Please, not another “Dunkirk”

DFH65 said:
So your telling me you can't fly a spitfire with a dead engine at low level for 20 minutes. Thanks for ruining the movie. :)
Click to expand...
And do loopty-loops while shooting a gun and downing an enemy aircraft in the process.
This incredibly high glide ratio got the pilot in trouble. His airplane was gliding soooooo well that he overshot the friendly beach and landed in enemy territory. :)
 
Philistines.
The time line for Dunkirk is not linear, so it was not 20 minutes of gliding.
It was 39 minutes of gliding.
But, a beautiful airplane doing amazing things is "poetic license" and should always be allowed.
Except the crash scene from the "Flight of the Phoenix" remake.
That was just stupid.
 
DanWilkins said:
The movie “Dunkirk” had lots of fine aerial sequences; however, the dead-stick Spit scene tarnished movie for me.
Click to expand...

That was the worst but I really liked that two guys could just hang around under an exposed pier directly underneath the theater command staff close enough to listen to them in the wind coming onshore in Ireland, and not be shot by the guards. LOL.

So many unrealistic things in that movie. I think it was worse than the flight scenes in Red Tails.
 
Yeah, Dunkirk was the worst on many levels. Beginning with the choice of telling three different story lines, with *radically* different time lines (one week, one day, one hour), intercut with one another. It was an art film. I have no idea how it got so much penetration in pop culture.
 
When movies that are meant to be real, or at least realistic, like Dunkirk, do totally unrealistic things (like the flight sequences described) it really does ruin the movie. What's funny, is I'll tell people this (most aviation movies are a joke when it comes to planes) and no one understands it "but you like Star Wars?"

Duh. Star Wars is a space science fantasy.. there is inherent license there. However even that has its limits, like Leia floating around in the vacuum of space and not dying
 
I'm pretty critical too but try to sit back and enjoy the movie as entertainment unless they actually call it a documentary. I include car chases, gun fights, martial arts movies, all entertainment even if based on a real event.
 
Tantalum said:
However even that has its limits, like Leia floating around in the vacuum of space and not dying
Click to expand...

Nah man, she was only in space for a few moments. That, as NASA experiments proved decades ago, would be completely survivable. In fact, if we give license to the existence of The Force, the least realistic part of that sequence was that it took her so long to recover. It would have only taken a few moments of breathing again and she would have been fine.
 
Tantalum said:
Duh. Star Wars is a space science fantasy.. there is inherent license there. However even that has its limits, like Leia floating around in the vacuum of space and not dying
Click to expand...

There's soooo many things wrong with the Star Wars franchise now that Lucas sold out to Disney... and that's the one that triggered you??? LOL...

Not that Lucas had any ideas on where to go anyway, as confirmed by videos of him totally clueless with huge numbers of Cliff's Notes on his home office desk (amazing what cameras will capture when you don't think about it! LOL!) while writing the early Episodes.

Star Wars was dead to everyone who found it novel and interesting, at Jar Jar Binks. But hey, let's drive a water slide cart through the planet core when we have effing SPACE SHIPS and can just LAND RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE WE'RE GOING. :) :) :)
 
denverpilot said:
and that's the one that triggered you???
Click to expand...
LOL
there were a number of points that triggered me, but the space thing seemed the most PC and neutral one to point out, at least as far as relating it to the context of the this thread. Despite the triggers, I'm trying to keep an open mind. After all, after Return of the Jedi "the good guys" basically won.. so I had to assume that follow on episodes would be quite different

Lucas, for as creative as he is, had a lot of just terrible ideas.. recently they disclosed that his ideas for 7, 8, and 9 was essentially some exploration of the midichlorian world.. http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/06...ored-midi-chlorians-and-the-microbiotic-world he also apparently has a history for not really caring about what the fans necessarily want and don't

denverpilot said:
But hey, let's drive a water slide cart through the planet core when we have effing SPACE SHIPS and can just LAND RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE WE'RE GOING
Click to expand...
Yeah that was pretty weak..I also liked how Anakin goes from what looks like an 8 year old to a 19 year old while Padme stays the same exact age and literally no one else in the universe ages

But at least the prequels gave you consistent characters that do tell one overall story arc (Palpatine, Anakin, Padme, Obi Wan, etc.). It leads in very nicely A New Hope, at least from story and character development. With the new franchise we get new characters in each film, that we're supposed to just love by default, without any real background:

-Poe Damaron. Who the F is this joker? And what purpose does he serve other than to insinuate that men make impulsive and terrible leaders
-The lady from Big Little Lies. Where did she come from suddenly?
-Snoke... okay, let's introduce a villain that makes Palpatine look like a saint.. then kill him off after one episode with a simple mind trick
-why keep the secret base plan thing a secret from Poe and the rest of the crew.. in a tight survival situation wouldn't it make sense to have everyone on the same team and united on that front?
-Finn.. I love Finn, we get to see a cool story point and character development with him..
-Captain Phasma.. cool, a silver female storm trooper.. wish we knew more about her. At least episode 8 gave us more of her, but episode 7 basically introduced her just to put her down the garbage chute
-etc


P.S. - I read that one of the scripts for I think Rogue One involved some shots of them rummaging through the wreckage of the Death Star on some other planet. That would have been cool
 
Another decent movie to watch if you get a chance, is First Light. Low budget but a good movie about the life of a young Spitfire pilot in The Battle of Britain. He passed away just last month.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_Wellum
 
Last edited:
The actual event was interesting and sad, poor guys drowning because they didn't know how to swim, and/or so weighted down with crap they sunk to the bottom. Movie was a disappointment. My mother's brother is buried in France, apparently making it onto shore but died shortly afterward in the following days.
 
I like more upbeat war movies, like when Allied forces kick butt. Don’t want to see us on the losing end, use ‘artistic license’ if need be.
 
mscard88 said:
The actual event was interesting and sad, poor guys drowning because they didn't know how to swim, and/or so weighted down with crap they sunk to the bottom. Movie was a disappointment. My mother's brother is buried in France, apparently making it onto shore but died shortly afterward in the following days.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about the Dunkirk retreat, or the Normandy invasion?
 
Overall Dunkirk was a big disappointment for this World War II buff. Loudest movie I ever saw, so loud it made it difficult to sit through. The disjointed storyline didn't help either.
 
FlyingTiger said:
Overall Dunkirk was a big disappointment for this World War II buff. Loudest movie I ever saw, so loud it made it difficult to sit through. The disjointed storyline didn't help either.
Click to expand...

Dunkirk - meh. But I found Darkest Hour to be pretty interesting.
 
The 1958 "Dunkirk" isn't bad. Starring John Mills, Richard Attenborough, and Bernard Lee (the original "M"). It's showing occasionally on cable.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Tantalum said:
LOL
there were a number of points that triggered me, but the space thing seemed the most PC and neutral one to point out, at least as far as relating it to the context of the this thread. Despite the triggers, I'm trying to keep an open mind.
Click to expand...

Star Wars Rebels is very worth the watch if you want to restore your faith in the Star Wars universe....
 
FlyingTiger said:
Overall Dunkirk was a big disappointment for this World War II buff. Loudest movie I ever saw, so loud it made it difficult to sit through. The disjointed storyline didn't help either.
Click to expand...

I finally watched this movie a couple weeks ago. I am not sure if disappointed would be the first word I would use to describe the movie, but definitely the word to describe how I felt after the movie was over. I was confused, lost as the movie played. For the first half of the movie I was trying to figure out how the storylines fit together.

And the Spitfire flying around on an aerial sightseeing tour with the engine not running just added to the confusion. The only part of the movie I understood was he landed where he did knowing he would be captured, and would NOT be in the war until it was over, thereby surviving and being a hero without endangering his life.
 
labbadabba said:
Star Wars Rebels is very worth the watch if you want to restore your faith in the Star Wars universe....
Click to expand...
Thanks, I have only heard good things. I will check it out
 
I watched both Dunkirk and Darkest Hour on long flights to/from Europe earlier this year. Dunkirk was disappointing. Very disjointed. Darkest Hour was much better.

Oh, and Solo just didn't do it for me. Han Solo is played by Harrison Ford, or nobody. And, at this time, Harrison Ford is too old to play a young Han Solo, so that movie was best not made at all.
 
Ghery said:
I watched both Dunkirk and Darkest Hour on long flights to/from Europe earlier this year. Dunkirk was disappointing. Very disjointed. Darkest Hour was much better.

Oh, and Solo just didn't do it for me. Han Solo is played by Harrison Ford, or nobody. And, at this time, Harrison Ford is too old to play a young Han Solo, so that movie was best not made at all.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Solo is probably the best crafted Star Wars movie ever made. People that don't go see it just because Harrison Ford isn't in it are missing out. Star Wars fans really aren't the best movie critics, so don't pay attention to them.

What I'm struck by, is that people here seem to have gone to see Dunkirk to see a history lesson. This is basically a european movie. The europeans don't need a history lesson here. Everyone in Europe knows exactly what happened there. The movie was made to flesh out the ideas of what it might have been like to have been there in those days. I think it did that pretty well.

I liked it. I can forgive the Spit gliding forever because I like movies and entertainment. I don't expect a documentary unless it is sold that way. I'm also not a grumpy old man on POA. The POA folks really should never go to a theater again. It will only be a disappointment that they will rant on for about for at least an hour.
 
I'm not old and didn't need a history lesson, in fact I'm sure I know more about Word War II then the vast majority of Europeans. This movie wasn't good. It was geared to keeping peoples attention with lots of visual effects along with a lot of loud bangs & booms instead of substance. The fact a person without much knowledge of World War II (there are plenty even in Europe) could watch that movie and leave without any more understanding about why Dunkirk occurred is pretty sad.
 
Last edited:
Dav8or said:
Sorry, Solo is probably the best crafted Star Wars movie ever made. People that don't go see it just because Harrison Ford isn't in it are missing out. Star Wars fans really aren't the best movie critics, so don't pay attention to them.

What I'm struck by, is that people here seem to have gone to see Dunkirk to see a history lesson. This is basically a european movie. The europeans don't need a history lesson here. Everyone in Europe knows exactly what happened there. The movie was made to flesh out the ideas of what it might have been like to have been there in those days. I think it did that pretty well.

I liked it. I can forgive the Spit gliding forever because I like movies and entertainment. I don't expect a documentary unless it is sold that way. I'm also not a grumpy old man on POA. The POA folks really should never go to a theater again. It will only be a disappointment that they will rant on for about for at least an hour.
Click to expand...

Well, the shirt I was wearing at Disneyland on Star Wars Day (May 4) should give you a little perspective. It listed the first 3 Star Wars movies and the years they came out. It said, "I was there. When it was cool". And our son was less than 1 year old when Star Wars premiered. So, yes, I am old enough to remember those days.

FlyingTiger said:
I'm not old and didn't need a history lesson, in fact I'm sure I know more about Word War II then the vast majority of Europeans. This movie wasn't good. It was geared to keeping peoples attention with lots of visual effects along with a lot of loud bangs & booms instead of substance. The fact a person without much knowledge of World War II (there are plenty even in Europe) could watch that movie and leave without any more understanding about why Dunkirk occurred is pretty sad.
Click to expand...

Bingo! I am old (at least according to my "kids") and I don't need a history lesson, either. The movie was one special effect after another, and very disjointed. If you want special effects it was great. If you wanted a story that you could follow, not so great. And I am well aware of WWII as a whole.
 
FlyingTiger said:
I'm not old and didn't need a history lesson, in fact I'm sure I know more about Word War II then the vast majority of Europeans. This movie wasn't good. It was geared to keeping peoples attention with lots of visual effects along with a lot of loud bangs & booms instead of substance. The fact a person without much knowledge of World War II (there are plenty even in Europe) could watch that movie and leave without any more understanding about why Dunkirk occurred is pretty sad.
Click to expand...

There was a documentary on TV, Discovery, Netflix don't recall, and it was much better than the movie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top