Went to see the Dunkirk film last night at the cinema and it was incredible. There's even a glimpse of Weymouth tramway and later, Southern rolling stock in it at the end courtesy of the Swanage railway!
Great to hear they got the important stuff right ;)
Apparently not, the Southern stock is 1970s!
I can't wait to see it!
The film generally, or the incorrect southern stock? ;)
Quote from: njee20 on July 24, 2017, 08:46:07 AM
Apparently not, the Southern stock is 1970s!
Hate to be a pedant but the bogie b and cct wagons that you see from the carriage window (painted dark green) seemed pretty appropriate. The carriage they're in is probably a mk1 SO pained green but it does have the carriage set number painted on the end so at least it's the correct region for the area!!
It's only a movie but judging by the reviews, looks like a good depiction of the event.
I'd love to see it at the cinema but sadly, for a couple of years now, I can't abide the incredible level they set the sound at as it pounds through my chest in waves and I feel extremely uncomfortable. Having had a triple bypass and a defib/pacemaker fitted has just compounded the problem so I'll just have to wait for the DVD which will be nowhere near as spectacular on my 37" telly :(
Hey get up with the new tech.
Anne's watching Master chef Australia while I transmit a video wirelessly into the other TV!
.... Me favourite movie, the full Monty, actually.
;D :beers:
Quote from: d-a-n on July 24, 2017, 09:12:24 AM
Quote from: njee20 on July 24, 2017, 08:46:07 AM
Apparently not, the Southern stock is 1970s!
Hate to be a pedant but the bogie b and cct wagons that you see from the carriage window (painted dark green) seemed pretty appropriate. The carriage they're in is probably a mk1 SO pained green but it does have the carriage set number painted on the end so at least it's the correct region for the area!!
Pedant away, just copying what I read elsewhere. Unless it's post privatisation I've not got a clue!
Quote from: newportnobby on July 24, 2017, 09:40:08 AM
I'd love to see it at the cinema but sadly, for a couple of years now, I can't abide the incredible level they set the sound at as it pounds through my chest in waves and I feel extremely uncomfortable. Having had a triple bypass and a defib/pacemaker fitted has just compounded the problem so I'll just have to wait for the DVD which will be nowhere near as spectacular on my 37" telly :(
The sound at Lowry cinema was loud - the gunfire, explosions and roaring Merlin engines really shook the theatre
I have to say, that I found it disappointing. Particularly as it was from one of my favourite directors. The incessant film "score" was largely counter-productive, far too many continuity errors from shot to shot and more than a few technical errors, early war, carburettor Spitfires nosing over into a dive without the fuel cutting out anyone? (and no spoiler, but the sequence after the Spitfire engine cut out due to fuel starvation was quite frankly ludicrous).
I'm all for big screen entertainment and excitement, but from Nolan I expected a reasonably accurate depiction. Sadly it just didn't live up to its billing, for me.
I was, however, pleasantly impressed by Harry Styles turn in the film. He has the makings of an actor, certainly. The ticking away of the seconds throughout the film was a clever touch, and the bringing together of the three threads was also clever and well done, but I have to say I left feeling underwhelmed at an opportunity missed. Band of Brothers did this sort of thing much, much better.
Quote from: Carmont on July 24, 2017, 01:44:57 PMI'm all for big screen entertainment and excitement, but from Nolan I expected a reasonably accurate depiction. Sadly it just didn't live up to its billing, for me.
I agree, his depiction of a dystopian Gotham City is among the most realistic I've seen ;)
I can't help but think people have unrealistic expectations from films/TV sometimes. I've heard a lot of good things about Dunkirk, and if the worst criticism we can level at it is that there's a scene where a Spitfire's engine should cut out then I'll take it!
Quote from: njee20 on July 24, 2017, 06:28:51 PM
Quote from: Carmont on July 24, 2017, 01:44:57 PMI'm all for big screen entertainment and excitement, but from Nolan I expected a reasonably accurate depiction. Sadly it just didn't live up to its billing, for me.
I agree, his depiction of a dystopian Gotham City is among the most realistic I've seen ;)
I can't help but think people have unrealistic expectations from films/TV sometimes. I've heard a lot of good things about Dunkirk, and if the worst criticism we can level at it is that there's a scene where a Spitfire's engine should cut out then I'll take it!
It isn't the worst thing that can be levelled at the film, but it was one example without ruining the film for those who want to go and see it. On a forum that lambasts TV and Filmmakers for including railway stock and locomotives on screen entirely out of the correct time line and context, I didn't think my observation at all inappropriate in a review about the film. Incidentally, the railway carriage the protagonists travelled on at the tale end of the film had seating fabric which looked decidedly un-Southern and un-1940s.
Batman, as I'm sure you are aware is not the only film Nolan has made. The amount of research and scientific accuracy that he carried out and presented respectively in Interstellar, suggested to me that he cared about things being right, hence my disappointment when viewing Dunkirk. At no time in the film did he make me believe or feel that there were anywhere near 300,000 soldiers anywhere near the beach. The "music" in the film was so loud and relentless that it removed any real terror or alarm at diving Junkers 87s. It also drowned out much of the rare dialogue. The number of air and land attacks on the evacuation was so sparse that many viewing would be forgiven for wondering what all the fuss was about. Nolan set out to present a historical film, by his own admission. Unfortunately, for me, it was anything but historical. The phrase all fur coat and no knickers springs to mind. It felt lazy and half baked.
Others mileage may vary.
As an aside, nejee20, once again on this forum, you've shown an inability to respond or reply to a fair and reasoned post with anything other than poorly delivered sarcasm. I add my name to what I understand is a growing list growing list of members who has you, henceforth, on ignore. Its only fair that I should tell you, lest you feel aggrieved when I don't respond to any of your future replies on any thread.
Take care and enjoy the film.
Can you unignore me long enough to get my username right, please? Common courtesy and that! :thankyousign:
It's a subject that's certainly been done before on here (but there are probably few things left in the universe that's not been discussed at some point), I'm the sort of person able to suspend belief for a film, and don't find such things detract from my enjoyment of a film. We don't need to get back into it.
I've only heard good things about the film, I've not managed to see it, having a baby gets in the way irritatingly, so really my contribution isn't really valid (I'm sure many are now thinking 'mmm, like usual'), but I'm slightly bemused that the things you've highlighted detract from it that much. That said, not posting spoilers is a good shout, so perhaps there are other more crucial failings you've not mentioned.
Saw Dunkirk on Saturday and was totally blown away by the whole thing. Han Zimmer's score pumps up the tension to eleven and the deft switching between the various storylines builds to a fine climax. OK, there were one or two inaccuracies, such as the 1970s BR Mk1, they can be forgiven.
Christopher Nolan insisted on using practical effects, real planes and hordes of extras to stop this becoming another Hollywood CGI-fest.
Best film of the year so far and deserves viewing on the big screen.
The 1958 Dunkirk film is far better. To me the new film is'nt a patch on it.
Have booked for IMAX at the science Museum in 10 days so no spoilers please - I want to see who wins!
Quote from: Plainline. on July 24, 2017, 09:36:37 PM
The 1958 Dunkirk film is far better. To me the new film is'nt a patch on it.
Thanks Plainline for answering what I was wondering. I do still enjoy the original Dunkirk, I have it on DVD.
I went to pictures on Saturday and paid to sit in the dbox section £15+ and really enjoyed it. I thought the whole film was stunning, great camera work a few minor errors no doubt. But having sat in a chair pitching and rolling, banking left and right rattling to machine gun fire and feeling like I was going to fall out at times (not quite that much movement in the chair) I really, really loved this film.
Quote from: Railwaygun on July 25, 2017, 06:52:12 PM
Have booked for IMAX at the science Museum in 10 days so no spoilers please - I want to see who wins!
I must admit to being really brassed off when someone told me how 'Titanic' ended as I hadn't seen it at the time :laugh:
A chap I work with was talking about the IMAX version earlier - apparently the film was filmed on film (should get a thesaurus) rather than digitally, which is rather rare these days, and indeed most of it is shot in IMAX, which is even rarer, with that actually being used as a mechanism by Nolan to enhance the open shots.
Then it's also being screened in 70mm and 35mm film, as well as digitally. Good job it's not in 3D or there'd be more variants than screens in most cinemas.
Quote from: newportnobby on July 25, 2017, 10:21:02 PM
Quote from: Railwaygun on July 25, 2017, 06:52:12 PM
Have booked for IMAX at the science Museum in 10 days so no spoilers please - I want to see who wins!
I must admit to being really brassed off when someone told me how 'Titanic' ended as I hadn't seen it at the time :laugh:
IIRC it formed a beautiful and lasting relationship with an iceberg.
Quote from: newportnobby on July 24, 2017, 09:40:08 AM
I'd love to see it at the cinema but sadly, for a couple of years now, I can't abide the incredible level they set the sound at as it pounds through my chest in waves and I feel extremely uncomfortable. Having had a triple bypass and a defib/pacemaker fitted has just compounded the problem so I'll just have to wait for the DVD which will be nowhere near as spectacular on my 37" telly :(
I just hate the entire cinema experience so much - expense, poor comfort, OTHER PEOPLE, etc that I tend to wait for the DVD whilst avoiding spoilers (yeah, I know what happened in this one) and watch it at home on the 42" flat screen. I even managed to be shocked when Han - well I won't spoiler it - in Star Wars The Force Awakens and I didn't see it until the following May!
The film critic Barry Norman who died recently was the son of
Leslie Norman, director of the original Dunkirk film, not a lot
of people know that,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Quote from: Railwaygun on July 25, 2017, 06:52:12 PM
Have booked for IMAX at the science Museum in 10 days so no spoilers please - I want to see who wins!
The Americans win..
Bought the DVD last week and must admit that I found it disappointing. Even watched it twice to check that my first assessment was perhaps incorrect.
Unfortunately, no. I found it disjointed and difficult to follow at times.
Personal opinion, obviously, but to me, it just didn't live up to the hype it received when it was released.
I didn't see it in the cinema - too many people crunching crisps/popcorn, coughing etc. Yup! I'm becoming a grumpy old man.
I recently saw it on Now TV and hated it. Too many things wrong to list although R J Mitchell would have been proud of the glider he never built.
Being retired, I can go to a local cinema here on a Tuesday morning. The cinema is family owned and is lovely in it's way.
I watched two films when I was the only person in there!!
I too cannot stand the popcorn, etc. Probably why the sound is so loud!
Stangely enough, one of the films I watched there by myself was Interstellar, by the same director.
It had major flaws too, but at least it was fiction.
Yes, I stick with my appraisal..... spectacular but very disappointing. Too much hype, maybe.
Quote from: Bealman on July 01, 2018, 07:59:02 AM
Bought the DVD last week and must admit that I found it disappointing. Even watched it twice to check that my first assessment was perhaps incorrect.
Unfortunately, no. I found it disjointed and difficult to follow at times.
Personal opinion, obviously, but to me, it just didn't live up to the hype it received when it was released.
Bought it in my local supermarket when the price had come down to £7 and not sure it was worth that much, to be honest. The 1958 version is far superior IMO and yes, George, I think it was hugely over hyped and an opportunity missed to create a spectacular. Instead I felt like I was seeing it in some sort of 'narrow' vision. 3/10
I haven't seen the new Dunkirk movie , but hope to see it eventually. The original was quite good
with fine performances from John Mills and Dickie Attenborough though it carried on with the myth
that the RAF wasn't there, also one scene which from a military point of view was ludicrous.
Positive... I'm lending it out to guys at the RSL club for a beer.
They are in a queue for it!
Money still to be made, with a bit of lateral thinking.... :thumbsup:
I do not mean any offense to veterans.
I'm just talking about the video.
The carriage they were in was Mk1 TSO 4945 - built 1961. The eagled eyed anoraks amongst you may have noticed the altered (for continuity) seat numbering, and that the local lad whose death is reported in the Weymouth newspaper being described in the caption under his picture as a native of Ramsgate.
Other than taking a while for the One Week, One Day, One Hour penny to drop with me, I enjoyed the film - 'mistakes' and all!
Cheers
Clive
I've got the original with John Mills etc, and the BBC one with Benedict Cumberbatch, and I know which is, in my opinion, the better one , the original.
just couldn't enjoy the later one, for some reason.
off topic, but did rewatch the other evening one of the free dvds that were given away with the Mail, some years ago.
'Went the day well?'
thoroughly enjoyed it.
apologies for going off topic.
I don't know enough about trains to have spotted any inaccuracies, but I and all the residents of Weymouth noticed some huge glitches.
Visible even in the trailer,as the guys ran along the tramway (past the back of my mate's B & B ) they run past the Pavilion, which was built in 1960, after the original burnt down in 1943.
Also in the same shot you can clearly see in the background what is affectionately known as the "Weymouth Willy"..... the observation tower built in 2012
https://www.jurassicskyline.com/ (https://www.jurassicskyline.com/)
A shame as while they were filming round the harbour all modern cars had to be moved, and they were so careful not to include any modern lamp posts shop signs etc.
Still an enjoyable film though ;)
All best wishes
Kevin
:beers:
I saw this on a flight a couple of months ago, was not impressed, seemed to be a series of vaguely related scenes but with no compelling "story". Almost as if someone had read a book, grabbed a bunch of scenes and turned them into a film. It seemed to be a bit built around some actor as well (young chap called Harry something, not really an actor IIRC?). Apart from the obvious Mk1 blooper, technically the scenic recreations seemed pretty good to me (as a non expert in military things) but overall it failed to captivate, don't feel the urge to watch again.
Funnily enough on the same set of flights I saw the Winston Churchill film ("Darkest Hour"?) which though overdramatized in parts, was quite informative, at an intermediate airport I found the accompanying book which was an interesting read and also provided some useful context about the whole Dunkirk operation utterly missing from the Dunkirk film.
Agree with railsquid, I had looked forward to seeing this film and thought it kind of missed the point.
The Darkest Hour however was and is, worth a watch.
Jerry
Slightly off topic, I can recommend the paperback 'Dunkirk' by Hugh Sebag-Montefiore.