MFOHome About Commentary Discussions Funds The Best Resources Support Us!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Categories

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Another couple of films: "Dunkirk" (2017) and "Dunkirk" (1958)

CrashCrash
edited March 2018 in Off-Topic
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5013056/?ref_=nv_sr_1
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051565/?ref_=nv_sr_3
And here's one I've not seen and did not know existed:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0400391/?ref_=nv_sr_4

The disaster at Dunkirk turned out to be a back-handed miracle, as we all know. Over 300,000 Brits were rescued and evacuated and returned home, to fight another day. (Punctuation is going out of style, but the comma between "home" and "to" seems rather essential, eh? ;)) From my study of history and memories from old newsreels, I learned that the French 1st Army which stayed behind, protecting the perimeter around that beach town, fought bravely so that the British could get away. They were soon forced to surrender, of course.

The Germans' decision to halt their own advance and to do maintenance on their tanks and re-supply themselves is what made the massive escape from the beaches possible at all.

The contemporary visual capabilities not available in years past makes the 2017 film feel like a whole different animal to me, compared to the 1958 film. I can't choose a favorite between them. Kenneth Branagh's role seems little more to me than a cameo. I remember him portraying Ernest Shackleton (2002.) He was magnificent in that one, and also as Benedick, opposite Emma Thompson's Beatrice, in "Much Ado About Nothing." (1993.) That was done while the two of them were still married--- to each other.

I noticed in the newest "Dunkirk" that the focus is on particular individuals in their own situations. There is no attempt, nothing more than a "tip of the hat," to giving any attention to the Big Picture. Maybe that's to be expected: people are stupider today than in days gone by, and we musn't dare to tell them anything which might EDUCATE them. (A-hem!) On the other hand, the 1958 movie did indeed spend considerable time with the civilians still in England, gearing up for their Grand Departure--- their "Mission from God" (apologies to the Blues Brothers.)

Dunkirk is, by the way, in FRANCE. I was mistaken, thinking it was in Belgium. But Bruges is in Belgium. Anyone else watch that dark comedy, "In Bruges?"

Comments

  • TedTed
    @Crash: Nice piece of work on Dunkirk ! I'm going to suggest to David that you become MFO's official movie reviewer.
    Regards,
    Ted:)
  • CrashCrash
    Aw, shucks, @Ted.:)
  • rforno

    Nolan's 'Dunkirk' was great. The lack of music, special effects, and more really put you into the middle of the action ... coupled with the relatively small amount of dialogue made the overall film feel rather surreal and gut-punchy. Excellent production value.
  • CrashCrash
    Yes, actually! I think you are spot-on in that regard.
Sign In or Register to comment.