Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 19 of 19

Thread: New Film on Dunkirk

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,413

    Default Re: New Film on Dunkirk

    Agreed on the cinematography, the movie looks stunning. As far as accuracy, the film was panned by a French newspaper for glossing over their resistance around the town that was very determined. There was also a series of running battles around the Dunkirk pocket with heavy casualties on both sides. The infamous "Panzer Halt Order" in mentioned, but the tanks were halted for three days and were again attacking for what would have been the majority of the film. I like the action and the minimalist dialogue. But I think the scale of the thing seemed a bit sterile as there were about 338,000 that got out.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,287

    Default Re: New Film on Dunkirk

    Saw it a couple of days ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by Half-Track View Post
    However, for purely entertainment value I would say it is worth your money.
    Agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Half-Track View Post
    The cinematography is spectacular.
    Agree also.

    Quote Originally Posted by Half-Track View Post
    But as someone mentioned, done more like a documentary and at times jumps from scene to scene quite rapidly. Not your "Saving Private Ryan" (my favorite) type movie with a definite story line and plot ...
    It's not a patch on 'Saving Private Ryan' because, as you correctly say, that film has a definite story line and plot which follows the characters through from the beach landing to the final scene. The problem with, and deficiency in, Dunkirk is that it attempts through various devices to cover the evacuation of more than 300,000 soldiers and the associated small boat efforts and air battles from the British viewpoint by a series of unconnected vignettes focusing on a few undeveloped and unrepresentative characters. It's a failure as a 'based on fact' fiction and as a documentary, and on any other basis apart from some impressive scenes of air and naval conflict.

    I found it particularly offensive in starting the film and progressing it with a couple of soldiers, one of whom turns out to be French, who were effectively deserters trying to escape through the orderly troops lined up on the beach waiting for evacuation. Much the same with the possibly shell shocked or just cowardly 2nd Lt picked up by the small boat who repays his rescuers by killing one of them. Might have happened, but hardly representative of the vast majority of troops.

    As a film which has anything to contribute to any understanding of Dunkirk, it's at best a great spectacle and at worst a great insult to the vast majority of troops who evacuated in good order under very bad conditions, but no worse than millions of other soldiers endured in countless smaller groups in many wars and in even larger groups during WWII under even worse conditions, such as Stalingrad and Battle of the Bulge.

    Overall, it's just a nice piece of cinematic entertainment with lots of spectacles and a suitably noisy soundtrack without which it would have considerably less impact.

    I don't understand why it's being hailed as the greatest film since 'Saving Private Ryan' or any other film, because it lacks plot, character development, character engagement, and just about everything else that a great film has.

    Still, it's certainly worth watching for entertainment.

    Just don't confuse it with anything that has much to do with the reality of the 300,000 plus troops who weren't the deserters upon whom the bulk of the film focuses for flimsy dramatic effect as they try to steal aboard a ship with a hijacked casualty or cower in a grounded boat, both of which experiences were on the basis of the film that of about a dozen or so of the 300,000 plus troops on the beach.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,287

    Default Re: New Film on Dunkirk

    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    As far as accuracy, the film was panned by a French newspaper for glossing over their resistance around the town that was very determined.
    The point is made in the first scene that the French were defending a line through which the British were able to escape to the beach.

    The absence of detail about the French fighting in what by then was the British rear is no more unreasonable than the absence of detail about the conduct of the British troops who weren't the majority of deserters and shell-shocked or cowardly troops upon whom the film focuses for characters.

    If I had a relative who'd been evacuated at Dunkirk, I'd be incensed by a film which focuses upon deserters for the story line. As indeed I am dismayed by that approach when I have no family or any other connection with Dunkirk.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    There was also a series of running battles around the Dunkirk pocket with heavy casualties on both sides. The infamous "Panzer Halt Order" in mentioned, but the tanks were halted for three days and were again attacking for what would have been the majority of the film.
    Really?

    I thought the only attacks were from the Stukas. Then again, I'm just basing that on this historically accurate film.

    And just on the Stuka point, early on in the film there is a scene of the effect of a creeping bomb pattern hitting the troops on the ground. That creeping pattern is what you'd get from a medium to heavy bomber dropping multiple bombs, not Stukas.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,287

    Default Re: New Film on Dunkirk

    And now, ladies and gentlemen (cue drum roll) for the idiotic politically correct contingent's contribution to history.

    "USA Today's Brian Truitt opined that "the fact that there are only a couple of women and no lead actors of colour may rub some the wrong way."

    Truitt has, understandably, been held up to no small amount of ridicule. It is a little difficult to shoehorn women and ethnic minorities into a story which, put simply, featured few. Dunkirk is, after all, very much based on the battle – on air, land, and sea. There is no back story, no emotion-laden scenes of loved-ones left behind. There is no examination of the cultural mix of Britain at the time.

    Truitt's utterance is little short of odd, akin to complaining there is a lack of Afro-Caribbeans in Alfred The Great, or commenting that it would have been better if a few women had made it out of Stalag Luft III in The Great Escape. If he wants women in the context of deep historical inaccuracy, he should perhaps tune into Raquel Welch in One Million Years BC."

    It was inevitable that the following complaint would be made from predictable, and invariably ill-informed, quarters.

    But Truitt is not alone in expressing dissent at Dunkirk's modus operandi. Marie Claire critic Mehera Bonner declared that the film just screams 'men-only', claiming the only reason male critics liked it was because it allowed them to feel manly.

    "To me, Dunkirk felt like an excuse for men to celebrate maleness," she wrote, "which apparently they don't get to do enough. Fine, great, go forth, but if Nolan's entire purpose is breaking the established war movie mould and doing something different, why not make a movie about women in World War II?"
    http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/big-i...ail/story.html

    Gee, no films about women in WWII? I must have imagined Mrs Miniver; Carve Her Name with Pride; Millions Like Us; Battalion; Night Witches in the Sky; not to mention the multi-episode TV show Tenko.

    The likes of Ms Bonner can always be relied upon to demonstrate their ignorance when putting forward their automatic complaints about how badly they are oppressed / ignored / downtrodden. They'd be more persuasive if they had facts rather mere outrage on their side.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •