Watched it today @ the ‘oldies screening’ at Everyman cinema. Just a part of my exciting day out in the big city of Leeds!
Thoroughly enjoyed it and returning next week to watch ‘Three Billboards’.
Train fare is about a tenner, tenner admission, a few pints, new pair of shoes at JL, fish n chips on way home. Living the dream....and whilst I’m being profligate, haircut tomorrow but not at Leeds city centre prices.
|
|
We are booked to see it at our local independent cinema in a few weeks. The only time it works. Hopefully taking the 86 year old father in law if he's up for it - not actually 86 until a couple of weeks later.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 15 Jan 18 at 23:57
|
See my thread below from last week LL.
I am glad you enjoyed it .
I found it OK with the plotting of Chamberlain and Halifax giving a different aspect to the background of his famous speeches.
I was not convinced by Gary Oldman as Churchill despite the raving of the critics , his voice was too high pitched and physically he just struck me as not catching the essence and appearance of the man despite prosthetics.
You will enjoy Three Billboards much more..very dark comedy and an outstanding performance by Frances McDormand ...
Last edited by: helicopter on Tue 16 Jan 18 at 09:49
|
Correct helicopter. I enjoyed ‘3 Billboards’ today. Almost wet myself laughing at the trailer for the animated film ‘Early Man’ which I shall see soonest, together with ‘The Post’.
Yet another grand day out in t’ big city. New shoes too! No expense spared
Last edited by: legacylad on Fri 19 Jan 18 at 00:06
|
>> We are booked to see it at our local independent cinema in a few weeks.
>> The only time it works. Hopefully taking the 86 year old father in law if
>> he's up for it - not actually 86 until a couple of weeks later.
That's what I would call an 85 year old father in law.
|
|
:-) My point was he's nearer being 86 than 85.
|
Good film - glad I saw it at the cinema rather than TV. Could have done without the tube scene though.
Last edited by: R.P. on Thu 18 Jan 18 at 19:20
|
Not ment as a rant.I grew up in the sixties born 4 years after the war.
I have seen so many documentaries about the war,worked with people who came out alive out of concentration camps.Showing me the tattoo numbers on their arms.
I just can't see the point going on with these war films.Just my opinion but there was so much suffering in this war on all sides ( never again)
|
>>
>> there was so much suffering in this war on all sides ( never again)
>>
That's why we have to remember the suffering, the sacrifice and that good will win over evil.
|
|
Choice is at the box-office Dutchie. People have different views and can watch what they want, part of the freedoms gained/kept after the war.
|
|
Of course that's true and film makers tend to make what people want to see. I do sometimes think that a nation we, have a bit of an obsession with entertainment based on the second world war. I do understand where Dutchie is coming from.
|
After watching both Darkest Hour & 3 Billboards recently, it’s The Post this week, Elle downloaded from iTunes Store tonight, and Early Man and Lady Bird as soon as they are released.
Quite the mix.....
|
|
Just dug out Boris' book on Churchill. In the queue to be read.
|
>> Just dug out Boris' book on Churchill. In the queue to be read.
Didnt know the Beano or the Dandy was into publishing history,
|
|
Didn't buy it - nicked it off my old dad.
|
>>I just can't see the point going on with these war films.
They stir the spirit I suppose. Our finest hour and all that.
And there is no harm in remembering either. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.â€
― Edmund Burke
I know as a country, we didn't suffer as much as Russia, or the occupied countries, but there was a while when we stood alone and many are proud of that.
When I was 19 I worked with a wonderful lady who's husband served in WW2. His job was to go around cleaning up destroyed tanks. A very unpleasant job and he never fully recovered from the horrors encountered.
|
>> >>I just can't see the point going on with these war films.
>>
>> They stir the spirit I suppose. Our finest hour and all that.
It was the last time the country had any worth, self esteem or an important place in the world. Hence the desire to keep harping on about it
>> And there is no harm in remembering either. Those who don't know history are doomed
>> to repeat it.â€
>> ― Edmund Burke
We are no longer in a position to prevent it.
|
|
But.....we didn't stand alone...We had a clandestine agreement with the US to supply weapons and food before they got officially involved, we had the biggest and most profitable Empire the world had ever seen....
|
|
Yes, heavy use of the word "had"
|
>> But.....we didn't stand alone...We had a clandestine agreement with the US to supply weapons and
>> food before they got officially involved, we had the biggest and most profitable Empire the
>> world had ever seen....
>>
I imagine it must have been like being in the ring with a huge unbeaten boxer. We were the ones getting pummelled. Our close friends were already knocked out. Our manager was happy to wait in the corner and provide an orange and water at the end of each round, until he decided to jump in the ring as well.
|
|
Good analogy. The Americans were in our corner as was the huge resource of Canada and Australia, once the decision to fight on was made we would have been very careless to have been invaded. The RN was girdling the earth, seconded to the Canadians, Australia had we capitulated they would have fought on very successfully, for one thing the gloves would have come off as there would have been no need to protect the Atlantic convoys - they would have defeated the German navy square on.
Last edited by: R.P. on Sun 21 Jan 18 at 19:25
|
|
The Candians and Australians would have defeated the German navy alone, is that what you mean RP?
|
I've just watched the film.
I found it quite moving, and fully conveyed the atmosphere and feelings of the time.
It was naturally very condensed, and the usual massive historical liberties were taken for the benefit of cinema effect.
It began inaccurately with Attlee's speech. Attlee was not present in the Commons for that debate - I think he was in hospital. It was the Conservative Leo Amery who attacked Chamberlain, very effectively quoting Cromwell's words when he led his troopers into the House and evicted the members. He closed with the words "You have stayed here too long for any good you are doing - in the name of God, go!"
The Government were not defeated in the debate - they won by 81 votes. It was not a confidence motion, but a procedural adjournment which would normally have been unopposed. But the point was the government normally had a massive majority of over 200, and this was reduced by large numbers of supporters voting with the opposition or abstaining. So it demonstrated the strength of feeling against Chamberlain and the writing was on the wall.
But it's obviously difficult and distracting to explain all that to a cinema audience, so the innacuracies have to be allowed in the interests of conveying the bigger picture.
|
Halifax was also very unfairly portrayed in the film, was never the out and out appeaser merely offering alternatives during the fall of France. He was key in persuading Churchill not to send the RAF over the channel, lost planes in forward deployment on poorly defended hostile airfields would have been a disaster for the Battle of Britain.
He then went on to help Churchill brings the Yanks into the war.
|
Haven't seen the film though look forward to it.
Halifax could easily have been PM in 1940.
Last edited by: Hard Cheese on Mon 22 Jan 18 at 09:58
|
>>
>> He then went on to help Churchill brings the Yanks into the war.
>>
Very true. He was much better as a negotiator and conciliator than he was a leader.
Then at the end of the war he helped Keynes secure the vital American loan. There's a famous line on that:
In Washington Lord Halifax whispered to Lord Keynes:
It's true they have the money bags, but we have all the brains.
|
>> not to send the RAF over the channel, lost planes in forward deployment on poorly
>> defended hostile airfields would have been a disaster for the Battle of Britain.
Did you mean poorly?
|
>> Did you mean poorly?
I guess what is meant that basing aircraft on less well defended airfields on the French side of the channel would have incurred great losses from bombing and sabotage.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 23 Jan 18 at 01:50
|
>> I guess what is meant that basing aircraft on less well defended airfields on the
>> French side of the channel would have incurred great losses from bombing and sabotage.
not just bombing the aircraft, fuel spares, personnel, logistics, might all have been lost under a rapid german advance.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 23 Jan 18 at 01:50
|
>> not just bombing the aircraft, fuel spares, personnel, logistics, might all have been lost under
>> a rapid german advance.
That was already happening in May 1940. RAF supporting the expeditionary force in France abandoned fuel, spares and grounded aircraft ahead of the German advance. I don't think there's much artistic licence in the opening scenes of the 1969 film Battle of Britain.
|
Darkest Hour - rtj70
