Dunkirk (1958) User Reviews

What a WWII movie should be

[Wakanohana · 8/10 · 20 December 2002]

A simple film, two stories, soldiers and civilians who did what needed to be done. None of the romance of "Mrs Minnever," but moving nonetheless.

I appreciated this film all the more for having seen "Pearl Harbor" a few months ago. I gave "Dunkirk" 8/10, maybe a little generous, because of the attention to detail and accuracy. The acting was better than adequate, and it was wonderful to see a youngish Bernard Lee. He was 49 when this film was released in 1958 -- there is a gap in his filmography from 41 to 45, so he probably served in the war... as did many of the other actors.

This gets closer to the people and events

[malcolmgsw · 7/10 · 26 July 2017]

The night before I went to see the 2017 film of the events I watched this film again.It was everything that the new film is not.A faithful retelling of events told in an involving but not over emotional way.The scale of production may not have been as large as the new film,but you learned a lot more.Peopled with many fine actors including Mills,Attenborough and Lee.It captures the mood of the times which the new film does not.

Fine War Movie.

[rmax304823 · 7/10 · 11 November 2010]

This is an above average account of the evacuation of almost half a million British and French troops from the beaches of France near the beginning of World War Two, when the German Blitzkrieg seemed unstoppable. There are good performances, nicely staged battle scenes, a well-written script, and impressive visual effects. A good job.

The story alternates between Corporal John Mills' confused attempts to get his squad from the front line back to his unit on the beach, and the growing realization across the channel that the English will need to muster more than a handful of destroyers to get their army home. Bernard Lee and Richard Attenborough are two civilian small-boat owners who are swept up in the massive effort.

It's really an impressive adult movie, free of heroics and flag-waving rhetoric. The Germans are not demonized. And when men die, they don't die Hollywood deaths, twirling around and collapsing. They die in pain, sometimes crawling helplessly before expiring. At the beaches, as the hordes of clumsily outfitted soldiers line up to board the motley fleet of dinghies, yachts, and ferries, they are shelled by artillery and bombed by Stukas. And when a shell or a bomb hits, the explosion is followed by hundreds of ululating howls of distress, a long collective moan of pain. Marvelously done.

Bernard Lee is the thoughtful civilian Londoner who is critical of both the generalship that allowed the Allied forces to be surrounded in a small pocket on the channel, and the citizenry that has never taken Adolf Hitler seriously. Attenborough keeps finding excuses not to join the rescue effort because his wife tells him, "Promise you won't leave me and baby." "Fools at the top and fools at the bottom," remarks Lee.

John Mills as the reluctant squad leader continued to surprise me. He's "Tubby" Bins, just one of the guys, until the sergeant is killed in action. One of the men points out that he now has the stripes. "I suppose I do," says Mills, surprised, uncertain, but not making a big deal out of it. He's not much at giving orders and having them followed. (He's the kind of non-commissioned officer I was.) But he gradually grows into the role and although the squad incurs casualties he manages to pull most of them through. Mills does everything possible with this character arc. A lesser actor would have played it as a stereotype -- stern from the start, adamantine and unchanging. It would have been easy.

There are some remarkable, sweeping shots of the cold, wet beaches showing hundreds of shivering, frightened men. At some moments they recalled the ligament-stretching efforts at gigantism of "The Longest Day." They're all the more strange for appearing in a movie that at all other times seems to have a limited budget.

The writing and editing slip towards the end. We see multiple attempts to get the men off the beach in fully loaded boats and ship. They all fail until Attenborough gets Mills and the others on his small yacht and takes off for Dover -- and they're among the last to go. The impression we're left with, until it's corrected by the narrated epilogue, is that hardly anyone escaped from the pocket. Some of the minor roles are less than well executed.

But none of that detracts from the overall impact of the movie. It has all sorts of incidental trouvees. A German grenade detonates near one of Mills' men and knocks him down. As time passes, it becomes clear that there's something wrong with the man. He's dizzy. His judgment is clouded. "It's just concussion," decides Mills, "and he'll be alright." Now, in a by-the-numbers war movie, we know this will not turn out to be the case. The man will continue to deteriorate before finally collapsing and gasping out a few last sentimental words before passing away from brain damage. But what happens here? Exactly what Mills says. The guy recovers after getting some sleep and is fine again. His temporary impairment could have been eliminated entirely from the script with nothing lost except a slight but incisive touch of realism.

Great unheralded war film

[scheelj · 7/10 · 5 May 2012]

See it – A surprisingly great war film, this movie tells two different stories. One is about a group of British soldiers trapped behind enemy lines, desperately trying to make their way to the French coast. Meanwhile, on the other side of the channel, English civilians bravely prepare to help with the mass evacuation at Dunkirk. Near the end, the two stories converge "Tarantino style." There aren't many household names in this one. Richard Attenborough headlines a cast of British actors that have recognizable faces but are relatively unknown to Americans. There is quite a bit of combat in the middle stage of the film as the British soldiers dart from hedge to farmhouse to avoid capture by the Jerries. The pace of the movie slows toward the end, but this is a historically accurate and memorable retelling of real heroes who snatched victory from the jaws of defeat. 3 out of 5 action rating.

Has Aged Surprisingly Well

[screenman · 7/10 · 14 September 2008]

'Dunkirk' was the event that really cemented WW2 in British minds. Up to that point it had been more a newsworthy disturbance in a foreign land, following on the much maligned 'phony' war.

For the first time, those at home - at least in the home counties - could see for themselves the face of defeat in legions of haggard and bandaged returnees.

This movie takes us through events in a familiar well-paced documentary-like way that makes old British war movies so watchable. There are few excessive heroics, just a gradual realisation that greater effort is needed and a reconciliation to it.

Individuals are about to have their pleasure craft commandeered. Even in the 1940's, to own your own boat for pleasure was a very middle-class activity, and so we see this 'Dad's Navy' confused and reluctant at first, but eventually volunteering themselves along with their boats. They still have little idea what awaits them.

In France, things are falling apart fast. The collapsing British forces are shown in microcosm by a company of squaddies led by working-class 'corporal' John Mills, complete with phony cockney accent. Constantly harassed by the encroaching German army, they manage to stay one step ahead and reach Dunkirk.

Only soldiers can be evacuated. The supplies and substance of an army must be abandoned, destroying as much as possible rather than allowing it to fall into enemy hands.

Small-ship civilians get trapped ashore and share in the bombardment with soldiers. Some are killed. There's a lot of men and a lot of equipment shown at times. It's clear that the army were involved in the movie's making. Cabin cruisers explode, loaded ships are bombed. Although today, the bombs falling on the dunes bear more similarity to thunder flashes, for its time, the overall effect is creditable. There are believable performances all round from a cast of reliable, regular stalwarts. And, necessary for every movie; we are made to care about them.

The retreat from Dunkirk was the first of several Great British reversals that were needed before the nation took its plight seriously enough to galvanise itself into a professional war-effort. This movie doesn't moralise or sentimentalise much. Dunkirk was chaos that was saved from disaster by just a little bit of order and a great deal of courage. Not to mention luck.

Well worth a watch even today. It may be a drama but it tells you as much as a reference book.

Concise account of the real thing.

[hedgehog-10 · 7/10 · 22 January 1999]

This presents a concise account of the Dunkirk operation. It avoids the "stuff upper lip" mentality that was present in a great deal of British War films of this time (with some exceptions). The film presents two separate stories around the Dunkirk operation: the lost soldiers (led by the NCO John Mills) and the cynical civilian reporter (Bernard Lee). They finally meet up on the beach at Dunkirk. A very well directed Ealing Film.

One of the best war movies I have ever seen.

[The_Ringo_Kid · 10/10 · 7 February 2007]

Dunkirk is one of the best war movies I have ever seen. It was nice to see Sir John Mills in one of his best if not-THE best roles he ever was in. The makers of this fine film did a most excellent job in portraying as accurately as possible; the terrible events that made up Dunkirk.

The cast was excellent and I am of the opinion that Leonard Maltin (a film critic) really does not know what he is talking about--especially when it comes to this fantastic classic movie. The cast was also superb.

This movie centers around the events that made up Dunkirk and was very accurately portrayed. It was because of this film that one learns that Mr. Lightholler (of Titanic fame) risked his own neck and boat in order to make that trip across the English Channel and to help out in the evacuation of British and French Soldiers; off Dunkirk Beach.

Somebody PLEASE release this film on DVD. I have not had the pleasure of seeing this film in many years and would sure love to see it again.

Today's Directors Need to Watch These Films!

[jb07-660-944395 · 7/10 · 22 July 2017]

Having watched the new, dreadful Dunkirk last night, I feel compelled to write a review for the "old" Dunkirk, which is one of my favourite war movies.

I must admit though, having watched this film many times, I do feel compelled to fast forward through a lot of the civilian bits. These parts haven't aged well, and tend to drag on the overall story.

However, the story of the army section, cut off from its main unit, and trying desperately to get to the coast, is thrilling and classic story telling. The action is as good as any modern day CGI, with John Mills actually burning his eyebrows off (not sure how to spell singing as in pronounced sinjing) in the scene with him trying to rescue the man from the burning vehicle.

The killing of the sentry, although showing no gore, exhibits great film making to make it every bit as ghastly. Again, modern day directors should take note - implied violence can be just as good, if not better, than gratuitous violence shown on screen.

The little ships mobilising is done extremely well, and this movie, unlike its modern day counterpart, makes sure the viewer gets to know the back story, and shows an epic effort to evacuate the soldiers.

Just like The Cruel Sea, and Carve Her Name With Fame, this is brilliant story telling, at times, making you feel like you are watching a little bit of history unfold.

A Nation Mobilized

[bkoganbing · 9/10 · 13 March 2007]

My favorite story of heroism in the 20th century happens to be the evacuation of the bulk of the British army from the beaches at Dunkirk. There was the United Kingdom which if they had not been rescued probably would have had to sue for peace with Nazi Germany despite Mr. Churchill's intentions to fight. The United Kingdom would have had nothing to fight with and World War II would have been over on the western front.

The Dunkirk story was touched on briefly in the American cinema in William Wyler's Mrs. Miniver. Walter Pidgeon who owned a small craft was asked to meet some friends at a local pub. Turns out they wanted him and his boat to cross the English channel and evacuate troops. It's one of the great scenes from that film boats feeding in from every tributary of Thames and the flotilla sailing out to sea. But it's only part of Mrs. Miniver.

The story is told from the perspective of the high command, but also from the ordinary tommy and from the civilians who helped. John Mills is a corporal who leads his small squad out of certain capture from the Germans. Richard Attenborough is a small craft owner like Walter Pidgeon who is a timid and frightened man, but summons up enough courage to help his country out in its darkest hour. Bernard Lee is a reporter who goes along with Attenborough to cover the story. All three meet on the beach at Dunkirk and go to the fates that await them and their country.

My favorite in the film is Attenborough, he plays his role with real conviction, representing as it were, the courage and determination of a people united to repel an evil.

Make no mistake about it, with the Royal Navy up over its head in other commitments, those people like Richard Attenborough in saving John Mills and others like him saved civilization itself. In many ways civilization owes them more than even the men of the RAF because they weren't in the armed forces, but civilians fighting for their homes and families as we did not see the like before or since.

Dunkirk is one of the best war films ever to come from the United Kingdom and a worthy tribute to the small boat owners who saved their army and their nation.

A great British war movie

[karltrowitz · 13 November 2009]

Dunkirk is one of the best war movies ever made.

John Mills puts in a great performance as Tubby Binns, as does Bernard Lee as private boat owner "doing his bit" for the country. I thought some of the best scenes were around the battle with the artillery battery in the woods. Some good special effects and totally believable scenes. The futility of war is also shown to good effect when the Stukas arrive and bomb the battery.

One thing that really amazed me, was the inclusion of a "real" German halftrack during the scene where the bridge was being demolished. For a '50's war movie this is a special treat, much better than seeing the usual American halftracks with big crosses on their sides.

All in all, one of my favourite war movies, one that somehow captures the ambiance of those terrible times.

A carefully observed film about a gallant effort and a very complex naval event

[shakercoola · 6/10 · 13 January 2019]

A British war adventure; A story set during Operation Dynamo, a reconstruction of the evacuation of surrounded British and French troops on the beaches of Dunkirk in France between 26 May and 4 June 1940. Events are seen mostly from the viewpoints of two people, a civilian in England, newspaper reporter, and a British soldier who becomes detached from the rest of the retreating Allies in France. The events are given reverent but reserved treatment. It puts forward the notion that the soldiers were men first and heroes second. The inspirational nature of the event is captured well, as are the actions during, leading up to, and including the evacuation. It is gritty in showing the bravery, sacrifices made and struggle against-the-odds. It also pulls no punches about the way the British people viewed the event before it happened, and the conflict and disagreements within the Royal Navy and in government. All in all, it is a film that concentrates on inspiring the viewer at the expense of exploiting the potential to be engrossing.

"They chose guns, we chose butter"

[Bondek · 10/10 · 25 September 2006]

I ignore Empire's slating of this movie as I write this. Dunkirk remains one of the greatest war movies that there is, yet it is not in effect a war movie. Although detailing the collapse of France and the greatest naval evacuation, it is an anti-war movie in regards of Bernard Mills' character and his death towards the end. For a film made towards, indeed at the end of Ealing's reign it has a staggering cast. Notably there is Sir John Mills (a legend of the highest order) playing one of his many 'in uniform' roles. No one role is made to jump up, all are quietly understated. The use of b&w footage from 1940 intermixes brilliantly, such as the Stuka attack on the woodland outpost bombed into submission. Lionel Jeffries is in the medic scene where they draw lots, again a brilliant scene that is laden with emotion. Sir Malcolm Arnold's score for this film (re-used for Heroes of Telemark) is absolutely first rate. The theme when used to show the little boats leaving London provokes a shiver to run down my spine. Sir Malcolm died this weekend gone and will be sorely missed.

This film is the rarest of war films like Dambusters, no love theme, and stoically brilliant.

Uneven but the final half hour is worth the price of admission alone

[tomgillespie2002 · 6/10 · 4 February 2016]

Surprisingly, precious few films exist depicting the events of Operation Dynamo during World War II. The emergency evacuation of thousands of British, French and Belgian soldiers from the beaches of Dunkirk while the Nazis closed in around them was described as a "colossal military blunder" by Winston Churchill and could have ended the war there and then. However, the assistance of hundreds of civilians who sailed from the south of England in a small armada of speedboats, yachts and fishing boats to rescue their battered allies provided a united front in what was then dubbed the 'Phoney War' and an astonishing tale of bravery to boot.

Leslie Norman's Dunkirk does not shy away from the buffoonery of high command which led to Allied troops being pushed further and further back until they were surrounded from every angle, but also explores themes of heroism in the face of invasion. Telling two parallel stories, we witness the events leading up to Dunkirk from the front-line, where inexperienced corporal 'Tubby' Binns (John Mills) finds himself in suddenly in charge after the death of his superior and separated from the bulk of his company in hostile territory. From the Home Front, cynical journalist Charles Foreman (Bernard Lee) is attempting to snap his fellow countrymen out of their laid-back state to pay attention to a war that is creeping on their doorstep.

Charles is met by people who agree with his concerns, but also those who are blissfully unaware of his country's dyer situation. In particular, local businessman Holden (Richard Attenborough) is making himself a tidy profit from the Phoney War and laps up the propaganda played over the radio. Attenborough's coward is the film's most intriguing plot-line and certainly the most complex character on show. Although he has relatively little screen-time compared to Mills and Lee, its Holden's reaction to the horror on the beach which subsequently changes his entire outlook that lingers in the mind once the film is over.

Mills' lovable Tubby looks like the more conventional hero, wise- cracking and back-slapping his men, but as the situation worsens his ability to command is questioned as leaves one of his men to die and fails to inspire his troops to move when told. Mills gets the bulk of the screen-time, and while his journey to the beaches provide some technically impressive set-pieces, there's an unevenness to the juxtaposition of the intertwining tales when they really deserve equal billing. Tubby's escapades means that it takes a long time to get the evacuation, but when it does, the sights of hundreds of soldiers wading out into the ocean in the hope of rescue and the horror exploding around them still holds up today. It's a moving and beautifully filmed final half hour that is worth the price of admission alone.

Limey war movies don't age well

[ArtVandelayImporterExporter · 2/10 · 10 March 2024]

Maybe in the decade or two after WWII movies like this reminded a nation sick to death of rationing (it was still going on well into the 50s!!) that it was all worth it.

Or maybe it was nostalgia for a time when everyone pulled together to defeat The Hun.

But 75 years later, these by-the-numbers war movies the Brits cranked out are as dry as news reels. In fact, newsreel footage shows up here. As does the kind of 1950s animation that shows how the front line had adjusted over time.

The actual "war" scenes are about as harrowing as a Sunday walk on Hampstead Heath.

At least when Hollywood made movies about WWII they were rousing adventures. Sure, they were probably all b2llshyt. But they were usually lots of fun.

The acting is, frankly, embarrassingly amateurish, despite the big names at the top of the bill. The dialogue is uninspiring. There's just nothing of interest here.

Abrupt Ending

[w2amarketing · 11 August 2003]

Leonard Maltin said that DUNKIRK relied too heavily on newsreel footage. In fact, the only newsreels appear early in the film as means of introduction. It's possible (probable) that Leslie Norman edited live-action snippets from newsreels into the movie, but, if so, there's very little of this and it fits with the rest of the action. Thus, an unfair criticism.

DUNKIRK is a good film, and the producers were successful in making the movie suitably suspenseful, even though most people knows how it ended up historically. By all accounts, it is historically accurate. My criticism is one of pace -- DUNKIRK seems to drag for its first 100 minutes or so, with a particularly long span of film devoted to the meanderings of Cpl. Bins' squad as they beat the Belgian bushes in confusion. In fact, the focus on Bins & Co. is almost entirely uninterrupted by other action in other settings, making it seem even longer.

The actual evacuation, then, is crammed into the final 30 minutes, and, in fact, very little of it is actually depicted. Since this was the main point of the story, it seems odd that the producers would devote 75% of the film to what is essentially introduction and very little to the main action. As an example (no, this is not a spoiler) -- the Heron's motor quits in the middle of the channel, and the boat begins drifting towards Nazi-held Calais. Yet, within seconds -- IN THE SAME SCENE -- a Royal Navy destroyer appears out of nowhere to rescue them. At least one or two cuts to other action would have enhanced the impact of the rescue (which, BTW, is not actually shown, either).

Nonetheless, an above-average and accurate WWII film that's worth seeing at least once.

Impressive In Parts But Let Down By The Painfully Leaden Dialogue

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 18 November 2012]

The evacuation of Dunkirk is one of these moments in history that splits opinion in half - was it a defeat or a victory . There's no middle ground on the argument . Some state that the British Expiditionary Force ( BEF ) losing 68,000 men killed , wounded or captured during the battle of France and leaving all their heavy equipment behind can't be described as anything less than a defeat . The other argument is that 200,000 British troops were evacuated along with 140,000 French and Belgian troops is the epitome of snatching a victory from the jaws of defeat . Regardless of your views ( I'm on the victory of sorts side )it was a pivotal moment in history and this film tells the story of that moment

DUNKIRK tells the story too well . By this I mean from the very opening sequence we're shown a history lesson as newsreel tells of " The Phoney WAr " . Cut to a war office were a group of war reporters are given a briefing " X corps is guarding the Y Flank while Z corps is BLAH BLAH BLAH " One sturdy seen it all before correspondent isn't convinced as he tells his colleagues that " This is the biggest mas maneuver of the war so far this isn't a manvoure because ... "

All this sounds painfully unaturalistic as we see the same corespondent visit the French embassy to be told by the French ambassador that the Germans have broken through the Maginot Line as in " The Magniot line was reinforced by two and a half million men . How many men have the British sent ? two hundred thousand , three hundred thousand ? BLAH BLAH BLAH " It's absolutely impossible for someone in authority to open their mouth without factual statistics and in depth analysis being given out so it's nice when the action cuts to The Battle Of France

Actually Coporal Tubby Binns platoon also suffers from the dialogue disease that the home-front suffers from " We move up to the front in order to protect the French flank at ... " and we're later shown a scene on the beaches were a RAF man points out that the RAF can't provide cover because of a number of factors . No one no matter who they are or where they are feel the need to spout exposition regardless of the fact that there's no need for them to do so and is very problematic for the film

I notice the screenplay is credited to two screenwriters . I have no knowledge of the film's production but my instinct is at least one of them is an academic historian who was told to emphasise the details of the operation while the other is a trying to bring a human element to the dry history lesson . If this is the case the dramatist has failed because while it's not a dry dull history lesson it is certainly a bit too dry

This is a great shame because some scenes do work quite well and is rather graphic for a 1950s British war film such as Tubby trying to convince himself that his commanding officer was dead before a lorry exploded or the aftermath of a refugee column being shot up by the Luftwaffe where a young child runs to its dead mother . It's an outstanding film when it concentrates on these scenes but is frequently let down by the painfully expositional dialogue

blood,toil,tears and sweat

[lackname-1 · 6/10 · 29 May 2006]

The evacuation from Dunkirk was every bit as important as the Battle of Britain. If the British would have lost those 350,000 troops on the beaches they would almost certainly have lost the war. Those men couldn't be replaced at least not easily. A defeat like that would have ended everything. There would have been extreme pressure to make a deal with Hitler and end the war. Thankfully they didn't give up and stuck to the job and thankfully Hitler very stupidly pulled his panzer forces up short.

This movie has good acting by a good cast, but I've always felt it could have been done better. Dunkirk is a subject that should be revisited on the big screen.

Evacuation

[Prismark10 · 6/10 · 5 August 2017]

Film critic Barry Norman's last contribution in his long running Radio Time's column before his death was about the film Dunkirk directed by his father Leslie Norman. This was obviously written in anticipation of the release of Christopher Nolan's version of Dunkirk.

The 1958 version is an efficient but low scale re-enactment which still has elements of propaganda about it even though it was made 12 years after the war had ended.

There are two parallel stories in this film set in 1940. John Mills plays an out of his depth corporal whose soldiers are separated from their unit and they attempt to join them as the troops retreat from the beaches of Dunkirk.

Then you have a band of civilians helping out and sailing their small ships to rescue the soldiers stranded at Dunkirk.

Bernard Lee plays a journalist rather hacked off by indifferent civilians and Richard Attenborough a businessman who is complacent about the outbreak of war.

Eventually both strands of the story merge but it all feels a little stiff and starchy, Leslie Norman stills manages a few interesting shots.

Good account of the Dunkirk evacuation

[jonesus · 8/10 · 4 June 2007]

This film is worth seeing as a good account of the Dunkirk evacuation. John Mills gives a fine performance. I agree with a previous comment that more time could have been devoted to the actual evacuation. However the time devoted to the group of UK soldiers moving through France helps to show conditions for the French people. Someone asked about where the Lock was. The Lock on the Thames where the small boatyard scenes were filmed is Teddington Lock. the suspension footbridge is still there as is the weir. Toughs Boatyard which is referred to in the film was on the River Thames at Teddington opposite the lock, it is now I believe demolished and been replaced by riverside apartments. Other scenes were filmed by the River Thames at Twickenham, along the embankment by Twickenham's Eel Pie Island. This still looks pretty much the same if you go there now.(Except for all the parked cars!

John

fine older war movie

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 12 July 2017]

It's 1940. Despite some losses and ominous reports, the French and British alliance is confident of their western European defenses. Reporter Charles Foreman (Bernard Lee) is concerned. When Germany invades neutral Belgium, the British Expeditionary Force and their allies become trapped in a pocket surrounding Dunkirk. Corporal 'Tubby' Binns (John Mills) leads a group of young recruits who find themselves left behind in the rush to retreat. Back in England, John Holden (Richard Attenborough) and many others are shocked by the losses and the state of the returning men. He joins a flotilla of little boats to rescue the boys stuck across the channel.

This is a perfectly fine war movie. There is solid British acting. The action consists of old stock footage, miniatures, hundreds of extras, and static explosions. There is a memorable sequence of a pier under attack. There is an early rear-guard action but the movie could have concentrated on that part of the story. The french soldiers are mostly missing. The German headquarter should have been included to show the flaw in their strategy. There is a compelling overall story that is missing.

History's most inspirational defeat, captured admirably well

[grantss · 8/10 · 16 June 2017]

The story of the famous evacuation of British forces from the beaches of Dunkirk in May/June 1940. Seen through the eyes of a squad of infantrymen, and their leader, Corporal Binns, in particular, as well as civilians who helped evacuate the soldiers. Also covers the high-level decisions as well as the individual sacrifices that were made.

History will record the Battle of Dunkirk as a British/Allied defeat, as the Germans ultimately captured the pocket and inflicted over 60,000 casualties on the Allies. However, over 300,000 Allied troops escaped, living to fight another day. This, and the method to evacuate them - the large scale use of civilian craft of all shapes and sizes, bolstered British morale and ultimately kept Britain in the war.

The inspirational nature of the event is captured well in this movie, as are the actions during and leading up to it. Quite gritty in showing the bravery involved, sacrifices made and against-the- odds nature of the event.

Good performances by the main actors - John Mills as Corporal Binns and Richard Attenborough as John Holden. Supporting cast are a mixed bag, varying from solid to serious over-acting.

Overall, a great depiction of a momentous event.

Not a great movie, but nice sets

[JurijFedorov · 7/10 · 16 November 2022]

Good intro to what happened at Dunkirk, but not that interesting a movie.

We follow a small combat unit trying to escape the Germans. Meanwhile in Britain civilians are complaining about the war. One of the civilians is a coward. We then follow both groups going to Dunkirk. The combat unit barely makes it. The civilians are taking their own boats to help out. The coward of course also goes. It's a basic story.

Unfortunately everything is stretched. There are a lot of scenes that should have been cut. The movie shouldn't have been even close to this long as it really didn't try to do much. There were plenty of times where I grew bored of it. And I watch quite a few WW2 flicks.

The acting is the main negative factor. My god is it bad. That's why the Nolan Dunkirk is better I'd say. At least that one feels real and has good acting. It looks small and fake and this one looks real with thousands of soldiers on the beach. But with the silly acting no scene feels that interesting. You kinda feel like the director just wants to show some small events happening without making it interesting. Which is a shame as I have seen movies from the 40's with much better acting.

The actors are also too old. The combat unit is like 40 years old on average. Usually this happens when you can't find great young actors. But since these actors were terrible here this just makes no sense. Of course the 2 younger guys here are horrible too anyhow. Basically unless you are interested in Dunkirk as an event I think the bad acting will be too much unfortunately. Even though the movie has a lot of good sets and proper boats and ships. It's a fine watch, but it feels like it should have been 30 min shorter or told us more. There are for example a long time where we are just on the beach and the same type of bombings happen again and again. It's just dull too much of the time.

We shall fight them on the beaches

[comps-784-38265 · 8/10 · 12 July 2017]

I've just watched the Christopher Nolan 2017 'Dunkirk' and that offering is mediocre at best, you feel very little for the characters, nor are you told much back story.

Mr Nolan's version is not a patch on this 1958 classic where you really get a feel for the scale and depth of the military disaster and miracle evacuation

Many war films made shortly after the war, have a gritty depth & realism.

Many of the actors had been participants, they could march, salute, handle the weapons and wear a beret correctly. Because many had done it for real.

Also a lot of original aircraft/ships/vehicles were still available to use. So in many respects the old war films have an authenticity difficult to match today. (As illustrated by the 2017 mediocre film 'Dunkirk')

This follows corporal 'cor blimey' john Mills as he and his small section are separated from their unit. Their attempts to try and rejoin their unit through the chaos of the retreat to Dunkirk.

It also follows the civilians helping in the 'little ships' and the operation to save the British/French armies stranded at Dunkirk.

It is an epic tale and over the years I have watched it several times. A Sunday afternoon classic epic tale of heroism in a total disaster that nearly meant annihilation. Without the evacuation by 'the little ships' it surely would have meant Hitler conquering all of Europe

8/10

A Movie About the Miracle

[zardoz-13 · 5/10 · 31 July 2017]

Traditional armchair generals should know Christopher Nolan's World War II epic "Dunkirk" has little to do with the battle of Dunkirk. You won't see German Panzer Corps careening through Belgium and plowing into France. In fact, the only Germans in "Dunkirk" are either flying aircraft (so cannot see them) or show up as infantry from unknown units. Instead, "Dunkirk" confines itself strictly to the evacuation of the British Expeditionary Forces (B.E.F.) in three segments: one on land covering one week, one on sea covering one day, and one in the air covering one hour. Of course, much, much more occurred at Dunkirk than just the wholesale evacuation. Presumably, the "Dark Knight" filmmaker didn't want to overwhelm himself with an ambitious battle extravaganza. "Dunkirk" was produced for $100-million, and likely millions went to publicity. So, if you're looking for something like "The Longest Day" (1962), "Battle of the Bulge" (1965), "Anzio" (1968), "A Bridge Too Far" (1977), "Saving Private Ryan" (1998), and "Hacksaw Ridge" (2016), prepare to be disappointed. "Dunkirk" doesn't recreate historic battlefield combat, not even the infamous Wormhoudt Massacre. Adolf Hitler's Waffen-SS soldiers slaughtered as many as 80 British soldiers along with some French POWs. The cold-hearted SS crowded these prisoners into a stable, tossed in stick-grenades, and then finished them off with bursts of machine gun fire. Something like this might have given "Dunkirk" greater dramatic gravity. Instead, we see neither German tanks nor troops storming through France and Belgium. This 107-minute movie boils down to a series of survival episodes that occurred at Dunkirk. Notably, the RAF preferred to confine their resources largely to the island in preparation for the inevitable Battle of Britain, later made into the exemplary film "Battle of Britain" (1969). Along with the RAF, the courageous Royal Navy and the Small Boat Owners emerge as the heroes who rescued the BEF waiting anxiously on the beach.

"Dunkirk" opens with several British infantrymen sauntering down a road inside the Dunkirk city limits as the Luftwaffe showers them with propaganda leaflets. No sooner have they had a moment to glance at these surrender summons than gunfire erupts from an unknown source. As they scramble for cover, unseen shooters kill all them except Tommy (newcomer Fiona Whitehead), who crosses a street and comes under fire then from French troops. They wave him toward their lines, and later he wanders onto the beaches. As far as he can see, queues of troops are standing on the beach awaiting transport. "Spectre" lenser Hoyte Van Hoytema's atmospheric cinematography shows these soldiers in their brown uniforms standing like ducks in neat, orderly rows on white beaches. These scenes resemble something out of "Lawrence of Arabia" in all their sprawling immensity. Van Hoytema's cinematography adds to the spectacle of the event. Not long afterward, as Tommy tours the beach, screaming Stuka dive-bombers plunge from the skies, seeding the beaches with bombs. The worst death in "Dunkirk" occurs when one of these bombs blast a British soldier to smithereens as he shoots vainly at a Stuka. Tommy meets another soldier under mysterious circumstances on the beach. Might he be a German saboteur? Without challenging him about his strange behavior, Tommy pitches in to help him. They become fast friends who desperately break the rules and the lines so they can get aboard a transport. Cheekily, they seize a stretcher case awaiting transport and dash to an embarkation station. They reach the ship at the last minute, but they are sent packing because they weren't Red Cross personnel. Nolan has these two heading off to find passage elsewhere by any means whatever. Their exploits turn into shenanigans as they deal with one setback after another, even after they stow aboard a ship.

Although the RAF lost fewer planes than the Luftwaffe: 145 to 156, "Dunkirk" shows no more than six Spitfire fighters cruising the English Channel in search of prey. Again, budgetary concerns may explain the aircraft shortages. Also, Nolan doesn't go for too much CGI, so he resorted to cardboard cutouts of troops on the beach. Nevertheless, we get one hour's worth of the RAF giving the Luftwaffe utter Hell. Predictably, one pilot perishes in a crash, another ditches in the sea, but the third is far more fortunate. RAF pilot Farrier (Tom Hardy of "Mad Max: Fury Road") riddles repeatedly the Luftwaffe in "Dunkirk's" most exciting scenes. Christopher Nolan does a decent job of staging several tense scenes of soldiers confronting catastrophe. Unfortunately, apart from Tom Hardy's RAF pilot, Kenneth Blangah's Naval officer (rarely endangered), Mark Rylance as an intrepid civilian sailor, and Cillian Murphy as a shell-shocked soldier, celebrity movie stars of prominence are far and few between in this epic. Indeed, most of the actors are unknown, except perhaps for "One-Direction" singer Harry Styles. Suspense works best when a character is conspicuous enough either as an actor or as a character for us to care about. Everybody is virtually a nobody in "Dunkirk." Meantime, evoking sympathy for soldiers so desperate that they take refuge in a beached ship and become targets seems like the province of a horror chiller. Quoting the cliché, they die like fish in a barrel during target practice. Indeed, two of the soldiers trapped in the boat are the same duo who have tried to bluff their way board a Red Cross ship. Oscar winning actor Mark Rylance has one of the better roles as a small boat owner who has already lost a son in the RAF. The episode with the shell-shocked soldier involving the inconsequential treatment of a civilian teen is the least savory scene. Nevertheless, Rylance's character is never in jeopardy. Often wearing an aviator's oxygen mask, Tom Hardy looks like the villainous Bane from Nolan's "The Dark Knight Rises," but he comes closest to being a blood and guts hero. Ultimately, despite its heartfelt tribute to British resiliency in the face of annihilation, "Dunkirk" qualifies as a fair war movie.

A quietly brilliant film

[Sjhm · 9/10 · 2 April 2011]

Simple, direct and lacking in the sugary schmaltz that characterised Mrs Miniver. The real film footage cut into the story works to brilliant effect.

The BEF might have been composed of regulars and early volunteers, but they were not equipped to deal with a vastly superior force that had honed their battle tactics in the Spanish Civil War three years before. The film perfectly captures the dawning realisation of their hopeless position without excessive drama.

It is a shame that more was not made of the actual evacuation, but as a tribute to the "little ships" and the effort to save the combined British and French forces, this is an impressive entry. The top brass in London was certain of only being able to save maybe fifty thousand; they lifted three hundred and thirty thousand men off those beaches.

Bernard Lee's dialogue with John Mills on where it all went so very wrong is one of the best pieces in the film.