_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Dunkirk
clovis899
#155
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: May 05, 2002
KitMaker: 774 posts
Armorama: 605 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 - 07:23 AM UTC
I would recommend the Ironman franchise if you are after complete real world movie accuracy; much better than that CGI Superman crap!

Cheers,
Rick
Dwaynewilly
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: December 15, 2006
KitMaker: 365 posts
Armorama: 18 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 - 07:35 AM UTC
Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is not like any war movie I've ever seen before. He is an extremely talented director and writer. If you have seen his other films like Interstellar and Inception, he weaves the same cinematic magic once again. If you are looking to count rivets you will be disappointed, although the attempt to achieve accuracy was made as much as possible. There is no glorification of war yet it is not an anti-war movie. His movies are about human emotion and human spirit and his choice of a defeat/victory is no surprise. This movie is about the experience of the people who went through the ordeal, with all the bravery and cowardice that went along with it. What Nolan does is create an atmosphere that is so compelling and powerful aurally and visually that it makes you a part of it. I highly recommend that you see it in the IMAX format. As for free streaming and $5 bootleg DVD's, that's called theft. Would you want someone ripping off your hard work and effort?
YellowHammer
#513
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: March 28, 2006
KitMaker: 554 posts
Armorama: 172 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 - 08:54 AM UTC
I just saw the movie tonight. I thought it was very well done. I'm not a rivet counter so I thought the action sequences looked authentic enough for me. I liked the use of time compression and the moving between the central characters. I was hoping for a little more of the land battle along with the evacuation but overall I think this is a definite award contender.
Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 - 10:15 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Endure the subtitles and see Panfilov's 28 Men. Armor heavy through fantastic model work. You'll think they got running Pzkpfw III G&H and IV D.


Have you by any chance seen Stalingrad (2013)?


As much as I love the work of the Bondarchuk family they're not really in the same place. One was about the experience of the war and the other was more about a handful of men seemingly doing the impossible in standing against the Blitzkrieg. Panfilov's 28 Men is more akin to Winter War in that way.

And the tanks in Stalingrad (2013) are the Pzkpfw IV H based on a T-55 originally made for White Tiger (which is a superior tank movie to Fury )

Now how does this version of Dunkirk compare to the 1958 film with John Mills, Richard Attenborough and Bernard Lee? That one had some great bits with John Mills as the reluctant squad leader and the artillery covering the retreat.
grom
Visit this Community
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: July 28, 2005
KitMaker: 214 posts
Armorama: 167 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 - 01:30 PM UTC
The 1958 version of Dunkirk is one of my favorites, down to earth no nonsense, hope this version follows, another one is Went the day well, a bit wooden but good for its time, just watched Theirs is the Glory on spike tv excellent movie, recommended.
Ramanathan
#477
Visit this Community
Pest, Hungary
Joined: March 21, 2007
KitMaker: 133 posts
Armorama: 131 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 03:04 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I found it half good and half disappointing. The sea action, and air to ground action were good, and the sound was good too.

Don't read further if you haven't seen it...




But air-to-air was crap. This movie jumps the shark when one lone Spitfire, out of fuel and only a couple hundred feet above the ground, without feathering it's prop, reverses course and shoots down a Stuka as it's coming out of it's dive.
This was after the same Spitfire downed four 109's and two Heinkel 111's. Granted, the 109 pilots made it easy. No schwarm, rotte, or any form of unit tactics. Only putting themselves in front of his Spitfire and banking back and forth until he shot them down.







I agree, the air-air was a bit "hollywoodistic" - spoiler alert!!! - and at the end why the guy in the Spitfire did not just turn back and landed on British or French territory? In worst case why not just fell to the sea?
On the other hand this film is sharing the 1st place on my war movie top-list hand in hand with the "A bridge too far". I strongly recommend watching it.
cheers,
Zsolt
RECON22
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Joined: February 10, 2012
KitMaker: 665 posts
Armorama: 652 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 04:34 PM UTC
It's a great flick, loved Tom Hardys character flying the spitfire at the end....even if it's not a true account it gets the emotions going....!
Would love a new "A bridge too far" or another "The Longest Day"....can't wait for "Pegasus Bridge" coming soon.

j76lr
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: September 22, 2006
KitMaker: 1,081 posts
Armorama: 1,066 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 05:08 PM UTC

Quoted Text

And don't not see it because they used the Spanish-licensed versions of some of the German aircraft. There are only four original He111s left and none of them fly, so it was either that or cgi BS. Do we want another Red Tails?



there is actually one Spanish HE 111 flying , I saw it in a airshow last year in PA . I was disappointed in the movie !
35th-scale
Visit this Community
Kildare, Ireland
Joined: November 21, 2007
KitMaker: 3,212 posts
Armorama: 2,807 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 06:06 PM UTC
Having just read through the full 3 pages of posts I was beginning to think I was the only one. Thanks Lou!
Not only was I disappointed in the movie I thought it one of the worst I've seen in a long time. Nearly as bad as Fury but for different reasons. The 3 different time-frames drove me mad, the music score was awful and the continuity was desperate....it constantly drove me mad and I'm not a nit-picker.
What is funny are the comments about the planes and not a mention of the ships.....
ReluctantRenegade
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: March 09, 2016
KitMaker: 2,408 posts
Armorama: 2,300 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 06:09 PM UTC
"and at the end why the guy in the Spitfire did not just turn back and landed on British or French territory?"

There was no British/French territory near-by. Dunkirk was completely sealed-off.

"In worst case why not just fell to the sea?"

If you're at low altitude with no fuel, you're options are very limited as WW2 fighters are not exactly famous for their excellent gliding ratios (although the Spit performs quiet well in this field).
Landing in open sea is an extremely dangerous maneuver, one should do absolutely everything to avoid it. Even the calmest sea can't be more appealing than a nice, wide, miles long flat beach.

retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 06:24 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Even the calmest sea can't be more appealing than a nice, wide, miles long flat beach.



And the German army?
jrutman
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 06:31 PM UTC
Reading all the posts I see the old old argument between guys that go see a movie and expect a documentary.
J
ReluctantRenegade
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: March 09, 2016
KitMaker: 2,408 posts
Armorama: 2,300 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 06:39 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Even the calmest sea can't be more appealing than a nice, wide, miles long flat beach.



And the German army?


I'm talking purely from the aviator's perspective (I fly commercially). Even in peacetime the decision making process in such situation is extremely complex. Add war to the equation, and it becomes unbelievably difficult. Plus he might thought the beach was still in British/French hands...? By the way, excellent movie. I especially liked the scenes shoot from the cockpit: the noise, the vibration, the pressure...everything felt very real.

ReluctantRenegade
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: March 09, 2016
KitMaker: 2,408 posts
Armorama: 2,300 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 06:51 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Reading all the posts I see the old old argument between guys that go see a movie and expect a documentary.
J


Very true. It called artistic license. One should always remember that the main aim of movies of this kind is to make money, not to please history geeks (like us).
Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 07:19 PM UTC
A friend's late father was a World War 2 veteran of an infantry platoon in the Third Infantry division. He was the only member of his platoon not a casualty. He said thr best and most accurate war movie in his opinion was Sam Fuller's Big Red One a movie routinely dissed by history geeks. He felt it was the only one to get the experience of being in a squad right without being Hollywood. He thought the combat in Saving Private Ryan was well done but the characters totally wrong for veteran infantry. So you know, I distrust most history geek's opinions and go with the veterans. By the way a previous post mentioned The Steel Helmet. Sam Fuller did that one too.

And you know the producers of Battle of the Bulge tried hard to please their technical advisors. The uniforms and fire commands are spot on, it's the script that sucked and there was nothing they could do about it. And the Spanish had promised them Shermans...
j76lr
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: September 22, 2006
KitMaker: 1,081 posts
Armorama: 1,066 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 07:51 PM UTC
[quote]I think we need a good War Movie, like the old days: Bridge to far or The Longest Day. I just want a Movie that has less Hollywood in it, by Hollywood I mean: The all mighty American Hero that just slaughters everything in his path, for example Fury! (worst War movie ever made).

Watching the trailers. Dunkirk might be the Movie I was long waiting for. But I was let down so many times !

Yes ,Fury was a bad movie . You apparently were never in combat, I was ! If you didnt Hollywood it up , no one would watch it !
. and why bring nationalities into it ? Every nation made sacrifices.

69mudbone
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: April 26, 2016
KitMaker: 362 posts
Armorama: 285 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 07:53 PM UTC
Here is my two cents..... first movie I viewed in IMAX and it cost me 18.50 that's right 18.50. The music score was way over the top. I did not like the jumping around of the three sub plots. I believe the director missed the boat big time. There was absolutely no sense of chaos or urgency with which I associate with Dunkirk. Oh well back to the DVD player..........
j76lr
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: September 22, 2006
KitMaker: 1,081 posts
Armorama: 1,066 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 07:58 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Even the calmest sea can't be more appealing than a nice, wide, miles long flat beach.



And the German army?


The German army was being held off by 30,000 French troops while the British being evacuated . Then some of them were evacuated.
TopSmith
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,742 posts
Armorama: 1,658 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 08:06 PM UTC
My daughter and I saw the movie. We felt something was missing. There was not enough. The story was of the little boats that saved the British army. There needed to be more of them. The film was on a budget I know but The British army was not saved by 30 boats. The story was mainly from the view of that soldier who was getting off the beach any way he could, the one small boat crew and the Admiral on the mole. There needed to be a larger cast. What was happening in London? Who and why were decisions made not to send more ships? Where was the Airforce and why were their numbers not larger? Were the British not helping with the defense of Dunkirk? Many things should have been included but weren't.
Klaus-Adler
Staff MemberCampaigns Administrator
MODELGEEK
Visit this Community
Scotland, United Kingdom
Joined: June 08, 2015
KitMaker: 1,505 posts
Armorama: 840 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 08:30 PM UTC
i was going to go and see it lastnight but we got the timings mixed up and ended up watching Atomic Blonde instead lol
ReluctantRenegade
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: March 09, 2016
KitMaker: 2,408 posts
Armorama: 2,300 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 10:06 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Even the calmest sea can't be more appealing than a nice, wide, miles long flat beach.



And the German army?


The German army was being held off by 30,000 French troops while the British being evacuated . Then some of them were evacuated.


True, but the biggest contributor by far to the "Miracle of Dunkirk" was Adolf Hitler himself. His decision to stop the tanks (twice) just outsider Dunkirk allowed the British to organize and carry out a successful evacuation.
Invincible
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: May 03, 2017
KitMaker: 148 posts
Armorama: 122 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 10:23 PM UTC
The reason why there were few RAF planes was answered in the film, I think. somebody said they were being held back to keep them safe for the defence of Britain . Same with the navy.
Invincible
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: May 03, 2017
KitMaker: 148 posts
Armorama: 122 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 13, 2017 - 10:24 PM UTC
I feel bad for you. Really bad. That film looks terrible.
casailor
Joined: June 22, 2007
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 97 posts
Posted: Monday, August 14, 2017 - 12:07 AM UTC
The director was very careful to never show the front of the engine cowlings, so the CASA 111 made a very believable He 111. After all, the major external difference are the Merlins powering it.
casailor
Joined: June 22, 2007
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 97 posts
Posted: Monday, August 14, 2017 - 12:13 AM UTC
The Spit was very dangerous to ditch, the underwing radiator and oil cooler tended to scoop up water and flip the bird on it's back. But at the time I wondered why Hardy just didn't bail out over one of the small boats. But it the end, it's a movie and designed to entertain the masses, not people like us who are familiar with vehicles, aircraft, weapons and tactics. What surprised me was how little my wife knew about Dunkirk.
 _GOTOTOP