Thread: Dunkirk - Film Review

Seems that the French are less than impressed with the film. Spitting frog legs more like it.
However, some French critics are saying that Nolan seriously underplayed one important historical fact: the role of the French military in helping Allied forces to evacuate Dunkirk. French historian, Dominique Lormier, points out to HuffPost France (translated into English from French) “the sacrifice of 30,000 French soldiers who prevented the total surrender of the British troops, who were already having trouble defending their territory.” In its review of the film, Le Monde asked the question, “Where in the film are the 120,000 French soldiers who were also evacuated from Dunkirk?”

just can`t please every one. Must say though it is a fairly big omission and could have been easily part of the film, even if it was some dialogue.
Cheers Hall

The greatest tactical blunder the Germans made in WW2. [ perhaps apart from invading Russia].Stopping short of the coast with their armoured divisions. Although at that time a large part of their supply chain was horse and cart. Some intelligence suggests that the Germans had a deal with sympathisers in England to put Edward on the throne in a Nazi occupied England, and expected an easy occupation. Along came the man of the moment, Churchill, and a band of heroes sailing small vessels to rescue a large part of their expeditionary force. No major heavy equipment came back, most did not have their personal weapons, and England needed a miracle to survive. They needed time, and the RAF gave them that. Along with hundreds of Commonwealth and foreign airmen, especially the Polish. This story is about those heroes in their little boats, and the soldiers who were rescued. In effect, a miniscule part of a huge War, but one of the most important . Britain should as be proud of their band of heroes in their small boats, as they are of the RAF, and Commonwealth Airmen.

The reason to some extent that they stopped short of the coast is what has got the French all fired up. 30,000 French died stopping the Germans long enough for the British to retreat and not a single mention in the film. I would also be a bit miffed.
Cheers Hall

Some recently released/translated documents from several historians showed that Hitler knew EXACTLY what he was doing by not going in for the kill. It was plainly obvious to both him and his generals that sending the tanks in and ending the fight was the right thing to do. He deliberately didn't do this so as to show the generals who was ACTUALLY in charge and so would accept no dissent, no matter the outcome. He gambled that Great Britain was effectively finished and it didn't matter either way. History of course proved otherwise. It also lead to him playing musical chairs for the bulk of the war with Generals in the field so they could not get too established anywhere.

Another plan that got shelved at that time was once the Germans hit the French coast, they would head South, go through Spain and Portugal and then cross into North Africa. From there they would head East and take the Suez Canal and oil refineries in the Arab states. As Great Britain was in disarray they could have done this without too much trouble using the aircraft and pilots that ended up being needlessly sacrificed in what turned out to be The Battle of Britain. It would have given them the entire Mediterranean and a soft route into Russia in a two prong thrust. Luckily for the rest of the world that didn't happen.

A couple of presentations by historians for anyone who is bored as they are over an hour each!
The Soviet-German War, 1941-1945: Myths and Realities - YouTube
World War II Myths, Misconceptions and Surprises - YouTube

I took my 14 yo son on the weekend and paid a little extra for the Vmax theatre. Glad I did that as the seats are better. Anyway, the movie was ok. I fully agree with 101 Ron when he said "No way for 5 stars.........More like 3" Yep, or if I was feeling generous 3 1/2 stars.

Best parts were watching the spits take on some Messerschmitt ME109s. Showed those dogfights pretty well with genuine tactics and flying portrayed. (Spits and Me109s were very similar in performance, the difference was pilot skill and numbers)
Worst parts were the directing and story line (or more precisely the lack of a story line) and how the movie seemed to ignore the French. My biggest peeve though was the films characters. I will not say more since I don't want to spoil the movie for anyone.

I can see how some people will like this movie, it was just not my cup of tea. All in all it is an ok movie and it is worth seeing once. (I am not racing out to buy a DVD or Bluray copy) My son liked it but I could sense that he wanted to see more story and less personal rubbish. He loves WWII history and he could tell me more about what happened than you see in the movie.

Cheers, Mick

Originally Posted by cripesamighty

Some recently released/translated documents from several historians showed that Hitler knew EXACTLY what he was doing by not going in for the kill. It was plainly obvious to both him and his generals that sending the tanks in and ending the fight was the right thing to do. He deliberately didn't do this so as to show the generals who was ACTUALLY in charge and so would accept no dissent, no matter the outcome. He gambled that Great Britain was effectively finished and it didn't matter either way. History of course proved otherwise. It also lead to him playing musical chairs for the bulk of the war with Generals in the field so they could not get too established anywhere.

Another plan that got shelved at that time was once the Germans hit the French coast, they would head South, go through Spain and Portugal and then cross into North Africa. From there they would head East and take the Suez Canal and oil refineries in the Arab states. As Great Britain was in disarray they could have done this without too much trouble using the aircraft and pilots that ended up being needlessly sacrificed in what turned out to be The Battle of Britain. It would have given them the entire Mediterranean and a soft route into Russia in a two prong thrust. Luckily for the rest of the world that didn't happen.

A couple of presentations by historians for anyone who is bored as they are over an hour each!
The Soviet-German War, 1941-1945: Myths and Realities - YouTube
World War II Myths, Misconceptions and Surprises - YouTube

Good stuff, but it depends on what historian you read. This link tells it as I remember reading about it. I actually wasn't aware the British opened up a second front, after Dunkirk. To no avail.

Did the British abandon France by withdrawing in Dunkirk? - Quora

I also saw the movie, generally wasn't too bad. I liked the music which gave a sombre tone to the movie. The beaches looked a bit bare of equipment that was supposed to be abandoned by the Brits......guess the budget didn't allow for too much in the way of old tanks and and trucks scattered along the beach. When the second spitfire pilot went down in the channel and he was trying to get out of his cockpit before he drowned....didn't he have a sidearm to fire at the cockpit to break it, instead of banging at it with his fists.

BIG MISTAKE was to forget to make mention of the French except at the end when the officer was standing on the wharf and mentioned them.

Three and a half stars from me.

It seems it won't be long before there are no WW2 veterans around to pass on their views...


\97-year-old Canadian veteran shares his thoughts after watching the movie "Dunkirk". [VIDEO]