fighters, but the rule was to use a Staffel (Squadron) as manover unit. So 20-30 bombers protected by an equal number of fighters attacked, not single aircraft...Secondly, you don't coordinate an evacuation standing on a mole like Kenneth Bragnaugh, watching out for rescue ships with your glasses. You coordinate from a CP using radio and maps, graphics... and a specialized staff. It's more like running a logistics enterprise. So the air attacks and the evacuation coordination were from my point of view quite unrealistic and misleading. On the other hand the viewpoint of the common soldier, the situation of despair and fear were pictured outstandingly realistic! Just my two cents...

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 270