Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Dunkirk (2017)

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Dunkirk (2017)

Old 27th Jul 2017, 12:04
  #121 (permalink)  
Cunning Artificer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 72
Posts: 3,107
I'm puzzled. Why would "the enemy" - i.e. Luftwaffe - waste bombs on dive bombing troops scattered out in the open on a beach? The real targets were the ships and the mole. Did the Luftwaffe really bomb the beaches
Blacksheep is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 12:15
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,190
PLEASE DON'T GIVE AWAY THE ENDING - I haven't seen it yet!

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 12:44
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 65
Posts: 59
Nice piece of cinematography........
meadowrun is online now  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 12:44
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: west aust'
Age: 56
Posts: 29
i thought it was very good . +1 on the earplugs .
laardvark is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 15:31
  #125 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,593
BS,maybe. If you chickened out and released early. Strafe is a better weapon against sand. Water is a better medium to propagate shock.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2017, 12:56
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 43
Posts: 588
Well, I went to see the film full of anticipation and expecting to come out singing its praises!

Instead, I felt an overwhelming sense of "meh"

The opening scenes seemed to be WWII soldiers walking through a town in northern France in the 21st century - everything looked and felt wrong.

The rejection of CGI and use of practical effects is commendable, but resulted in empty looking beaches.

What little battle scenes there were felt very sanitised - for the benefit of the 12A rating obviously.

The three pronged timelines jarred too, the soldier is supposedly experiencing a week (it felt no more than 24 hours), the civilian on the boat is experiencing a day (it kind of felt like it) and the Spitfire pilot is experiencing an hour (it felt way longer).

The total lack of characterisation - I just didn't care about anyone, could glean nothing about who they were or their personalities. The actor playing the soldier was utterly bland. Mark Rylance did his "puzzled/troubled" turn - again. Tom Hardy was indifferent as the pilot - in fact his wing man had more character than most of the rest of the cast.

And the Spitfire at the end - I'm all for suspension of disbelief in films - but not blatant taking the p*ss as this was. And as others said - put a bloody engine in the mock-up Spitfire, so we don't all cry "where's the engine?"

Definitely one of the biggest cinema disappointments I have had!
eal401 is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2017, 16:23
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: England
Posts: 29
I must have seen a different Dunkirk film.

The one I saw was a vision of hell on earth and a story of survival in that situation. I saw all the same inaccuracies as previous posts, didn't matter. The big name stars didn't shine, didn't matter, they didn't need to. The lack of CGI, didn't matter, the actual aircraft were amazing. There was no annoying music, the music in this film carried the tension all the way to the end.

No blood and guts, but that didn't stop you feeling uncomfortable at times.

One of the best films I've seen in a long time.
Grayfly is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 00:48
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ex everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 25
I must have seen a different Dunkirk film.

I guess it's good that we're not all the same.

I spent the first half wondering "is this good, or a load of bollocks ?" The second half was just pure unadulterated bollocks. Some of the flying scenes had me laughing out loud.

The fractured use of time contributed nothing. I still crack up thinking about how far a Spitfire will go, not only on 50 gallons of gas, (with ammo in endless supply,) but also on a glide approach at 300 knots.

A rubbish movie in my view. 2 out of 10. The worst I've seen in a long time.

But hey, if you enjoyed it, good on you.
tpad is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 01:12
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: at my computer
Posts: 206
OK as entertainment, but disapointing overall for anyone with any aviation knowledge of the period.

Some things that made me go 'arrrgghghh'.
  • Spitfire pilot with no idea of deflection shooting.
  • Thinks it a great idea to close the canopy before ditching. Then doesn't know about the crowbar clipped to the door just for use in opening a jammed canopy.
  • Aircraft code leter missing on the spitfires. I have looked up the squadron code 'LC'. It was for RAF Fetwell which was a bomber station, so no spitfires there.
  • A spitfire that can glide forever. A competition glider pilot that saw the movie with me now wants to trade his high performance sailplane for a spitfire!
Some good air to air photograpy let down by the details.
/pedant mode off.
Terry Dactil is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 02:47
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 65
Posts: 59
Had a look at the crew list.
Not an Aviation or Military consultant in sight.
Special thanks to Sir Michael Caine.
meadowrun is online now  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 04:30
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 592
Just back from seeing the film, so have to add my bit:

Didn't like it at all. I guess I just don't care for the "stream of consciousness" approach to a film.

I understand that the director was trying to purposefully confuse the viewer's sense of time, and portray the disorientation that a battle must induce. But I just couldn't get a feel for the overall story or the people being portrayed. And the score was designed to mimic a heartbeat, rising and falling with stress, then morphing into the slowed down Nimrod.

Too artsy-fartsy for me, though. Branagh?: is there a more "wooden" actor today? Same lip expression in every film. Rylance?: underplayed, subtle, and marvelous as everything he does is.
obgraham is online now  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 07:39
  #132 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,593
Originally Posted by Terry Dactil View Post
[*]Aircraft code leter missing on the spitfires.
Oh how droll.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 09:00
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 252
I feel sorry for the French! Good movie and nice to see real Spitfires flying with interesting go pro camera angles. Much better than Pearl Harbor!
ChrisJ800 is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 09:10
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: at my computer
Posts: 206
It took a bit more than a go-pro camera to get the cockpit shots.
The iMax camera is pretty big.
The cockpit photograpy using this pretend spitfire was very realistic.
Terry Dactil is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 09:40
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,963
Originally Posted by Terry Dactil View Post
It took a bit more than a go-pro camera to get the cockpit shots.
The iMax camera is pretty big.
The cockpit photograpy using this pretend spitfire was very realistic.




It's important to remember that there is no CG. The fact that it's all real footage of those aeroplanes in that setting makes it worth the price of admission alone imo.

And the sound of three flat chat merlins in HD 3D surround sound loud enough to rattle your seat??? Please
Hempy is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 10:03
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 54
Posts: 302
Slight thread drift

I was in Paris last year for a couple of days holiday. It was just after one of the terrorist attacks so the city was under heavy security, troops and armed police everywhere and military vehicles very much in attendance.

When I got back I was relating the story to a mate, who was replied that his Dad had been in Paris and had much the same story. The streets had been a mess, tanks and troops everywhere, put him of foreign holidays for ever.

Mates wife looked a little puzzled and asked "When was you dad in Paris, he never took your Mum?"

The reply was simple enough "1944"
Ogre is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 10:42
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: at my computer
Posts: 206
Never mind the plot and the mistakes.
It was worth it just to look at the spitfires.

More at:
Spitfires at Lee-on-Solent Airfield 2016

Last edited by Terry Dactil; 1st Aug 2017 at 11:37. Reason: Reduce image size
Terry Dactil is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 10:57
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: A place in the sun
Age: 78
Posts: 748
Please forgive my ignorance, but what type of aircraft is the 'pretend Spitfire' that is used for the cockpit camera shots?
Bergerie1 is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 11:22
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: at my computer
Posts: 206
It is a Yak 52.
More photos of it at
Spitfires at Lee-on-Solent Airfield 2016 link above
Terry Dactil is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2017, 18:58
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: A place in the sun
Age: 78
Posts: 748
Thanks Terry - I should have looked at the previous post!!
Bergerie1 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.