History Buffs: Dunkirk
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- Get ready to dive into the epic war drama "Dunkirk" by Christopher Nolan! This gripping film takes us back to the intense events of World War II. Brace yourself for a thrilling ride as we witness the incredible courage and determination of soldiers and ordinary people during the daring evacuation from Dunkirk.
HISTORY BUFFS MERCHANDISE
history-buffs-s...
SUPPORT HISTORY BUFFS ON PATREON
/ historybuffs
● Follow us on Facebook: / historybuffslondon
● Follow us on Twitter: / historybuffs_
I had the pleasure of playing as an extra in this film (British soldier #6) and I must say that everyone was very focused on making this film special. We redid some scenes 40 times and every little inch of the ships and costumes had to be perfect. And yes, they really crashed one of the Heinkel model bombers irl to make it as realistic as possible. Took them the whole weekend to salvage the wreck from the water. Glad you liked it and proud to have contributed even a tiny bit to it.
I loved the movie. Well done for being a part of it!
man that must have been some experience, loved the movie
alteanprince
Congrats dude! Don't listen to the haters, the movie was awesome
That's hella cool my dude :)
Mr. Smile ?
I really appreciated the casting in this movie. Choosing 18-26 year olds is way more realistic than 35-40 year olds like every other war movie
Perhaps countetintuitively , had they cast a few 35-40 yr olds it would have been more accurate. The average age of the professional British army at the time was higher than in later war years. This was brought home to me when visiting Commonwealth War Graves around the world . The number of graves of men in their late 20s to 30s was surprising .
Saving Private Ryan.
@@abaddon4823 That Ranger unit had been fighting for years together.
But what cost, having so few extras.
“In peace sons bury their fathers, in war fathers bury their sons.”
- "The tide's turning now."
- "How can you tell?"
- "The bodies are coming back."
The most chilling dialogue in the movie. I have nothing to say to that...
That's fucked.
but... you just did.
What makes it even more chilling is that a corporal in the engineers said it to a Colonel.
iN Armenia in 1919 the amount of bodies clogged and diverted the river they were thrown into by several miles.
In Russia and Korea bodies were regularly used as sandbags.
@Wesly Stanton They held on and fought so that racist xenophobic views like yours would be relegated to TH-cam comment sections and largely ignored.
That speech of Churchill is making me want to defend britain from the Germans...
Im German
his voice makes him sound like god
Amazing speech every time I hear it I jump on warthunder and fly Spitfires and hurricanes
@@robbie1155 i usually play the bf-109's but I also loved the hurricane
109s are good but the spitfire is graceful
Well there was a lot of Germans who fled the nazis and joined Britain
"I don't know if ther'll be another (big budget war movie with a heavy focus on practical effects) anytime soon"; I'm glad that's being proven wrong with 1917
1917 was easily better than Dunkirk. MILES ahead
Agreed - it's good to see some good films that return to practical effects. Though I must say, while I did enjoy, I found that I much prefer Dunkirk to 1917.
@@sgtrpcommand3778 I agree, for all the inaccuracies I thought Dunkirk was a much better movie. Had high expectations for 1917, but it felt too try-hard to me.
Yes, 1917 was awesome.
Titus Pullo mate are you high? That whole film was so accurate to the period.
I felt a strong connection with this film. My grandfather was at Dunkirk. He refused to abandon his motorbike (he was a dispatcher) so he went and hid on a French farm, eating nothing but raw turnips for a week before stealing a boat to get home, then rejoined the 8th army in Africa. Two things happened after this. One, he sold the bike ten years later to buy my grandmother a wedding ring. Two, he never are turnip again!
@@auz6880 What is wrong with you you fucking troglodyte? Go play Minecraft or something, if that doesn't work go interact with your friends until you realize you don't have any.
@@auz6880 no one asked u to ask
give him radishes
How did he manage to get the motorbike back to England, and how did he manage to sell Government property?
@@enscroggs When he joined in 1940, he brought the bike with him to the army, so it was his to begin with. The bike was the reason he joined the Dispatch Corp.
Honestly, I never questioned how he got it into the boat and home. Sadly, my grandfather passed away years ago so I can no longer ask him.
That church hill speech with the Dunkirk music and the images from Dunkirk and stock footage and even Band of Brothers... That got me.
Jerky .Murky I’m an American and it got me choked up. We here in the states love the Brits, we have their backs
StephySon You certainly had are backs during the war for which we are very thankful.
A Bett and we still do despite what trump says
Except Churchill was referring to "our Empire" when he was speaking of the "New World" aka Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India....
church hill
24:04 I simply have to explain the story behind that old guy
That old man is based off a real-life person. His name was Charles Herbert Lightoller, who sailed his private yacht to the shores of Dunkirk with his son and rescued 127 Allied soldiers
But he has a bigger claim to fame in the history books; he was the highest-ranking crewmember to survive the sinking of the RMS Titanic
Born 1874 in Lancashire, Lightoller's mother died when he was a baby and his father left when he was 10, leaving him in the care of grandparents. However by aged 13 and nearing the end of school, he decided that he didn't want to end up in a miserable factory job. So he signed up for a 4-year seafaring apprenticeship. On his 2nd ever voyage when sailing as a cabin boy on a small barque named the SS Holt Hill, the ship was damaged in a South Atlantic storm and had to stop in Rio de Janeiro for repairs. But because Brazil was doing a revolution and smallpox epidemic, the repairs were botched. When the ship went out to sea again, it was wrecked on a small uninhabited island. Luckily for Lightoller, a passing Australian ship saved them, and he signed up on another voyage to get home
On his 3rd ever voyage the small ship he worked on was nearly sunk in a storm on the way to India. On another voyage shortly after, he saved a ship from burning and was promoted to 2nd mate as a reward
In 1895 aged 21 he began work on steamships, working on mail ships along West Africa, during which he was nearly killed by malaria. In 1898 he decided "hey Im gonna look for gold" and headed to Yukon, Canada for the Klondike Gold Rush. Finding no gold and totally broke, he walked across Canada by following train tracks, and earned his voyage home to England in 1899 by handling cattle onboard a cargo ship. After a short recuperation, he started working for the White Star Line. He was 24 at this point, so maybe finish that book you were gonna write
In his first year of service onboard the SS Medic in Sydney, he and some friends broke into the old Fort Denison outside Sydney Harbour, raised a Boer flag and fired some cannons. The resulting panic sent Sydney into lockdown thinking they were being invaded by the Boers. If you think thats hilarious, its even more so when you find out that he faced essentially no punishment for narrowly averting a major diplomatic crisis
In 1903 while working aboard the SS Suevic, he met a woman named Sylvia Wilson. They married at the end of the voyage, and stayed together for the rest of their lives, having 5 children together
After working his way up to bigger ships and higher ranks, eventually he was made the 2nd Officer of the brand new RMS Titanic. His actions during the sinking have been roundly criticized as he left many lifeboats criminally underfilled and flat-out refused to let men evacuate (yet Im not too scathing of him, he was a man of a different time who hadnt been trained properly in evacuating such a large ship). When the Titanic sank under his feet, he entered a moment of dumbfound and started swimming forward. Just as he realized his mistake, he was sucked under and pinned against a metal grating. But miraculously, a burst of hot air pushed him back to the surface. He clambered onto an upturned lifeboat, and taught the 30-so men aboard how to keep it balanced in the rough waves. When the rescue ship RMS Carpathia arrived in the morning, he was the last survivor of the Titanic to be pulled from the sea. He later attributed his survival as "with God, anything is possible"
He was a key witness in the inquiry into the sinking and later wrote that the White Star Line had secretly known that a major disaster had been possible for decades. He took an important part in the swell of regulation changes following the disaster
After another short bout with the White Star Line, Europe decided to do a World War 1 and Lightoller volunteered for the Royal Navy. He served on one of his past ships, RMS Oceanic, when it was converted to an armed merchant cruiser in the very brief period the Royal Navy thought it was clever to slap any random guns on an ocean liner and call it a warship. However on its first voyage the ship ran aground and was lost, making it Lightoller's 3rd shipwreck. And again, he was the last survivor to be evacuated
By the turn of 1915 he served aboard HMS Campania, one of the first aircraft carriers. Later in the year he was given command of a patrol boat, and battled a Zeppelin which he damaged and forced to withdraw. He was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross for saving London from another bombing raid
For that act he was given command of the destroyer HMS Falcon. He kept the ship's guns loaded at all times and encouraged his men to think for themselves in times of danger. In April 1918 Falcon was accidentally rammed and sunk by a trawler, but he was acquitted of blame and was one of the last men to leave (3 men were trapped and had to be rescued later)
Then he was given command of the destroyer HMS Garry, where one of the darker episodes of his life played out. Garry sank the German submarine UB-110 and their survivors, under Lightoller's order, were gunned down in the water, but some survived. The British-led trial found him not guilty but he knew he did it, openly admitting that he "never thought much about the hands-up in air business"
(Are you still reading? We're not at WW2 yet lol)
After WW1 he left White Star Line after realizing that being a Titanic survivor was a black mark on his career. He took land-based jobs, becoming a real estate speculator, an inkeeper and chicken farmer. In 1935 he wrote his biography "Titanic And Other Ships" and dedicated it to "my persistent wife, who made me do it". He used the royalties from the book to buy a private yacht in London, naming it the Sundower
In the run-up to WW2, Charles and Sylvia took the Sundower on some coastal journeys across Germany. They posed as an innocent old couple on a pleasure cruise, when actually they were on a secret mission from the Admiralty taking photos of German coastal defences. One time he was nearly caught, but pretended to be drunk when a German patrol craft asked what he was doing. All 5 of his kids served in WW2, and he lost 2 of them in the war
When the disaster at Dunkirk unfolded, the Admiralty gave Charles a call telling him they needed to requisition the Sundower. Lightoller refused, and instead sailed the tiny boat there himself, where he and his son saved 127 Allied soldiers and dodged a bomb from a Ju87 Stuka. Lightoller also had no idea that his own son Trevor was one of the soldiers who had been evacuated earlier. The emotional power of a Titanic survivor again rescuing young men from the water nearly 30 years later to me is absolutely staggering
He spent the rest of the war commanding small patrol ships during the 1940-1 Invasion Scare, and overseeing small supply runs
After WW2 he operated a small boatyard in London. He remained enthusiastically in contact with Titanic historians with the rest of his life, offering an albeit very self-inflated telling of the sinking
A lifelong smoker, he died peacefully during the Great London Smog in 1952 aged 78
I’m almost more impressed by you for writing all this than I am by Charles 😂
bruh
Well that was the most fascinating story I have read from WW2 so far. I realize now there is still so much I can do in my 20s.
He's the main character
True hero and absolute legend
I love how the British formed queues while evacuating Dunkirk when death was very probable for them. This is one of the most British thing i ever saw
Obama Prism I mean, I feel like soldiers of any nation would do the same. Chaos and disorder would severely hinder any evacuation efforts.
Weren’t they divided into their ranks not just queueing up
Master Chief Petty Officer no, i think that chaos would happen if Americans would be there...
Bochi Jaramillo as an American, I can confirm this. There would also definitely be some bro’s tryna shoot the planes down with their rifle. Yeah, we’re smert.
Lie Lie iTs BiG brAiN TiMe
YES!!! Just got Greggs, sitting at my desk browsing for something to watch, BOOM NEW EPISODE! Best lunch ever!
Same
Did you get the flippin Steak and Cheese roll? They are God.
:O That's sounds amazing! I got 2 sausage rolls, a banoffee donut and a fucking Mocha because it's raining outside for once and not hotter than the arsehole of a dying star. I need to invest in Steak & Cheese rolls next time, good shout!
It’s like that!!
Mate I'm addicted! I'll have to run down the road now!
Can you do a history buff episode on Der Üntergang/ Downfall
Troll Man God yes
Maybe my favourite history/drama movie
Baron of Bahlingen *Insert Ranting Hitler Meme*
Oh yes!
Troll Man Too many nazis and wehrbs
Honestly, when I watched the movie, I wasn't aware of the amount of troops at Dunkirk. The lack of the amount of troops on the silver screen, however, conveyed to me a sense of loneliness and helplessness that I'm sure the troops felt; do I run and eventually face an onslaught of infantry and armored units, or do I stay on a wide open beachhead and get strafed/bombed. That must have been terrifying for troops to be in open territory, waiting for an undetermined period. God bless all those who came to their rescue.
The beach was bombed every 20 minutes by waves of 150+ bombers from sun up to sun down, the port and town of Dunkirk was completely on fire with only the town hall still standing, no pies cooling on a window ledge, 1/3 of the men on the beach were French, no one was pretending to be British. Over 5,000 ships were fighting a battle with German submarines and aircraft in full sight of the beach. There was a dedicated anti aircraft defence of the beach and lots of tanks and equipment on the beach along with almost 300,000 men.
This film is a disgrace, one of the worst war films about actual events ever made.
@@peterdemkiw3280 Lol😂 this is entertainment movie not a documentary movie. The purpose is to make viewers enjoy it, historical accurate is not the main point.
A lot people enjoy it, that's what make a movie great.
It feels like some sort of metaphor with the lack of troops which honestly looks like only a few thousand.
@@peterdemkiw3280 While I agree with your points, I don't agree with your overall assessment. To say it's one of the "worst war films about actual events ever made" is obviously ridiculous and hyperbolic.
@@peterdemkiw3280 "This film is a disgrace, one of the worst war films about actual events ever made."
You don't watch a lot of movies if you think that with any shred of honesty. To present all these facts about the event and then use such egregious hyperbole is dishonest of you and demolishes the point you were trying to make.
just took a break from writing and cracked a beer.. and thought is there something good on my subs... And JACKPOT!!
Fun historical fact. The guy in Dunkirk, played by Mark Rylance, who piloted his own yacht (Mr Dawson) is based on Charles Lightholler who did pilot his yacht with his two sons during the evacuation. Lightholler is perhaps most famous for being the senior surviving officer on the Titanic
One son and a family friend who was a sea scout (Google the Sea Scout's name and he has a hour long interview about it and later being a Nay Lt) , the year before Lightholler had sailed on the coast of France and Dunkirk and made sectret maps and charts for the navy
>French Retreat jokes
>Forgets Dunkirk was a thing and the French army bravely allowed the Brits to retreat
@alfyn what else were they supposed to do?
And they then proceed to get taken over by Germany
@alfyn If they fought they all would have been captured or killed, leaving the British without an army, think about it, if you had a knife and were fighting 50 muscular men with fully automatic weapons that surrounded you in a semicircle and you had a small window of escape, you wouldn't fight, you would run, there's a massive difference between bravery and stupidity my freind.
@alfyn retreat is a part of tactics.
@alfyn but not surrendering which is what the jokes are usually about
Damn, Churchill’s speech turned my taco into fish and chips.
LMAO
🤣🤣🤣🤣
That must of been a welcome surprise
That sounds exactly like what my wife said after I slammed a fat rail of pre-workout and took her to pound town. Minus the Churchill part.
Please do a review of the movie "The Downfall". Most, if not all, fans who have seen it would be very much delighted, including me.
I'd also like to see him review The Bunker starring Anthony Hopkins.
Agreed on Downfall. Such an amazing film very well acted but ruined by Memes.
In nearly all historical films we end up joking about hitler etc, making him into some kind of boogie man, but the reality was he was a person with feelings and opinions, and THAT is what made his actions far more scary and disgusting. The Hitler rant meme took a film that was dark and distraught and made it into a benny hill sketch.
YES!!!!
Spot on mate.
Great movie, and would make a good review.
At last some justice to the French fighters that hold the line during Operation Dynamo, their bravery was unquestionable.
And the thousands ones who after being evacuated get back to France for fight..
goprev I don’t question the courage of the French soldiers. It was the stupidity of the French generals that was the main problem. The top French General established his hq in a building with no telephone or telegraph connections, and relied entirely on aids to handle messages back and forth. Every decision thus made was far too late to be effective, as the Germans had already overrun critical areas. That’s just one example. Without such basic communications (vital in an era of mobilized units and aircraft), he was effectively blind and deaf.
Are you saying that the French weren't cowards and white-flag raising heathens like Facebook, TH-cam and Reddit comment sections were saying?
When I was at school there was a joke about the worlds smallest book - French WW2 heroes. But during the battle of Waterloo everything hung on the British holding a small farmhouse, it was touch and go, and if the French had taken that farmhouse - we would be speaking French now.
@@higgins382 Jokes are fine, the problem is when people construct their entire notion of historical reality out of them. Which in this case is not only false but quite disrespectful to french soldiers that died defending their country. I personally have a problem with the idea of disrespecting the dead who sacrificed their lives for something bigger than themselves, especially when that reason is noble on itself.
I enjoyed hearing the whole of Churchill's speech, but damn. He sounded like he was completely hammered.
The speech you are hearing isn't the original. It is spoken by Churchill but was after the war as there was no recording of the original given in parliament. Further more Churchill was known to have a speech impediment. Churchill was a heavy drinker however his colleagues say that he could hold his liquor very well and had never seen him drunk.
@@maxedgerton2374 Maybe he was always drunk and they never saw him sober, so they just assumed he was never drunk. That would explain his speech impediment.
He coined the term 'The Black Dog' when referring to depression and smoked and drank heavily to deal with it.
Speech impediment very likely
Churchill spent a great deal of his life considerably sloshed.
24:53 "I didn't think there would be another big budget war movie with a heavy focus on practical effects, but fortunately, I seem to have been proven wrong. I don't know if there will be another one anytime soon, but I hope so".
1917: Hold my beer...
shame 1917 wasn't a very good ww1 movie
@@First_Sea_Lord_Ford What makes you say that? I'm sure there are elements of historical inaccuracy in it (I'd like to see a History Buffs review of 1917 one day) but the cinematography was fantastic. You would have to have quite unreasonable standards to dislike the film in my view.
@@olivermoore7020 the cinematography was outstanding no doubt.
The film itself was over hyped in my opinion which was its most damning element.
but the story itself is ridiculous. An entire BATTALION of men are going to charge into a trap- over 1000 men. and they send 2 enlisted men. I am well aware of the concept of runners but there is no reason why they wouldn't send at least a junior officer along to give credibility- they even experience that problem of being held back by their rank and having to explain it.
then they had this climatic crossing no mans land scene just to then meet a allied convoy on the other side.... couldn't they of sent a runner from the convoy- or walked a few metres down the line to cross without danger.
then there was the old trope of running from a crashing plane in a straight line where the plane is going, instead of stepping to the side- this was immediately overshadowed by the appalling portrayal of airmen in WW1. they saved the mans life and he then tries to kill the,. - the pilots were known as the knights of the air for their sense of honour, which brings me to my next point.
The Germans are portrayed as completely incompetant- drunk etc. or they are portrayed as nazis, raping and murdering, no normal soldiers.
even in a WW2 film I don't like the dehumanization of the enemy but at least I can understand it better compared to a WW1 film.
I am sure theres more but I don't want to bore you with a wall of text but if i can summarize.
I anticipated a great WW1 film, I got a mediocre war film with little to do with ww1
@@First_Sea_Lord_Ford Okay, I see what you mean. I guess theres always an issue with hyping up your expectations of a film.
I know the premise of the film (I.e. sending just two lance corporals to deliver an important message) is somewhat preposterous. But I'd say it's at least a more realistic premise than Saving Private Ryan.
I was really disappointed with 1917, it was very basic, slow moving and almost boring. And since it didn't cover nearly the scope that Dunkirk did it was much easier for it to use a lot of practical effects although it also use CGI at some points.
The movie “Glory” would be a great movie for you to do.
I second this
I agree as well
Such a great movie
Fury also
Yes pls do Glory,Spartacus,Valkyrie..
I don't understand the complaints that there was too much / not enough minority representation. We see a few colonial troops, but they make up a very small portion of the overall troops. Exactly how they actually were historically
Dylan S You’re clearly unfamiliar with the twenty four seven whine fest that everyone calls Twitter
"The trio of timelines can be jarring as you figure out how they all fit, and the fact that there are only a couple of women and no lead actors of color may rub some the wrong way."
This one sentence is literally the only negative statement about the film in the entire review that got so much attention. It's as benign as saying "the violence may rub some the wrong way", or "casting Harry Styles may rub some the wrong way." The fact that this was ever construed as a criticism of the film is the real offense.
@@upaya30 I found it quite disappointing and unnecessary to point out as well.
And his comment that if we have Indians soldiers in a movie then put them somewhere where they mattered(more) is also quite hurtful, it doesn't matter if they are a minority but for reasons of historical accuracy especially in a movie and at modern times not showing is the same as not acknowledging they have ever contributed(whitewashing).
Now its's all fair if this was an artistic/conscious decision by Nolan to focus on white male characters during Dunkirk, it's his work he can do what he wants,
but then I still think its fair to point out the absence of people of colour or women in a movies which advertises itself to be Historically accurate.
It just takes away accuracy and fullness to a movie that is still great, at least to me.
@@INeyxI by that point, is hurtful that Dunkirk doesn't cover the personal story of each one of the 300 thousand troops evacuated. Is not "whitewashing" when is historically accurate, specially when we are talking about 100 in hundreds of thousends.
It is the modern zeitgeist, unfortunately.
Fun fact
Charles Lightoller who was an Officer aboard the RMS Titanic
Was actually saving people from Dunkirk with his own ship. Called the Sundowner.
He was a pure badass in doing so.
He dodged aircraft attacks.
quote:"We attracted the attention of a Stuka dive bomber. Commander Lightoller stood up in the bow and I stood alongside the wheelhouse. Commander Lightoller kept his eye on the Stuka till the last second - then he sang out to me "Hard a port!"
His Boat could only carry 21 personel,he did it with a 127 servicemen.
He was a real hero.
Thought you guys would love that info.
Mr Dawson in the movie is inspired by Charles Lightoller.
That’s amazing
I guess you could say he was FUCKING INVINCIBLE
I think his name is Mr. Dawson in reference to Jack Dawson from the Titanic movie
@@ItsDatGuy969 please no
“There’s 400,000 men on this beach”
…“Um. Where?”
That got a genuine LOL out of me. I never really noticed that. Yeah, that’s not 400,000 guys.
That was biggest immersion breaker for me….the beach looked as clean as a hospital floor. Even a hospital looks dirtier than that clean AF beach.
@@ewjiml You do realize the beach is bigger than what they showed, right?
@@spencerwattamaniuk950 That’s irrelevant . The beach, at least the part that was used in the movie scenes, had no debris, no explosions, no heavy gun emplacements, no vehicles. Completely sterile. Not at all how the evacuation went.
Pretty disappointing to think you're getting the Christopher Nolan Hollywood version of Dunkirk and then we get the limited TV series budget instead.
Plus, all the actors cleanly shaven, fresh haircuts, clean uniforms.
FYI some of the ships in the film WERE GENIUNE dunkirk little ships
they’re tiny!
One of those little boats saved my great grandfather. I get teary every time is listen to Churchill speak.
We shall never surrender
THE MAN indeed, not like these pussies today!
Iron Trooper homosexual
@@SGT1Barns what the heck is wrong with you? you disrespectful shell of a human.
@@samsykes308 i still don't want that rat disrespecting my grandparents and great grandparents. and the grandparents and great grandparents of others.
That Churchill speech gives me shivers every time. & I don't even like Churchill very much. Great video
2020 quote: "haven't met him personally"
Bruh how do you not like him
How do you not like him?
Gallipoli
Kieran Quirke welcome to the 1940’s lad
One of the civilian ships was captaind by Charles Lightoller who was second officer on the RMS Titanic and was an officer of the HMS Gary during ww1. I kinda find that awesome that a man who had been through such things and still went on to go save some soldiers at Dunkirk amazing.
victoria dk
Gee I wonder... that’s this movie. The old man, Mr Dawson is Charles Lightoller.
@Mike'e Stark He saved between 70 and 120 men even though his boat was not made for that many. It was made for 21 people and the ship Sundowner is now preserved.
@@maticstudios More inspired i think if it was actually him they would have used his name and his actual ship if possible.
wolfmendroiteka
It was a subtle nod to him. Everything that happens to Mr Dawson happened to Lightoller. Titanic: Honor and Glory stated so in a livestream.
@Mike'e Stark Because the Titanic designers not putting enough lifeboats on it for everyone is his fault. /s
Who else wants to see a Bridge Too Far covered?
Salokin
Yes this please
Me
I loved that film to bits! I'd watch it over and over and I've got the theme stuck in my head cause of it.
"We haven't the proper facilities to take you all prisoners, sorry!"
My Grandfather was a veteran of Operation Market Garden. He disliked that movie but I never found out why.
That's it mate, the word I used is that the film looked too 'clean'. In that it is too orderly and sparsely occupied. The accounts I have read, the pictures I have seen and the people I have heard talk about the evacuation of Dunkirk give the impression of chaos, confusion and crowding.
The Dunkirk scene in Atonement is excellent in showing the chaos.
@@Hippidippimahm Thanks for that, I'll take a look.
I very much wish that you would do regular 30-min to 1 hour videos on any historical topic, maybe even a series of videos relating to one topic, followed by another, etc. You have the rare gift of making history interesting to just about anyone, not just history buffs. You're a master at breaking down historical accuracies/inaccuracies of films, but I'd predict you'd be a hit as a TH-cam history prof.
Ships might usually take a longer time to sink but there have been enormous ships, like Lusitania and Empress of Ireland, that sank in only 15-20 minutes.
there are accounts of ships sinking in minutes, and some taking a lot longer, it depends on why they were sinking.
@Brady French That's right. But there were no weapons on the Athenia, sunk for no legitimate reason on 3 Sep 1939.
The bigger they are the harder they fall
Well, the Titanic for example took 2 hours to sink, and it was huge...
@@1stofficerwilliammurdoch515 it depends on the damage. The titanic had a relatively small crack. If a ship is hit by a torpedo the damage will be greater.
“Ship's don't sink that quickly“
Don't tell that to the hood😂
Destroyer hit by torpedo do sink quickly
The 5th salvo fired from the Bismarck hit the mainmast of the Hood which was also combined with a massive magazine explosion soon after. This broke the aft and back, allowing for the ship to sink in 3 minutes.
My point is that the damage of a torpedo is not the same as a critical hit that creates a magazine explosion.
@@Oridux it depends on where it hits in the ship, there could very well be a torpedo that creates such famage, that the ship will sink in that amount of time. Especially if it is a destroyer, not a battleship.
@@wolfbrigade1425 NO, no you are wrong
God bless the French and the Belgians for Dunkirk.
Fighting to the very end
Here, here!!
vive la france
i mean, sure? granted, the badasses who covered the british retreat are long dead, i dont think magical prayers are going to affect them now.. and the ones alive now weren't there?
i mean, i get where youre coming from, its a nice gesture, the really put it all on the line to do what they could for the war effort, and the french surrender bullshit is just ridiculous
but i just think its funny how amazing achievments of mankind are always taken down a notch by attributing them to 'divine intervention', whilst ignoring the glaring inconsistency of the holocaust happening, i mean its philosophy 101, the Problem of Evil, the monotheistic interpretation of an all powerful, all good, all knowing diety just doesnt hold up under any scrutiny or logic. 4.5 billion years of earths existence, millions of years of hominid development to become man, 10,000 years of human civilization, and one religion out of the countless thousands takes precedence haha, its silly.
its no different than saying Odin bless their rifles, or Horus grant them wisdom, Mithras bless their badass defense
Calm down man its just a saying, don't have to go ultra-Atheism mode on a compliment to the Belgian and French Troops who stood and defended the Brits on their way out.
21:39 this speech braught tears to my French eyes, thank you. Let's also remember that one of the main tank in the french army, the B1, was feared by Hitler himself, and before panzer IV came into combat it could wistand almost every shot of any other German tank, some of them where under the order of general de Gaulle himself during the funny War
Panzer IV faced the B1 BIS, they were on the battlefield at the same time. It was just the Panzer IV's with short 75mm canon and they couldn't do shit unless at close range. So until the Pz IV F2 the B1 Bis was unmatched by any German tanks
Sadly tho with the large size the Char B1 bis has, the outgunned Panzerkampfwagen lll had good speed, meaning it could flank and surround the B1
@@Cbrmkn98xs yep, sadly it had this big weak point
My grandfather was a fighter pilot.He was there.He told us stories when we young and it is only today I can appreciate what his contribution was.RIP GRANDPAW.
It is time for Das Boot.
It is time.
oldmoviemusic IT IS DUE TIME!!!!!
@@violentscorl697
Agreed. Hopefully sooner rather than later!
Do it!
that or "The Iron Cross"
Das Boot was a fantastic movie, really lovie that movie
I thought it was really cool seeing the french forces and even colonial forces covering the british retreat, those guys had some balls
You do realise British stayed behind as well to hold the line
51st Highland Division got left behind almost fighting till the end, until finally surrendering.
Yes. That's why thousands of those men "covering the retreat" were covering it from people's cellars, houses, sheds etc...
GlasgowIsBlue Yea but us scots are scots And NOT British
Nope, you literally are British, as are the Welsh and Northern Irish, you are both a Scottish and British as British refers to being a citizen of the United Kingdom, of which Scotland is part
My late grandfather was at Dunkirk. He was Able Seaman John Lee on HMS Speedwell. He survived the war and died in 1982: I proudly display his medals in my home along with a picture of the Speedwell.
Speedwell was a Halcyon class minesweeper of the 6th Minesweeping Flotilla, which, commanded by Lt. Cdr. Maunsell, brought back 1668 men. Display your Grandfather's medals with the honour they deserve!
So interesting to read other comments about you guys having grand/great-fathers in the war. My grandfather was a sailor for the Norwegian supply fleet during the war. He was sunk at least 2 times and survived watching all his friends die. Unfortunately he and other sailors contributions were not recognized until late 2000s. Many went in to deep depression and heavy on the bottle because of this. My mom says he was a quiet but elegant man. I never met him but I hope he is proud of what our country became post-war and that somehow at least he knows that his family are immensely thankful and proud of him and his actions.
Well in my family I've met 2 people who fought in WW2 and they both lived simple quiet lives after the war.
My great grandfather was a soldier in the Greek army. When Italy invaded Greece he was one of the first to fight them, defeated them, returned home on medical leave (due to frostbite) on New Year's Eve, saw my grandma being born the next day, and 10 days later he left again to continue fighting until our surrender to the Germans. He actually experienced almost 10 years of war because from 1945 to 1949 Greece was in civil war. But after all this he lived a peaceful life as a farmer until his late 90s.
And my great grandmother's cousin was an anti aircraft gunner with horrific experiences. I can't even think about how he felt with the things he saw, people being burnt alive by bombs is quite a shocking thing to watch... But afterwards he also lived peacefully and passed away 2 years ago at the age of 102.
As a teenager in Norway, my grandmother hit a German soldier with her umbrella. She is 94 now and still just as cool.
I'm American but want to say I'm proud of your grandfather. Based on what you said, he and his peers contributed to the war effort in the ways they could, which is something to be proud of
Definitely agree about the lack of acknowledgement of the french soldiers left behind to fight
And Belgium
Luxembourg
[Request] HBO'S The Pacific. Great miniseries and would love to learn the accuracy and inaccuracy of the film
Thank you for your review. I could never quite figure out why this movie lack a certain "punch", but I think you framed it perfectly: sparsely populated beaches and pristine French towns. In spite of that, if you add "Darkest Hour" and the "Battle of Britain" into an evening's viewing you get a strong feeling about just how desperate that period of time was for Great Britain.
Nick: speaking of Battle of Britain, any chance you can review it some time?
Had the same problem with the newest “all quiet one the western front” it’s supposed to be a world war and with the exception of like the no man’s land scenes you barely see more than just 40 ppl together in a noticeably empty landscape
You can’t have a world war with 40 ppl lol
@@Allen667sjja the battlefield in the book is not specified and that they are only composed of a battalion
Have you seen 'Their Finest' (2017)-which was released the same year as 'Dunkirk' and 'Darkest Hour'?
The greatest experience of my life was being a extra in Dunkirk I was in several scenes the scariest one of them was where the destroyer gets torpedoed and everyone starts shoving to get out I got shoved down hard by accident and went underwater for a bit until someone grabbed me by my jacket collar and pulled to the top I then had to jump off the railing into the waters bellow and had to stay in the water for a while.
Are you on screen?
Imperial Officer I honestly hope so.
Okay i knew this would come up. (12:10) Fal's spitfire ONLY FIRES 18-20 seconds worth of ammo in the whole movie (yes i counted) people who say he fires way more than that probably counted the same shots from 2 different viewpoints in the movie. Honestly 20 seconds isn't far off from the real thing. WHY DOES NO ONE COUNT FFS? At least he didn't make Cynical historian's claim of 70 seconds, but still.
I got taken out of it more from the "pilot's eye view" shots they had through his HUD. I don't think he lead a single target while firing that entire movie.
Scott McIntyre did you just call a gyro gunsight a HUD?
I like that History Buff said that some said it wasnt accurate with that about the RAF. I would say it wasnt because of the ammo, I would think more on the fuel. I might this mixed up with the BF-109, but I dont think Spitfire had enought fuel to get over the channel and fight before the pilot need to return before running out of fuel. The reason I think I might mix it up is because the BF-109 only had something like 5, 10 or 20 min fuel before the pilot are forced to return home, during the Battle of England. The fighters didnt have big enough fuel tanks to fly over the channel and stay long enough in the air on the other side to be effective then, say, a heavy fighter or a bomber could
No need to lead if everyone is flying straight and level the entire movie!
if this was hollywood it would of been firing for hours fitted with missiles
Been pulling an all nighter. Thanks for the much needed break!
So... goodnight? :*
I thought your review was spot on. I agree with everything you said, except about the time it takes for a ship to sink. Not all ships sink slowly. There are even several WWII accounts of ships sinking in less than a few minutes.
Yay! I’ve been waiting for this review!
Also, I’m glad you brought up both the idiotic reviews on it, especially on the Brexit one. C’mon people, this is a history movie, stop trying to make everything political!
Kinda my thought. This identity politics bullcrap's starting to get out of hand, and yet shows no signs of stopping. :< They can't even stop complaining at things pandering to them, there was this movie in the works about someone transitioning, but due to the internet harpies because the actor planned wasn't trans themselves and getting her fired, so now it's not going to get made. They'll never learn.
Gratuitous Lurking Complains that people care too much about identity politics, goes on tirade complaining about identity politics. Pro tip: don't cast someone who isn't trans, for a character who is written as trans... You wouldn't cast a black person for a character written as white, would you?
I never noticed politics... I guess I wasnt paying enough attention?
RemixedVoice Because a sexual orientation is truly something that is wholly unique and cannot be replicated by someone that isn't of that status, clearly. /s
While I will agree that certain roles may do better with better matching parts (mostly in lineage, trying to run Mel Gibson as a mongol is something we can all agree would go about as well as when John Wayne did it) there is often compromises that must be done so a picture can get DONE. Does Hollywood play the lazy card sometimes? Yes, but you also need a talent pool and star power to make something work as well. It's harder to sell something, especially if it has an agenda behind it, if you can't get those factors, and as far as I'm aware, actors who have made the transition are in short supply and not really available, Thus why thanks to such idiots you probably ain't gonna get it at all because now it's lost it's star power, and any replacements to do so wouldn't get the draw the studio wants, thus, it's probable death. Whine all you want, welcome to the real world and all it's cynical dumbness.
"A history movie" imao
I feel like CGI might get a rough go from you sometimes Nick. I think that CGI and practical effects are two sides of the same coin in that when used poorly they look horrific and serve as poor examples.
Best example is that Mad Max Fury Road looks like a practical effects wet dream yet in addition to using real cars, the film also had a very healthy cgi budget.
What people Nick and other reviewers and even myself need to stray away from is this idea that practical effects are always better and that cgi is shit. We need to start observing movies like Fury Road that masterfully use good cgi and good practical effects to make a visual masterpiece instead of just looking down upon it or seeing it as a crutch for weak filmmaker.
I rate this opinion
Clevertrousers -- I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, Nick, the "it always looks better when the real thing is filmed" doesn't always hold up very well under all conditions, especially when the "real thing" doesn't exist. Sci-fi movies have been under fire for decades due to poor special effects that simply couldn't be done with practical effects. Even the original Star Wars trilogy has some glaring practical effects nightmares like the stop-motion AT-ATs during the Battle of Hoth which are painfully, obviously models. What CGI can do is simulate the absence of gravity that practical effects cannot do -- which results in very unrealistic explosions (most ships just vaporize instantly no matter how big they are. Even the Death Star vaporized into tiny points of light in less than a second when we should have seen huge chunks of the station being blown out into space with a massive debris ring forming around it, etc. etc.
But you're thing is war movies -- and if practical effects can be done, well, in a practical way, I'm all for it. If you only need a handful of planes or a few ships, you might get away with practical effects. Like the He-111s in Dunkirk being a big remote controlled plane was pretty nifty. BUT what if you needed to show hundreds of He-111s during an attack on London? And to me, there's nothing more jarring in a movie than horrible blue screening -- which is often done with aerial cockpit shots. Plus, using models over CGI is a big mistake, IMO, because a model will always look like a model no matter how much you slow the camera down. Only if the model is sufficiently large in scale can it be pulled off -- like the scene in Sum of All Fears when a Russian missiles hit a U.S. aircraft carrier. But if you wanted to re-do a movie about the Battle of Midway, the ONLY effective way to do it is to use CGI to show the large numbers of aircraft, the Japanese carriers being hit and sunk, and planes being shot down. Yes, I know a movie was already made using practical effects, but they either had to substitute old Essex class carriers for the Japanese carriers or use models that looked more like the elaborate set-up in some kid's bathtub.
And I still build scale models as a hobby -- I've done this since childhood. I remember searching hobby stores up and down the East Coast trying to find an A6M Zero that looked like the ones used in Tora! Tora! Tora! and Midway ... and could never find one. For years and years I looked untl I was in my mid-20s (when the internet became widely accessible) when I found out WHY I couldn't find that Japanese Zero. Yeah, it was because they used American T-6 Texans dressed up to look like Zeros. I would rather have CGI model the REAL thing than for a fake thing to be filmed in realty -- if you know what I mean. No more T-6 Zeros, no more Essex class Akagis, no more models where the camera speed has been slowed way down to make the little ships appear to behave like large ships, and explosions that vaporize everuthing whether it's a WWII fighter or a moon-sized space station. Sometimes CGI just does it better depending on the circumstances.
I don't mind cgi too often unless it's cgi of planes they can never get the flight models right and it always looks off especially in fly boys and the red tails
hannable70 I agree with most of your points, especially the one about scale : Although I did not suspect while watching the movie that the He-111 was a model, having hundreds of them would require CGI.
In addition, just as the Zeros in Tora Tora Tora, the 109s in Dunkirk suffer the same problem, i.e. they are Spanish version (I forgot the name) that have a bulky engine and thus their noses are distinctly bigger than the real 109-E of the time. This really took me off the dogfight. This was already the case in the Battle of Britain, a movie which only had practical effects (it's still a reference for that battle nevertheless).
Still, I really enjoyed seeing the Spitfires, the Heinkels, and above all the Stukas. They really convened the terror that they represented to the soldiers and civilian on the ground, also partly because the sound in the cinema I went was EXTREMELY loud.
I agree, although I’ll ad the best CGI is when we don’t notice it at all
i saw that fecking guardian article at the time and it really pissed me off ... the writer of it has a history of pushing agendas ... the guardian does as a whole .... its pathetic really
Well, there were Indian troops at the battle. To not include them is literally historical inaccuracy and something they could have easily avoided. People would probably complain if they were in the movie too.
Yeah, and Polish forces too apparently. But that's okay because to include others would have slowed down the pacing. The focus was on the British forces, who were the most prominent and numerous at Dunkirk. They had the most stories to tell. Even the French only got one prominent character, and he was only given one line. It worked.
All Nolan had to do was to include them in the background of one shot. One shot, of so many on the beach. You can see African soldiers in some of the shots. Why not Indians?
Britain has been very deliberate in it's amnesia of the horrors they visited upon their colonies. 21 million people died in various famines in the first half of the 20th Century in India, all of them caused by extreme callousness on the part of the British government. Yet our troops fought in both world wars, fought well and sacrificed themselves, for a nation that didn't call them their own, that saw them as subhuman, the same way the Germans treated what they saw as inferior races. The British were racist pricks at the time, and broke just as many promises to the Indian people. If the British mainland had fallen, the entire government would've come to India and led the fight from there, and you can only imagine the blatant exploitation of Indians and the country's natural resources that was occurring at the time. The British used India, and now they can't be arsed to include Indian soldiers in their stupid "historically accurate" films.... Yet you get angry at one article in one journalistic organisation that asked one simple question: how can something be historically accurate if they don't show historical accuracy?
"Historical accuracy" is a catch phrase to defend of multitude of representational sins. You hear the same argument why there are no people of color in fantasy epics also: we can have dragons, but no people of color. Here, you have the same political argument: we can use CGI and special effects and cheat when we need to improve the story narrative, but no people of color. In effect, this is saying people of color don't matter and aren't a part of British history. Is that historically accurate?
Robert Wilson I already said this in another comment but what I think the author of the article was trying to say was that if people expected minorities the might be surprised
I seriously love this channel so much. they don't sugar-coat a goddamn thing. we did this right, we did this wrong, this could have been better, etc. I know this is a few years old now, but still, I love it.
My great grandfather was evacuated from Dunkirk. He was a corporal and dispatch rider in the Royal Signals. He cane home on a small fishing boat after having to leave his personal motorcycle and camera. I couldn’t thank the civilians enough for saving him and his friends and allowing him to then serve in the 8th Armoured army in Africa
To be fair, I don't think the three spitfires are meant to imply that only three are sent. I think we just follow them and we see how much effort they put into everything and then we see the thanklessness of the soldiers. So I think it's really meant to imply the opposite. That the airforce did all they could. I'll admit though, I don't recall if it was ever made clear in the movie that these planes were the only ones or whether they're just the only ones we follow, in which case that doesn't mean there weren't other ones.
OneOnOne1162 Almost all the fighters sent were also sent inland! You don’t fight a bomber while it’s over it’s destination, you fight it before!
That is why most soldiers report seeing very few RAF planes. They weren’t over Dunkirk!
Dunkirk was an inside job, it's the only explanation
Also the guy who tells the main character to sod off isn't telling him to do so because he's RAF (he's army), but because it's a queue of the Grenadier Guards, and he isn't a guard, at best he's regular line infantry.
dernwine loved how he said "it's the guards" or something along that line. They see themselves as a cut above the rest of the army. Esprit de Corps 💂♂️
He says "It's Grenadiers mate."
The one thing that bothered me was all the modern building they didn't bother to CGI out.
WhyyoutubeWHY?! The movie did not have a soul. It was an empty action movie. That 5 minute Atonement sequence was way more satisfying than the entire Dunkirk movie.
It probably would have been better if the opening shot was a movie set, the beach at the actual location no CGI for the town and they just CGI the town in the final air scene, CGI works best at a distance.
Personally I wasn't too bothered by the lack of CGI or the fact that Dunkirk isn't in ruins but I do see where it could've improved some scenes.
I hadn't seen that, it's a shame that they didn't cg it out.
How was it empty? There were so many action moments, you don't need bombs exploding everywhere and tanks coming in because like he said at the start, the army were held back. It uses suspense in possibly the best ways a movie like this can, stop being an idiot and
LET PEOPLE ENJOY THINGS
or maybe you can chill and acknowledge that the movie isn't perfect and people can criticize its flaws.
I remember watching the movie Dunkirk and during the early scenes in town and on the beach, thinking that something was off. I just could't put my finger on it. Now I know. It was because the town was in such pristine condition, and the beach was too empty. Thank you for pointing it out!
I love how 'Atonement' portrayed Dunkirk.
Agreed, it really evokes the chaos and melancholy of the situation, in a way that Nolan's film doesn't even get near to.
I love how 'Atonement' portrayed Knightley, but what do I know?
That scene is one of my very favourite film scenes of all time. Incredibly impactful and emotionally powerful.
While this movie had some great effects and a few good scenes, "Atonement", in all of its much-lower-budget-glory, absolutely wipes the floor with "Dunkirk"
so much better imo
Hey, how do you feel about foreign films? Land of Mine is an amazing movie about young german PoW's forced to remove the millions of land mines placed along Denmark beaches. It's a gritty realistic depiction of how the Germans were treated after WW2, even drafted children (many of whom died performing this horrendous task). I'd LOVE to see how well it stacks up to real events in history.
Foreign historical movies are so often underrated.
Here are some more great movies i recommend for anyone who's a fan of history:
"nine lives" (1957)
"City of life and death" (2009)
"Fires on the plain" (1959)
"Ningen no Joken" (1959-1961) [trilogy]
Norwegianboy EE also the finnish film unkown soldier 2017
Oh yes! I watched that movie. It's amazing as well!
I second Land of Mine. Even if there won't be an episode about it, it needs to be watched
When are you going to review Cleopatra? She's in your intro, and the only one in your intro you haven't done yet.
She is talked about in his Rome review. But i agree, i'd love to see him review Cleopatra.
Seriously. I've been waiting on that Cleopatra review for literal years at this point. I love this channel to bits but the Cleopatra teasing is getting to be too much. I mean, it's not like he hasn't seen it. It's been in the intro for god sakes, and every other movie featured in the intros has been covered.
interesting for all people who think that she was egyptian (ethnic) or black. which is wrong. She was of Macedonian greek background. Still, there are people who claim that she was black
She wan't black, she was descended from Ptolemy I, a Macedonian general and friend of Alexander the Great
Canaan B 💀
Dunkirk is one of those events in history I knew little about because I am American and I don't remember it being taught often in history class. I really did not know much about this film until watching it and this TH-cam video, but now as an adult watching so many WW2 documentaries I understand how important it was.
Same, never knew id be genuinely curious of history but it works out that way when you’re not forced to learn about the Mughal empire before you even know the origins of your country
Please do a history buff on Hacksaw Ridge!
SO MUCH THIS.
He won't tho. He has an irrational hate for Mel Gibson and will only talk about his work in the negative.
@@NeoSoldner shame. This movie was amazing in my opinion.
I agree. One of the best war movies of the decade.
I incredibly disliked this film. Everything about it just from a filmmakers standpoint before the history. I love Mel Gibson, but he really made a cheesy war film that is dressed in a fantastic story.
A US support gunner takes an extremely heavy BAR automatic rifle, and proceeds to one hand it while carrying a Japanese corpse ( a torso without legs) as a bulletproof shield. He single handedly takes out multiple positions without reloading his 20 round capacity BAR and all around looks like he should be in Call of Duty, not a historical war film.
I like hacksaw ridge but that movie is fucking ridiculous.
That five minute continuous shot in Atonement was chilling. Subconsciously I was wondering where the suffering soldiers were in the movie Dunkirk. Excellent and fair critique.
MustardSeedish After seeing Dunkrik, I already knew that the 5 min long shot of Atonement was way better. That 5 minute shot really got to me. Dunkirk was emotional and seems so fake.
The movie was very clean and a clear departure from Spielberg's film style pioneered in Saving Private Ryan and copied by pretty much every other war genre film since then. In my opinion Spielberg is still the ultimate masterclass when it comes to capturing war on film, and Dunkirk reinforces that belief by being so artificial despite the level of technical effort made to turn it in the opposite direction.
That speech gave me chills.
Migraine I'm glad its not the 1940s right now. Thanks ancestors!
Defeating the far right is something we should all be proud of.
sjewitt22 you mean crushing a nation because they escaped financial enslavement is something we should all be proud of? I’m not, and no one should be.. they didn’t want war!!
And now we free and fair society is being threatened by the far left
The Far-Left was always a problem, Communism and Socialism have killed many more than most ideologies.
That speech of Winston Churchill should be taught in every country. It's beautiful and inspirational. Makes you want to fight for your own country at every moment.
That Churchill speech always puts a lump in my throat and causes my eyes to well up a bit. Also the way that he calls his country "Our island home" really conveys to me how much he loved his country and its people.
He also knew that water border(English Channel) would be a bear to cross. Planes did not have enough fuel to spend time once over, so they went over and guessed where they were in the fog and many times a farmers field got bombed...or some minor town...and the planes had to come back with no dog fights.
WWII had amazing leadership in both Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Review hacksaw ridge
Please? Thanks.
For that matter, review The Pacific!
Man, I loved Hacksaw Ridge. Great movie!
The one movie where the Japanese aren’t vicious enough yet they feel too vicious? Weird
Great movie!
Do Letters from iwo jima :)
I second this, Ken Watanabe is awesome in that movie, as he is in pretty much everything he's in
Great movie.
Yes please!
Yes!
Do both that and Flags of our Fathers, since their basically a "package deal" so to speak. One is from the American perspective and the other from the Japanese one.
Great film - great review. My late father was a flyer in WW2. I have all his diaries of his experiences in the air fighting against the Germans. He was always willing to talk about it all and could remember EVERYTHING. They are amazing to read. I have some amazing photos too. I wish he was still alive to see this film and 1917 - in which HIS father was in WW1 - also the great Peter Jackson re-colored documentary They shall not grow old. He would be amazed.
The last time I was this early, Germany was winning the war.
Insert original thought here
Insert witty remark
Last time I was this early Napoleon was winning the war.
THE ARMADA
Last time I was this early, you could count the number of wars that Napoleon was in
Last time I was this early, this joke was still funny...
So Nick, when are you gonna cover "A Bridge Too Far"?
My grandad was an officer in the Indian army in WWII. I would love to see a film showcasing their side of the war. I mean I'm white and so was he but he was utterly convinced his Indian sergeants were the reason he survived and thus, by extension, I exist. But I agree, Dunkirk is not the place for it.
Hey I'm all up for some different WWII movies. The Allies liberating France from the Nazis has been over saturated at this point threw varies movies, shows, and video games. If the story is just as well crafted as Dunkirk or Saving Private Ryan I would pay to see it.
As Yahtzee over on Zero Punctuation once put it given the amount of films, games and tv series that have shown it the D-Day landings must have taken at least a month.
"BuT eViDenCe ShOwS X wAs PrEcEnT dUrIng Y, sO yOu MuSt PuT tHeM iN!!!!!!!!!!"
+punch3870 ...I'm not sure what effect you were going for with the varied typing there but that was a touch eyestraining to read.
There is never going to be a movie on Kohima and Imphal. It would alienate Japanese and Indian audiences.
My old English teacher as a small boy, saw the small boats set sail across the channel I’ll always remember him telling us youngsters this remarkable event.
7:00 hidden footage of Vladimir Putin in WW2
The KGB is truly everywhere😂
Time traveller
close but nose is too big (If your speaking on the german soldier on the cart@7:01 who I thought looked more like Putin than the guy pushing the truck @7:00)
“Wtf does Dunkirk have to do with Brexit?” That made me lol
@Chris Anagn. racist
@INN racist
As a Navy Veteran i can tell you...even large ships can go down pretty damn fast if hit in the right spot,and i'm talking less than 10 min.
Morgan Grey likewise, there’s ww2 accounts of six minute scuttles
How many ships did you see sunk be enemy fire as a Navy veteran?
Eric M I personally saw only none whatsoever, however I did read a report of a six minute sinking of British large class ship during Dunkirk I believe it was
So your naval experience is completely irrelevant then.
Why did you preface your comment with "As a Navy veteran?"
@@GinEric84 I would hardly say its irrelevant as they would have drilled for evacuation, including discussing issues ranging from timescales, undertows and the like
I like how at the 9:43 mark of Sir Winston Churchill’s speech it shows American Paratroopers loading onto transport ships in New York harbor en route to Britain to train for Operation Overload 🇺🇸🇬🇧🗽
Overlord? lol
Destroyers are small ships and torpedoes have a lot of explosive; a quick sinking is quite realistic - look at what happened to destroyers in the Mediterranean.
@David McConville Destroyers weren't armored. I also recall at least one account of a Japanese destroyer going down very quickly after being torpedoed in the Pacific.
Well yeah, but destroyers weren’t your typical target for torpedos, you really wanted to hit battle ships and cruisers if you could. The enemy had a lot of destroyers, but using torpedos to take down one of the few battleships the enemy has for the battle is a much better idea than going for all of the many destroyers the enemy has. You don’t have a lot of torpedos, not enough for every ship, so take down the important targets.
@David McConville No armor by any real measure of the term. And yes, there's lots of cases of dd's going down very quickly after a torpedo hit. Very often such a hit would break their back and they would rapidly be two or more pieces.
There were at least two different torpedo attacks.
1. was the old-fashioned, aiming at the just below the waterline using contact detonators. These would blow holes in the ship's hull but any battleship had a thick enough armour belt to 'shrug of' one or two torpedo hits;
2. destroyers weren't battleships of course but they wouldn't break in two either after being hit such a fashion;
3. the advanced torpedo attacks started by the Germans used deep running torpedoes that had magnetic detonators. These were aimed to run under a ship's hull and detonate right underneath, causing a large bubble of air/'vacuum' that would cause the unsupported ship's hull to break in two. Ships that were hit this way sank in literally seconds.
With regards to Dunkirk: you can see the torpedoes are running just below the surface, which is understandable since coastal waters are very shallow. So the destroyer does sink a bit too fast. But for the people being down in the hull, where the torpedoes struck, there wouldn't have been much of a difference. Most would drown anyway because of the water gushing in and not nearly enough doors available: a warship is not a passenger liner that needs to be evacuated within 90 seconds.
HBO mini series The Pacific would be cool
Sledgehammer..... I like that....
Ball PEEN hammer, that's you! lol - Mr Robot.
I didn't get it on first view, and saw all the soldiers as looking alike, and all that. On the second view, after reading the book that accompanied the TV series, I got a lot more of the story about John Basilone, Eugene Sledge, and the story that was hidden behind the helmets, noise, explosions and fury. If anything, it is better than Band of Brothers.
Na, I think "The Pacific" is way inferior to BoB. Especially in the characters writing and development. All the guys from BoB are still in my mind, you got really close with them and that made BoB so perfect. In The Pacific, in my opinion, the characters were also well written, but not as good as in BoB. And, there was waaay to much japan hate. At some point it just really pissed me off.
Feeling this heavy. Loved both of them when they came out and recently went back to watch them; BoB stood the test of time but The Pacific felt like an unnecessary sequel that tried too hard to emulate the success of BoB. Maybe chop it up to too intense of introspection on the part of the production team.
I just realised, 4 years and two days later after the last ship had left Dunkirk, this time as a liberating force, the Allies had once again arrived in France.
Jesus, that speech made me tear up as I sit here beneath the US flag on my porch. God be with GB because I know I will.
No ship goes down in minutes? Tell that to the Lusitania. Regardless, great video as always.
Or the Hood
It sounded like he said "rarely" goes down in minutes.
A Mildly Manky Deadbeard that’s exactly what he said
Paul Fletcher 900 casualties
@@1987palerider The Hood blew up prior to sinking. It wasn't hit by a torpedo, it was hit by an armour-piercing broadside that penetrated a magazine, totally different.
Michael bay would be having a field day over this
Well at least he did convert Chicago into a war zone
Justin Y. whey you too here
Justin Y. I dunno, it would probably be a more exciting movie if he did.
Does that "Y" in your ID stand for "TH-cam"? Because you're like the dark matter of the TH-cam universe.
Justin Y. Ew. Keep bay as far away from real history as possible. He can keep making Army Propaganda disguised as robot movies for dimwits.
Dunkirk was the 1st Brexit
Internet Win! CHURCHILL Approves!
Nah that title belongs to Hastings.
Are you guys forgetting Boudica?
@@RacinZilla003 it failed
Henry VIII and the church of England was the first Brexit!
The scene from Atonement looks like it really might have been - a crowd of defeated men waiting to die, chaos, misery, boredom, confusion
Ships often sink instantly when hit by a torpedo, it depends on their cargo, for instance a cargo of iron ore will guarantee a quick sinking while a cargo of wooden pit props would sometimes save a ship that would otherwise have sunk.
As for destroyers, they often survived a torpedo hit if the strike is at the bow or stern, however one torp anywhere in between and it is invariably doomed.
Can be within only a few minutes and barely anyone lives because of cargo or the hit being in a perfect spot.
Especially "smaller" ships like destroyers and frigates. USS Hammann sunk in less than a minute after Midway from the same thing - a torpedo amidships
Lusitania sank in less than 20 minutes from a torpedo hit. It was 10 times larger than a WWII destroyer.
@@captainjoshuagleiberman2778
Yes, indeed she did.
It's theorized that either the initial torpedo strike dislodged an enormous amount of coal dust in adjacent bunkers which then exploded or some of the ammunition she was carrying exploded or both.
Regardless, she was sunk very quickly by a single torpedo strike.
Please review Downfall, enemy at the gates, Michael Collins, or siege of jabotville.
Brendan Murphy seige of jadotville is really underrated
Enemy at the gates would take 5 hours just to list the inaccuracies. I love the movie though.
The French sacrificed there men so in return and out gratefulness of all they sacrificed we kept fighting and helped liberate France and I appreciate all the French sacrifice
And as Churchill said "we will never surrender"
Yeah and the debt the British owed the French in covering their retreat was paid for 4 years later at Normandy. And lets not forget the Canadians and Americans who also spilled their blood on those beaches so that France could be free.
Don't forget the 10000 men of the 51st Highland Division who were sacrificed by Churchill.
Ummmm well the British SACRIFICED themselves for the French! The British arrived in France to help save a country and it's people from their total destruction and subjugation! Thanks French soldiers for holding off the Germans from annihilating the BEF who were trying to save you!
Yes let's glorify the French during the evacuation but not talk about why there was an evacuation in the first place. If the French military was actually competent, there wouldn't have been an evacuation
@@shnek5143 to be fair the french mobilized a lot more troops than us
The lack of PEOPLE on the beach ruined this movie for us. The person I saw it with was English and so she picked up on a lot of the issues you did as well.
Black Hawk Down next! I know so much about what really happened and I wonder if you can tackle it and get everything right.
can you tell me what really happened because I kinda know what really happened too (kinda)
For the most part the movie got it right, I don't want to spoil to much my friend, but certain characters lived in reality that died in the film, other characters died in different ways.
You tease me with footage of Das Boot. That is certainly a movie that would make for a great History Buffs review.
YES!
That is also a movie that is much better than dunkirk
Das Boot is also very relevant with the mini-series on the way.
A piece of fucking sliced white bread! Hell yes it is
U-boat officers crying their sensitive hearts out for those merchant sailors shipping weapons and whatnot to England - Total B S.
Oh man, you're gonna want to review "1917" if you like war movies with practical effects. I would love to hear your thoughts on this one.
I'd love to see an analysis of Greyhound. I thought that was an awesome look at what naval warfare was like just before the days of computers.
"Until in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Secret code for "America please help"
@Lee Naylor Eeh yeah okay? What point are you exactly making here?
That Churchill should have talked about 'The Bolshevist Saviours' instead of 'the New World'?
You do know that the relations between the British and the Soviets were... chaotic, to say the least, even during the war Churchill didn't trust Stalin.
Fabian Keizer you have missed the ENTIRE POINT. The point was the soviets were crucial to the war effort, and ignoring it is straight up history erasure. Are you trying to say the Russian men who died for the war really didnt matter? Pathetic
In other words Britain could not save Britain. It needed its colonies (Canada, India, Pakistan, etc and was egging the U.S. to enter the European war , which AFA the U.S. was concerned was a European war and it did not want to get involved. That is why it separated. Keep your tea. We drink BEER.
@@the_tactician9858 Lee Naylor The point is the MAIN GERMAN FORCE WAS ON THE EASTERN FRONT because that was the real battle. Hitler already proved he could take out France. Hitler did not want to battle Britain, or he would have built a navy. He wanted to co-rule Europe with Britain. War leads to destruction of castles in Germany and in Britain. Hitler offered 4 times, Churchill wanted to fight instead.Hitler saw Britain as the other Aryan race. Nobody trusted Stalin, not Hitler.
Do one on the Netflix movie "Siege of Jadotville"
I didn't think of that one, I like that. I'd love to see The Pacific but it'll take some time.
Jadotville was awesome
I just came here to say that. I just saw it for the first time last night, great film, and I did just some skimming research and seems it was pretty accurate with just a few inaccuracies here and there, though not any that I couldn't easily excuse. I find it funny that the movies that follow the closest to history often seem the most unbelievable, but then they end up being true upon later scrutiny. Like 150 green Irish UN troops holding out for 6 days against a battle-hardened force 20 times their size without suffering a single death in their ranks. My plus one for "Siege of Jadotville".
Yea
@@Stupac0110 The most shocking thing was that those brave men were denounced as cowards and failures. Us Irish always seem to get screwed!
"I'm really dissapointed there were only two white people in the final battle in The Last Samurai."
- Mirror universe The Guardian
I'm way more fascinated you expected them to not to make everything about their politics :D
@@thinkingboi9508 To be fair, one (1) person did write that the lack of PoC "might rub some the wrong way". Better watch out for...THEM.
@Conrad Kujur Everything is political, but in this case there really wasn't more than a few ppl talking about the lack of diversity.
Not ashamed to say that the final scenes brought tears to my eyes! Hans Zimmer & Elgar hit me very hard & the visuals were breathtaking! Nolan you are a genius!
I couldn't get over how few people were on the beach. It was like a dream sequence. Very peculiar and did nothing to give any sense of what actually happened. As you say the Atonement scene blew this out of the water.
Do the Battle of Britain 1969 film.
Would you review ?
Letters from Iwo Jima
I believe its a top notch war drama film.
Agreed, one of my favourite films ever.
My favorite war film
letters from iwo is like the japanese version of the movie stalingrad. very good movies that make you feel bad for the bad guys. he should do that one to.
My fav. Movie
Just found this channel, and I was looking for that movie, sadly it's not here yet
One detail I really enjoyed that you may not have noticed is the beached French destroyer they feature in the background of the beach. It is well known to me because I am a ww2 photo collector and one of my collection is a German soldiers photo of that very wreck on the beach of Dunkirk. It was only in the movie for a moment or two but it’s an amazing attention to detail that almost no one will even ever notice.
from a seafearer, ships do go down in minutes, bulk carriers have been recorded breaking up and sinking in under 5 min, rig tenders have also been known to go under in under 2 mins