Dunkirk

#1

carlos86

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2011
Messages
8,775
Likes
6,986
#1
Directed by Christopher Nolan it centers on the British military evacuation of the French city of Dunkirk in 1940 at the beginning of WWII. It's being filmed on 65mm large format film and IMAX, will be in theaters July 19, 2017.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM9BWtppzko[/youtube]
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#2
#2
Directed by Christopher Nolan it centers on the British military evacuation of the French city of Dunkirk in 1940 at the beginning of WWII. It's being filmed on 65mm large format film and IMAX, will be in theaters July 19, 2017.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM9BWtppzko[/youtube]

Like to see this
 
#3
#3
As a WW2 buff, I'd like to see this. Need more Eastern front movies though.
 
#4
#4
As a WW2 buff, I'd like to see this. Need more Eastern front movies though.

I both agree and disagree with that thought. I did love Enemy at the Gates. But I really don't like communist Russians very much..hence the ambiguity. True thing though...lots of great stories to tell from that theater.
 
#5
#5
The only reason I will watch this is because it's from Nolan. Otherwise, Hollywood is really running out of ideas if they are making war movies about evacuations now.
 
#6
#6
The only reason I will watch this is because it's from Nolan. Otherwise, Hollywood is really running out of ideas if they are making war movies about evacuations now.

Not your standard evacuation. They pressed every boat they could find into getting men off the beach. Fishing boats were picking up a half dozen men at a time and taking them to England. This was repeated 24/7 for days under constant attack. They saved over 300k men this way. It's also Hitler's first major blunder of the war, leaving the destruction to the Luftwaffe instead of pressing the panzers to the beach. The RAF bloodied their noses pretty good in that endeavor. The British army could have been completely wiped out and that would have left Britain wide open for invasion.

What's sad is reading the comments and seeing how many people think this is WWI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#7
#7
I don't really "enjoy" movies about real wars anymore...I find them about as depressing as holocaust movies, but I may have to check this one out.
 
#9
#9
This is the war movie I want Nolan to do. Anybody read this? It's phenomenal

84725.jpg
 
#10
#10
Not your standard evacuation. They pressed every boat they could find into getting men off the beach. Fishing boats were picking up a half dozen men at a time and taking them to England. This was repeated 24/7 for days under constant attack. They saved over 300k men this way. It's also Hitler's first major blunder of the war, leaving the destruction to the Luftwaffe instead of pressing the panzers to the beach. The RAF bloodied their noses pretty good in that endeavor. The British army could have been completely wiped out and that would have left Britain wide open for invasion.

What's sad is reading the comments and seeing how many people think this is WWI.

It's those helmets.
 
#13
#13
It's a great story that's why. You have to be really ignorant to call Dunkirk just an "evacuation" it was more like a miracle. History would have been completely different otherwise as has already been stated.

As a history buff, this story always fascinated me. Leader of a country facing the obliteration of the main army mobilizes every able bodied Brit with a boat and staved off defeat. Nationalism and an evil villain makes a great movie...really surprised this is the first effort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14
#14
It's a great story that's why. You have to be really ignorant to call Dunkirk just an "evacuation" it was more like a miracle. History would have been completely different otherwise as has already been stated.

Took the words right out of my mouth. What happened at Dunkirk was extraordinary and Nolan will absolutely do it justice. I am unbelievably excited for this movie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
I both agree and disagree with that thought. I did love Enemy at the Gates. But I really don't like communist Russians very much..hence the ambiguity. True thing though...lots of great stories to tell from that theater.

Not really much of a rooting interest, eh? Evil dictator on one side versus an evil dictator on the other.

Regarding Dunkirk, I sometimes think it is overblown. It was more of a morale booster than a strategic turning point.
 
Last edited:
#16
#16
Not your standard evacuation. They pressed every boat they could find into getting men off the beach. Fishing boats were picking up a half dozen men at a time and taking them to England. This was repeated 24/7 for days under constant attack. They saved over 300k men this way. It's also Hitler's first major blunder of the war, leaving the destruction to the Luftwaffe instead of pressing the panzers to the beach. The RAF bloodied their noses pretty good in that endeavor. The British army could have been completely wiped out and that would have left Britain wide open for invasion.

What's sad is reading the comments and seeing how many people think this is WWI.
The success of the evacuation was more due to the French rearguard at Lilles pulling 10 divisions off of the BEF more than anything else. The Wermacht couldn't press the channel with 40,000 enemies on their flank, which bought time
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#17
#17
Not really much of a rooting interest, eh? Evil dictator on one side versus an evil dictator on the other.

Regarding Dunkirk, I sometimes think it is overblown. It was more of a morale booster than a strategic turning point.

I do not agree with that assessment at all.
 
#18
#18
The success of the evacuation was more due to the French rearguard at Lilles pulling 10 divisions off of the BEF more than anything else. The Wermacht couldn't press the channel with 40,000 enemies on their flank, which bought time

I'm sure the Germans were petrified of the French at that point...drip drip drip..
 
#19
#19
It's a great story that's why. You have to be really ignorant to call Dunkirk just an "evacuation" it was more like a miracle. History would have been completely different otherwise as has already been stated.

There is nothing extraordinary about an evacuation. As much is admitted by Churchill himself. I point you to Churchill's autobiography set, particularly the "Our Finest Hour" edition. I would much rather have an adventure about the assassination of Reyhnard Heydrich or a biopic of Otto Skorzeny, but I bet you don't know anything about those stories. Careful about calling someone ignorant about something when they have written on it.

Dunkirk is a miracle in that Hitler for the first time listened to Goering and his overestimates regarding the capabilities of the Luftwaffe. That in and of itself is the true value of Dunkirk, not the rescue of ~340,000 men, because it would ultimately doom Hitler in the Soviet Union and at home by 44/45. The value of those 340,000 men later in the war I concede, however, is a point argued by many.
 
#20
#20
Not really much of a rooting interest, eh? Evil dictator on one side versus an evil dictator on the other.

Regarding Dunkirk, I sometimes think it is overblown. It was more of a morale booster than a strategic turning point.

300,000 troops escaping capture isn't "morale". I'm sure Hitler's strategy was to take out as many opposing forces as possible. This was major.
 
Last edited:
#21
#21
There is nothing extraordinary about an evacuation. As much is admitted by Churchill himself. I point you to Churchill's autobiography set, particularly the "Our Finest Hour" edition. I would much rather have an adventure about the assassination of Reyhnard Heydrich or a biopic of Otto Skorzeny, but I bet you don't know anything about those stories. Careful about calling someone ignorant about something when they have written on it.

Dunkirk is a miracle in that Hitler for the first time listened to Goering and his overestimates regarding the capabilities of the Luftwaffe. That in and of itself is the true value of Dunkirk, not the rescue of ~340,000 men, because it would ultimately doom Hitler in the Soviet Union and at home by 44/45. The value of those 340,000 men later in the war I concede, however, is a point argued by many.

Sir I humbly bow under the weight of your vast and awe inspiring intellect. Of course I know nothing of Heydrich and Skorzeny. Why my humble 10th education (learned a trade and had to go to work to help support my family) is no match at all for what must be decades of higher education. Everything I have read, including the assuredly low brow trash compilation of first hand accounts that I read in the third grade after finding it in the local library, along with the "The sinking of the Bismarck" were obvious and pathetic attempts to glorify, and rationalize the humiliating retreat. I should know better than to put any stock in all the other accounts I've read of the "evacuation" and it's ultimate effect on the The War. Thank you so much for showing me how ignorant and pathetic us folks that still believe it was anything other than just an "evacuation" really are. (including Nolan I presume, since he and his money men obviously are even dumber than I, because they have sunk millions into such a lowly enterprise) Please continue showering your knowledge upon us poor, simple minded plebes, oh saintly Socrates. And have a nice day :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
Wow..jeez man I was lightheartedly disagreeing with you. What in the heck is going on when you can't playfully argue with people anymore? I'm sorry I offended you so bad you had to stoop to calling me names. The drip drip drip was just a jokey attempt at indicating the obvious sarcasm in my post.
 
#23
#23
300,000 troops escaping capture isn't "morale". I'm sure Hitler's strategy was to take our as many opposing forces as possible. This was major.

No it wasn't butch. It was just a simple evacuation. The Germans were terrified of the mighty French army on their flank, who theretofore had been getting obliterated by the Germans and running for their lives or surrendering in mass, or as the Gauls say..en masse. They let 300,000 men get away so they could fight them in a more even fight later. You know when they actually had a well trained, well equipped army. And they had to let the Brits get their almost non existent war effort started. I mean they hardly had any military industry to equip their pathetically small army. I mean how fun would beating them that fast be?
 
#24
#24
No it wasn't butch. It was just a simple evacuation. The Germans were terrified of the mighty French army on their flank, who theretofore had been getting obliterated by the Germans and running for their lives or surrendering in mass, or as the Gauls say..en masse. They let 300,000 men get away so they could fight them in a more even fight later. You know when they actually had a well trained, well equipped army. And they had to let the Brits get their almost non existent war effort started. I mean they hardly had any military industry to equip their pathetically small army. I mean how fun would beating them that fast be?

Fun fact: Hitler was a stark raving insane mass murderer but quite the good sport (cepting you were Jewish).
1381629387625795.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#25
#25
Sir I humbly bow under the weight of your vast and awe inspiring intellect. Of course I know nothing of Heydrich and Skorzeny. Why my humble 10th education (learned a trade and had to go to work to help support my family) is no match at all for what must be decades of higher education. Everything I have read, including the assuredly low brow trash compilation of first hand accounts that I read in the third grade after finding it in the local library, along with the "The sinking of the Bismarck" were obvious and pathetic attempts to glorify, and rationalize the humiliating retreat. I should know better than to put any stock in all the other accounts I've read of the "evacuation" and it's ultimate effect on the The War. Thank you so much for showing me how ignorant and pathetic us folks that still believe it was anything other than just an "evacuation" really are. (including Nolan I presume, since he and his money men obviously are even dumber than I, because they have sunk millions into such a lowly enterprise) Please continue showering your knowledge upon us poor, simple minded plebes, oh saintly Socrates. And have a nice day :)


You said I was ignorant. I am not. Sorry if the response, which I thought was more than enough to prompt an actual discussion, was interpreted as some kind of insult on your part.

No it wasn't butch. It was just a simple evacuation. The Germans were terrified of the mighty French army on their flank, who theretofore had been getting obliterated by the Germans and running for their lives or surrendering in mass, or as the Gauls say..en masse. They let 300,000 men get away so they could fight them in a more even fight later. You know when they actually had a well trained, well equipped army. And they had to let the Brits get their almost non existent war effort started. I mean they hardly had any military industry to equip their pathetically small army. I mean how fun would beating them that fast be?

Sarcasm, sure, but you have yet to point out how this was anything other than an evacuation from one side of the English Channel to the other because of the arrogance of one world leader. Get over yourself.

300,000 troops escaping capture isn't "morale". I'm sure Hitler's strategy was to take out as many opposing forces as possible. This was major.

Once again, this was major because Hitler, instead of reevaluating his trust of Goering, continued to do so. This would have drastic consequences for the war far more than the evacuation itself.
 
Last edited:

VN Store



Back
Top