Yes this movie doesn’t accurately represent history, but then again, who said this was a documentary? This is a film for purely entertainment purposes. And I freakin loved it
@@tedarcher9120 The Gentlemen I didn’t think much of the first time I saw it. For me, it was the second when I really started to “get it.” The humor seemed far more subtle, but was hilarious. Especially Coach!
I also hate how people are comparing it to Quentin Tarantino films. Sure they could be similar, but this whole film was just that, a film. A film for entertainment. Now the whole "Based on a True story" is greatly exaggerated. I think Hollywood should revise their wording more. Too many people believe the phrase as fact.
Brian lett KC in his excellent book,reckons that 007 was a mixture of March-Phillips 001 ,Appleyard 002, Hayes 003 and Lassen. At Kew the record gives their 00 codes and even states them as " licenced to Kill" There is no doubt about the James Bond Link.
Extra trivia: Anders Lassen joined the Allied war effort on April 9th, 1940, the day of Nazi Germany's invasion of both his native Denmark and Norway. April 9th is a mythical date in both those countries. Lassen was KIA exactly five years later in Northern Italy, on April 9th, 1945. Denmark was liberated by British forces on May 5th, less than a month after Lassen's death.
@@madshansen8612 No, I don't know of specifically Canadian troops liberating Denmark. You might be thinking of the story of how a Canadian battalion managed to reach Lübeck on the Baltic coast before the Red Army did, which then blocked the Soviets from advancing onward to Denmark, which they probably would have. (The headline is "How A Small Group Of Canadian Paratroopers Saved Denmark From Soviet Occupation".) The summary of the end of hostilities in Denmark is that she was specifically relieved of German rule on the morning of May 5th, 1945, when mechanised British units under Bernard Law Montgomery crossed the border into Southern Jutland. Remaining German forces in the Netherlands, North-Western Germany and Denmark had formally surrendered to Montgomery the evening before at Lüneburg Heath just South of Hamburg in Northern Germany. A small Danish contingent who had trained in exile in neutral Sweden also disembarked in Elsinore North of Copenhagen, and they along with the Danish resistance actually had a bunch of shooting skirmishes on May 5th around the Copenhagen area. Not with German forces who had officially surrendered, but with armed Danish groups that had collaborated with the Germans during the occupation. Internal showdowns. More people actually got killed on the day of liberation than during Germany's six hour long invasion of the country five years earlier. The one exception was the Eastern Danish island Bornholm out in the Baltic Sea, which was sort-of-liberated by the Red Army on May 9th, who then decided to stick around for another year, seemingly because Stalin was trying to hawk that strategic island for himself at the conference table. Which failed, 'cause by then Denmark had been officially declared one of the victors of the war.
@@geronimo5537 Technicality, the war in _Europe_ ended in May '45. It carried on in the Pacific until the two atom bombs were dropped on Japan in August.
He was awarded the VC for the mission where he was killed. The report makes it sound like he more or less single-handedly took out several machine gun nests.
I don’t think this movie was going for historical accuracy…..I mean the Nazi commander literally dealing with a black African businessman is kind of absurd….
The Nazis would mostly deal with whoever if it was for gain. Allso the world was alot more connected alot earlier then you give it credit for in the early 1900s there was basicly not a place where an african had not been mate. I mean sheesh there was probably an african in England during roman times just saying o.O
Believe it or not nazi germany litterally had Africans fighting in their ranks in Africa ofcourse I believe they had a middle eastern unit aswell however then again still doesent justify them doing business with one so yea ahah
Interesting fact, I literally realized today that I was able to listen perfectly in English for the first time, thanks man, your content is really good
Mad jack churchill was a British soldier who actually used a longbow in battle and had several confirmed kills with it. He also carried a Scottish claymore sword and bagpipes into battle.
As a historian, I watched this film not for a leasson but I good time. I saw the trailler and alreadynwas loving the action comedy aspect of it and the WW2 spy theme was the icing on the cake. I enjoyed it, it was funny had great action scene. A solid movie. Henry Cavill had me in stiches when he put on the SS uniform. Hell that was hilarious.
Regarding the use of a bow and arrow, I'd recommend reading up on another legendary British soldier - Lieutenant Colonel John Malcolm Thorpe Fleming Churchill.
@@easyenetwork2023 you never saw saving private Ryan and dunkirk? Those 2 are the best imo war movies. I would add 1917 and everything quiet on the western front.
When I heard Ritchie had directed the film and watched the trailer, I realized this wasn’t going to be documentary. It was meant to be an interpretation of historical events and was even described as a comedy. I really enjoyed the film and thought it was really well done…it “met the brief.” Having said that, thanks for providing more of the real historic background. The movie certainly sparked my curiosity about these men. Sometimes, art/film is meant to do that and not be a faithful retelling of facts…and that’s not only ok, but a very good thing.
basically. from the start of the movie i kinda knew it was going to be an overexaggeration of Operation Postmaster. but even then. i had a lot of fun with this film. end of the day the movie is entertainment and not a documentary. i think people forget that when they watch movies about events. general audiences dont like Tora Tora Tora or Midway because.... well... its boring. war history nerds do because its pretty close to what happened. and you know what? entertainment is what got me into history and learning about the real stories anyway. you brought up saving private ryan and the d-day landings. a sequence that can be picked and picked and picked apart for its inaccuracies. but the authenticity and chaos is there. but then you get the whole movie and its ridiculous concept of 1 group of rangers trying to find 1 person. but we need a story instead of "oh its a inspired by a guy named Niland who heard his brothers died then got shipped home when he arrived at Division". so we got a good movie even with its flaws, ridiculous concept, and inaccuracies.
@@easyenetwork2023 another movie that even the Doss family had a little bit of issues with. Also loaded with inaccuracies. And condensed his overall story so much they were having actions he did in other parts of the pacific. But yes. It was a great movie. Especially if the message you want is a spiritual one.
As far the Bow and Arrow weapon of choice. It's likely inspired by Mad Jack Churchill who was officially the last person in a major war to ever score a kill using a Bow and Arrow
3:48. "What the movie doesn't tell you, gus was the inspiration for ian Flemings character james bond" bs. Dont turn it off right away and you get a in memory of section where it tells you exactly that. Figure it out.
Read the book. Watched this docu-drama for it's entertainment value. Enjoyed the drama. It is my home when the younger generations see this & other films like it, they will go on to read & learn more about our history. LEST WE FORGET!
Ok friends, history is one thing, a movie is another. If from the beginning they tell us that it is based on a true story, then you don't want the real story, for that you read the books. It is pure entertainment but admit it, well done. Now everyone comes out and criticizes or says that it would have been better to have made the movie sticking to the real history, none of you would have gone to see it, since as "historians" have clarified, there was no such bloodshed, two actions were mixed as if one had been followed by the other (I am referring to the captain's rescue). So, finally, thankful for the historical theme, impressed by what these men were, incredible that they did everything without killing a Nazi, but let me enjoy an entertaining movie.
For a modern post 2000 hollywood movie. They did a fairly accurate job. The intro of cleared out a boarding party in front of german ship watching would have never left them alive. But the rest was quite possible. Overall the people involved were respected and the risks known. One could say they had done this easy mode. However sometimes the impossible is far easier than it seems. Which is why the British got away with so many little operations like this against the odds. Because no one expected someone could.
Elsa Gonzalez' character being Jewish not German?? WTH? Jewish is not a nationality. She can be German, or French, or Polish, or Russian, or any other nationality and ALSO be Jewish. Jewish is also not a language.
Making the movie closer to the truth would have been better. Having read about and studied the real men of this operation and many others like it, i can't help but feel slightly sick that their names and legacies have been basterdised ! I know it's only a movie 'as they say' , but kids and the uninformed always think its true to life.
If the real life events are this different it should not have said based on a true story. It should have said inspired by a true story and went on with different names
I do agree aswell, however I think that as he said in the video. If the film was being more truthful about the whole event I wonder if so many people would care to watch it. I see it as a way of spreading the word and getting people to want to learn more about WW2 and its heroes. Just like me I just watched it and immediately wanted to know if those things really happened. Also I think that making the characters nearly invincible is not that bad for the film itself. I see it as a way of thanking them for their service, although they should have included their sacrifices in the credits. As I said real life heroes. ❤And maybe juuuuuust maybe I liked the film that much because I just love seeing Nazis bite the dust 😂 greetings from 🇦🇹!
This operation in 1942 was followed by a similar in 1943 in Goa. It was called operation Creek. It was done by retired officers of the Calcutta light horse. They had seen service during ww1. This operation was organized by SOE India, they were to capture or sink 3 German merchant ships. It also was turned into a movie, called The sea wolves.
I think the "superhero" like characters was a way to honor all of the traits of the real people, it doesn't depict them in ways that are not flattering or disrespectful. I loved the movie and it honestly was good at it's job because I wouldn't know about these people if it weren't for it
About using the bow and arrow both in fiction and reality (people already mentioned the real soldier Mad Jack) - even though it can be deadly when used by an expert (and in the same time being the most silent ranged weapon on the battlefield) it also requires A LOT of training and experience, something that a man can only acquire in years of practice. Just as in Middle Ages, the British Longbowmen were trained from childhood to be bowmen. So it would be unfeasible in WW2 (and actually in any modern war ) to "introduce" the bow and arrow, as it would be impossible to train men in it's use in due time. UNLESS you happen to have someone who is already trained and proficient in the weapon, (and you might include his skills in a "covert ops" type of mission, if the particular mission might benefit from them, but not conventional warfare) but these people are rare and far between.
Great video and first of yours I have seen so will checkout more. In relation to the movie, it was a shame it came out such a box office failure as it deserved better support, but it was the Lock Stop and Two Smoking barrels version of Operation Postmaster and a bit too jokey for me. Also I note that a really similar version of the forming of the Special Air Service was made in the UK in 2022, written by Steven Knight and though that sticks more closely to the origins of 1st SAS Regiment in North Africa, a bit like this movie it had a quiet childish and cartoony feel to me and I was putoff by the music of ACDC being played by Stirlings jeeps were being driven through the desert. But one positive thing I will say as a British Amateur military historian and military veteran myself it is always good to see real stories re told, even if in a slightly unbelievable way as it does educate the young people about WW2 which has to be a good thing!
Was loosely familiar with Operation Postmaster from other readings of SOE ops. I didnt expect accuracy, but enjoyed a "boys own adventure" which reminded me so much of Guns Of Navarrone that I went and re-watched Guns, Ice Station Zebra, and when Eight Bells Toll =D
Rambo and Chuck Norris films have much to answer for - there were very few WW2 Special Forces types that resembled these characters - consider the actor David Niven, who actually was a real life WW2 Commando, and apparently capable of some fairly cold blooded actions - he doesn't really fit the Rambo mold, does he?
Read the true account of this opeartion "Ian Fleming's and SOE's Operation Postmaster" by Brian Lett. You will also learn how the 00 (of 007) meant a license to kill. The officers involved in Operation Postmaster were assigned codenames such a W.01, the 0 meaning that they were TRAINED (assassinate a better word?) to kill, not licensed; licensed to kill would be redundant as everyone in the military is licensed to kill. He was initially under the command of Admiral Godfery and several years later under the command of General Gubbins whose code name was M.
the part about not using a bow & arrow sounds odd limey commandos used a cross bow and mad jack churchill captured more than a squad of krauts with a bow & arrow
The film is not a Hollywood production. It was produced in Britain, & filmed in Britain & Turkey (standing in for Fernando Po). Like many independently produced films, several different companies & agencies for states, provinces, cities & so on, helped fund the production. That's why the list of producers (& co-producers, executive producers, associate producers, & line producer) numbers 31 total. See the IMDB rundown for that list.
@HistoryvsHollywoodOfficial I have read everything in Danish about and in English on Anders Lassen. He was once in SOE training tasked with providing extra food, for his team and hunted a deer with only a knife and that was why he was selected for Op Postmaster. His cousin was a German, von dem Busche and he was originally tasked with planting a bomb next to Hitler in 1943, but his führer moment was cancelled due to an allied bombardment. Von dem Bussche was scheduled to show some new officers uniforms to AH
Yep, Axel Von Dem Busche volunteered to be a suicide bomber with a pair of hand grenades under his coat. Hitler decided to cancel the appointment shortly beforehand (Allegedly having had a bad feeling about it) and Von Dem Busche had to excuse himself and disarm the grenades with a minute to spare...
There was a women working undercover on the island with the SOE. Plus they were initially going to enlist, local African help and had lots of local help in the planning. Maybe just read the book or learn some more about it.
@@eddiel7635 There were a number of women in the SOE thruout the war. But they weren't the pistol-toting mamas as portrayed in the movie. Likewise, given the locality, it is not surprising to find arabic or black Africans in the mix. They offered support, and their roles were peripheral. Giving them extended screentime and lengthy dialogue are what I called it in my post, Acadamy award considerations.
@@eddiel7635she was not working in this capacity at all. And “were” going to enlist isn’t the same as enlisting. We want to honor everyone’s little efforts in this, but not overblow and lie. This was absolutely a dei hire.. why not just admit it? It’s just true.
I knew Brigadier Beyts, who was Gubbin's second in command at SOE, and I have met Gubbins' great-nephew, so I can tell you that Major-General Sir Colin McVean Gubbins, KCMG, DSO, MC definitely existed. The Gubbins came from France, and were then first recorded in Ireland. / My mother was part of French Section of SOE, but never spoke of her war, which I discovered through deduction after her death. She was an Ensign in FANY, and knew the Beaulieu area very well. / Another point. The German officer on the train was not wearing an SS cap - looked rather Wehrmacht to me. /
Operation Anthropoid is not ideal example of operation SOE as you mention. It was Czechoslovak army operation, more likely Czechoslovak goverment in-exile operation as active proof for british government in order that czechoslovak people actively fighting against nazies. Gabcik and Kubis, others members from their group were just prepared and trained by SOE. "Brain" of the operation was Frantisek Moravec, head of the Czechoslovak intelligence services and it was approved by Edvard Beneš, head of Czechoslovak goverment in-exile.
I just watched this movie & was entertained, if I wanted to see what really happened I'd come to a page like this & here I am, the appearance of the dread pirate Westley was a nice touch too.
"Churchill's Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare : The Mavericks Who Plotted Hitler's Defeat" by Giles Milton tells a more detailed version and several aspects of the book show that it was actually very much like the film fantasy in a broader sense.
I totally take most of these points. However, i don't know anyone who would expect a completely historically accurate film from Guy Ritchie (especially when we're tipped off heavily on the intent with the Queen soundtrack). However, i will defend a couple of points. The mixed up timeline of the film, helps to move the film along but may make people forget that that boat journey took a very long time and that that long time is adressed in the film. The run in with the British ship also highlights that not everyone was happy to have this operation going on, without holding up the screenplay for too long. This also means that when the injurred commando is clearly badly wounded, when they arrive back on the British ship, the scene with Winston Churchill will have taken place weeks (at best) and possibly months later. Plenty of time to recover.
Loosely inspired by a true story is literally the same thing as based on a true story. Neither says “exactly like the true story”, so it’s really weird to be trying to make a distinction between two interchangeable things. Based on a true story means that reality served as an inspiration for a fictional stury. Soon after that you say the movie doesn’t tell you one of the characters was an inspiration for James Bond, except the movie does tell you that. I get what the purpose of the video is, but not paying attention to the movie itself is a bad way to go about it. If you can’t get things about the movie right, how do you expect people to believe you abou the historical bits?
My Goooood loose a little bit this is not a docu movie or a docuseries, is a fictional/Action/Adventure/Comedy movie i think that they did what they were task to do To Entertain, that´s it, if you want to know more about history read it and educate yourself
Nice video. I didn't hear you discuss another aspect of this film, after pointing out that there waa no females, as well as digging as far as the possible female being hispanic to explain the casting, and that is the casting of "roids' in two of the key male roles. Your historic photos show men that were no where near as big as several of the modern actors. It is too bad Christopher Lee isn't around to give us his thoughts on this new release.😜
Well, a film about historical events does definitely not need to add combat... It can simply add tension and suspense, portraying the actual events. I think the action scenes are great to watch, but they aren't needed per se. Look at great movies based in a world war II timeframe like "The Imitation Game" using character building and emotion instead of violence and gore. It's still a great movie, but it wouldn't be a bad movie, if Ritchie had dialed down the violence in favor for more realism and suspense between the characters. 😎
It's a movie, it doesn't matter, it never states "here is a history lesson" why do people have to pick apart things if you want facts go to the history channel and stop criticising, I don't understand why someone would make a video like this .
Oh yeah, this was so much better. The British winning the war one masterful commando operation at a time. Total German dead & missing 3.6 million. 2.7 of them fighting the Russians. 900,000 on all other fronts. It's rather obvious who did most of the fighting. Yet not many western movies about the Eastern Front.
Dude, it's a movie! Just enjoy it. We are all grown-ups, nobody is expecting a minute by minute true account of the real events. It's never been the goal of the movie.
About the ONLY 100% accurate thing in this film is that the Brits only ever assigned suppressors to the STEN gun for Special Forces to use. Since the gun was very light, suppressors made it much longer and heavier, so they only ever gave them for special forces type missions in WW2. I was shocked when they got that part right. Considering there wasn't many suppressors made for the STEN gun, its interesting that they got a couple. (could have been fake tho).
As usual and American has to knock a story based on true events (all be it with extra gunfire and explosions). Yet Americans are taught that the events of U-571 genuinely happened! It was only after significant backlash that a little note was added that it was fictional and that the Royal Navy captured the Enigma long before the US were in WW2. The MoUW is a film, sit back and enjoy it.
The photo damian lewis used on the book cover is of the long range desert patrol group somaliland camel corp.on deployment.i do wonder who gave kind permission for the use of said photo?
I enjoyed your video, but one niggly little criticism: " . . . the HMS Violet . . ." Please do not use an article when a ship name is preceded by the abbreviation HMS, which stands for His/Her Majesty's Ship.
"....that is exactly what Churchill would have done" - which makes it a factual truth in some people's eyes today. that it never happened is irrelevant.
Movie was Guy Ritchie trying to be Tarantino and turn real events into an inglorious style flick but because it was trying to have a foot in both camps it fell short. Passable popcorn flick but could have been so much more. If they wanted spec ops and explosions then the St Nazaire raid would have been a better choice but given how this movie ended up its a good thing they didn't go there.
He was reacher playing reacher on steroids, the real Anders in the book isn't this bloodthirsty, at least at first he does go very dark in later missions when the Germans start reprisals.
It is a great story about brave and resourceful warriors risking their lives for their country. The movie was a cartoonish affront to the memory of those men.
It's not a documentery, so i don't mind how "Hollywood" it is now. I do enjoy the shorts. And i wish they had survived, and been able to life their lives after the war. I do like the history behind the film.
It has always struck me as odd that the British are criticised for operations conducted in neutral countries such as Fernando Po & the Altmark incident in Norwegian waters, while ignoring the fact the Germans were using the same neutral countries for their benefit & advantage.
It was all politics. That was part of the reason why Churchill was in favour missions like this. Better to ask for forgiveness after than permission before.
It was entertaining, but like you, I found the way the protagonists effortlessly blasted through lots of enemies without being phased or even lightly wounded for most of the film very offputting. I don't expect it to be a documentary, but equally I don't expect the action scenes to be so over-the-top that they remove any thought of the heroes being in danger.
The big thing for me wasn’t the Guy Richie-ness of the movie but there is no way the Nazis at the costume party (Nope) would be listening to jazz, which they considered to be degenerate due to the majority of the musicians to be black or jewish.
what movie crap! And those actors who just got out of the gym and are supposed to recreate real characters that existed in the 40s! It's no surprise that younger generations have no idea what the Second World War was like.
That’s a good point I didn’t mention in the video. While the real guys weren’t out of shape, they certainly didn’t have time to spend several hours a day in the gym and they certainly didn’t look like Reacher or Henry Cavill. There were more important things, like a war going on.
@@HistoryvsHollywoodOfficialplus being absolutely huge like that would have required massive amounts of rations. There’s a very good reason why even today, most special forces soldiers are built like greyhounds.
Its a great movie. After the immediate post war British movies about WW2 like the Dambusters etc. Hollywood took on the subject with High action Romps light on realism like Where eagles dare, Guns of Naverone and a bit later Kelly's Heroes. Casting themselves as the Heroes who won the war on their own! A kind of golden age of WW2 action movies, not too bothered by realism but great entertainment. If a little bit unfair in their re writing to make America the sole victors. We are now reclaiming our war back from the Americans telling fantastic tales about the many operations carried out by Brits and their European and colonial allies. And doing it with fun and the same derring do as Hollywood did. And about time. Realism would be dull. This hits the spot perfectly blending fun comic book action with a foundation in fact. A great movie. If you like this watch the series on BBC i player SAS rogue Heroes. Similarly bending reality to tell a fun and fab tale with a foundation in fact. To analyse this type of movie and criticise it for its fantasy aspects is frankly to completely miss the point .
I enjoyed the movie. It was never meant to be historically accurate. Just a tongue in cheek Guy Richie wartime heist movie. I feel critising it for historical accuracy is unfair
I didn't like Henry Cavill as Superman because he was poorly written and directed. But I watched this movie twice. This was a good movie in this day and age a good movie is hard to find
Yes this movie doesn’t accurately represent history, but then again, who said this was a documentary? This is a film for purely entertainment purposes. And I freakin loved it
For me it was like a bad parody of Inglorious Bastards. Ritchie tries to make Tarantino, but he just can't.
IMO,
Ritchie is far superior to Tarnetino. His films always seem to have the most entertaining and enjoyable vein of dry humor running through them.
@@Daddy53751 they did in 90s and 2000s
@@tedarcher9120 The Gentlemen I didn’t think much of the first time I saw it.
For me, it was the second when I really started to “get it.”
The humor seemed far more subtle, but was hilarious. Especially Coach!
I also hate how people are comparing it to Quentin Tarantino films. Sure they could be similar, but this whole film was just that, a film. A film for entertainment. Now the whole "Based on a True story" is greatly exaggerated. I think Hollywood should revise their wording more. Too many people believe the phrase as fact.
After the release of the movie Argo, it was criticized for it's accuracy. Ron Howard said " if you want the facts don't look to Hollywood"
What a terrible attitude for a director to have. The true story of this operation would have been a good movie.
Actual based, imagine criticizing Hollywood accuracy cus of their movie
@@therebelfrogy9287 Yes indeed how could they?
It’s refreshing to find a bit of honesty in Hollywood.
a lot of true stories are outright absurd comedies
at best they are turned into good action films like this
at worst into terrible dramas
The film does mention at the end that Gus March-Phillipps most likely inspired Ian Fleming's James Bond.
Brian lett KC in his excellent book,reckons that 007 was a mixture of March-Phillips 001 ,Appleyard 002, Hayes 003 and Lassen. At Kew the record gives their 00 codes and even states them as " licenced to Kill"
There is no doubt about the James Bond Link.
@@pescatorioso also, ian fleming also did spy stuff too. some of oo7 was based on his own experiences.
And Gus got the woman
@@pescatoriosoThe story is mentioned in multiple documentaries as the inspiration for Bond, I believe.
@@tooslow4065He was a spy during WWII and was involved with Operation Postmaster.
Love it ,cause Henry gets to play the man who inspired James bond so Henry gets to be the real james bond so cool
lmao and YOU know that he knows that... I love Henry.
Just finished watching this movie... and I do have to say I was genuinely entertained...
Extra trivia:
Anders Lassen joined the Allied war effort on April 9th, 1940, the day of Nazi Germany's invasion of both his native Denmark and Norway. April 9th is a mythical date in both those countries.
Lassen was KIA exactly five years later in Northern Italy, on April 9th, 1945. Denmark was liberated by British forces on May 5th, less than a month after Lassen's death.
I thought it was a Canadian force who went to free Denmark. But Canada is under the British Empire.
@@madshansen8612
No, I don't know of specifically Canadian troops liberating Denmark. You might be thinking of the story of how a Canadian battalion managed to reach Lübeck on the Baltic coast before the Red Army did, which then blocked the Soviets from advancing onward to Denmark, which they probably would have. (The headline is "How A Small Group Of Canadian Paratroopers Saved Denmark From Soviet Occupation".)
The summary of the end of hostilities in Denmark is that she was specifically relieved of German rule on the morning of May 5th, 1945, when mechanised British units under Bernard Law Montgomery crossed the border into Southern Jutland. Remaining German forces in the Netherlands, North-Western Germany and Denmark had formally surrendered to Montgomery the evening before at Lüneburg Heath just South of Hamburg in Northern Germany.
A small Danish contingent who had trained in exile in neutral Sweden also disembarked in Elsinore North of Copenhagen, and they along with the Danish resistance actually had a bunch of shooting skirmishes on May 5th around the Copenhagen area. Not with German forces who had officially surrendered, but with armed Danish groups that had collaborated with the Germans during the occupation. Internal showdowns. More people actually got killed on the day of liberation than during Germany's six hour long invasion of the country five years earlier.
The one exception was the Eastern Danish island Bornholm out in the Baltic Sea, which was sort-of-liberated by the Red Army on May 9th, who then decided to stick around for another year, seemingly because Stalin was trying to hawk that strategic island for himself at the conference table. Which failed, 'cause by then Denmark had been officially declared one of the victors of the war.
then the war ended May 1945. he almost lived the entire thing. impressive on its own right given his close engagement.
@@geronimo5537
Technicality, the war in _Europe_ ended in May '45. It carried on in the Pacific until the two atom bombs were dropped on Japan in August.
He was awarded the VC for the mission where he was killed. The report makes it sound like he more or less single-handedly took out several machine gun nests.
I don’t think this movie was going for historical accuracy…..I mean the Nazi commander literally dealing with a black African businessman is kind of absurd….
Black guy in Eaton in 1920s is even more absurd. In reality the first one was in 1969, not 1920
The Nazis would mostly deal with whoever if it was for gain. Allso the world was alot more connected alot earlier then you give it credit for in the early 1900s there was basicly not a place where an african had not been mate. I mean sheesh there was probably an african in England during roman times just saying o.O
Haha 🤣 I didn't even think about that 😂
😂the way I was watching, like in pretty sure nazis weren't partying with black women.
Believe it or not nazi germany litterally had Africans fighting in their ranks in Africa ofcourse I believe they had a middle eastern unit aswell however then again still doesent justify them doing business with one so yea ahah
Interesting fact, I literally realized today that I was able to listen perfectly in English for the first time, thanks man, your content is really good
Mad jack churchill was a British soldier who actually used a longbow in battle and had several confirmed kills with it. He also carried a Scottish claymore sword and bagpipes into battle.
And he was an instructor here in Qld post war. I bet their Officers mess was rowdy place
That bagpipes must be his most brutal and gruesome weapon in the moments when he not beaten his enemies to the death, with his cast iron balls
@@piritrem2232The Canadian Army did that during World War 2, and the German soldiers called those Canadian soldiers wearing kilts "Mad Women "😂
As a historian, I watched this film not for a leasson but I good time. I saw the trailler and alreadynwas loving the action comedy aspect of it and the WW2 spy theme was the icing on the cake.
I enjoyed it, it was funny had great action scene. A solid movie.
Henry Cavill had me in stiches when he put on the SS uniform. Hell that was hilarious.
Historian? You must have missed “Redaction 101” in college.
Regarding the use of a bow and arrow, I'd recommend reading up on another legendary British soldier - Lieutenant Colonel John Malcolm Thorpe Fleming Churchill.
Mad Jack. My old man served in the same unit early in the war.
@@madade27No way! That’s incredible! Do tell us more!
Cool video. Hope no one really thought this was gonna be Saving Private Ryan or Dunkirk. Just a super fun Ritchie film and I'm here for it.
It was a good movie. Never seen the other 2, but I liked it a lot.
@@easyenetwork2023 you never saw saving private Ryan and dunkirk? Those 2 are the best imo war movies. I would add 1917 and everything quiet on the western front.
@@bepinkfloyd814 SPR full of crap.
@@jacktattis lol ok, idc i still think is a good movie with good acting and good directing. You do you, go watch toy story for what i care.
@@bepinkfloyd814 Ritchie is always good
When I heard Ritchie had directed the film and watched the trailer, I realized this wasn’t going to be documentary. It was meant to be an interpretation of historical events and was even described as a comedy. I really enjoyed the film and thought it was really well done…it “met the brief.” Having said that, thanks for providing more of the real historic background. The movie certainly sparked my curiosity about these men. Sometimes, art/film is meant to do that and not be a faithful retelling of facts…and that’s not only ok, but a very good thing.
I totally agree. These stories are surely dramatic enough without exaggeration.
basically. from the start of the movie i kinda knew it was going to be an overexaggeration of Operation Postmaster. but even then. i had a lot of fun with this film. end of the day the movie is entertainment and not a documentary. i think people forget that when they watch movies about events. general audiences dont like Tora Tora Tora or Midway because.... well... its boring. war history nerds do because its pretty close to what happened. and you know what? entertainment is what got me into history and learning about the real stories anyway.
you brought up saving private ryan and the d-day landings. a sequence that can be picked and picked and picked apart for its inaccuracies. but the authenticity and chaos is there. but then you get the whole movie and its ridiculous concept of 1 group of rangers trying to find 1 person. but we need a story instead of "oh its a inspired by a guy named Niland who heard his brothers died then got shipped home when he arrived at Division". so we got a good movie even with its flaws, ridiculous concept, and inaccuracies.
Hacksaw Ridge was a great movie.
@@easyenetwork2023 another movie that even the Doss family had a little bit of issues with. Also loaded with inaccuracies. And condensed his overall story so much they were having actions he did in other parts of the pacific.
But yes. It was a great movie. Especially if the message you want is a spiritual one.
I love Guy Ritchie movies.
He's definitely a one of a kind director.
As far the Bow and Arrow weapon of choice. It's likely inspired by Mad Jack Churchill who was officially the last person in a major war to ever score a kill using a Bow and Arrow
3:48. "What the movie doesn't tell you, gus was the inspiration for ian Flemings character james bond" bs. Dont turn it off right away and you get a in memory of section where it tells you exactly that. Figure it out.
Read the book. Watched this docu-drama for it's entertainment value. Enjoyed the drama.
It is my home when the younger generations see this & other films like it, they will go on to read & learn more about our history.
LEST WE FORGET!
Docu-drama is being very generous.
who needs '' based on a true story 'when you have guy ritchie
Ok friends, history is one thing, a movie is another. If from the beginning they tell us that it is based on a true story, then you don't want the real story, for that you read the books. It is pure entertainment but admit it, well done. Now everyone comes out and criticizes or says that it would have been better to have made the movie sticking to the real history, none of you would have gone to see it, since as "historians" have clarified, there was no such bloodshed, two actions were mixed as if one had been followed by the other (I am referring to the captain's rescue). So, finally, thankful for the historical theme, impressed by what these men were, incredible that they did everything without killing a Nazi, but let me enjoy an entertaining movie.
As a history buff, this movie is the equivalent of watching Speed Racer to learn about nascar.
I didn’t watch it as a history lesson!
@@Colin-Fenix it's too bad it wasn't more accurate. The reality was much more intense than that slap stick pie fight they dropped on the public
For a modern post 2000 hollywood movie. They did a fairly accurate job. The intro of cleared out a boarding party in front of german ship watching would have never left them alive. But the rest was quite possible. Overall the people involved were respected and the risks known. One could say they had done this easy mode. However sometimes the impossible is far easier than it seems. Which is why the British got away with so many little operations like this against the odds. Because no one expected someone could.
Elsa Gonzalez' character being Jewish not German?? WTH? Jewish is not a nationality. She can be German, or French, or Polish, or Russian, or any other nationality and ALSO be Jewish. Jewish is also not a language.
Honestly the Nazi making her because she accidentally slipped into Yiddish was one of the less ridiculous choices in this film.
The movie does tell you about Gus being a base for Bond. Plus its a fun take on the whole thing.. its not meant to be a Saving Private Ryan type film.
Making the movie closer to the truth would have been better. Having read about and studied the real men of this operation and many others like it, i can't help but feel slightly sick that their names and legacies have been basterdised !
I know it's only a movie 'as they say' , but kids and the uninformed always think its true to life.
If the real life events are this different it should not have said based on a true story. It should have said inspired by a true story and went on with different names
I agree.
DEI Bullshit...
I do agree aswell, however I think that as he said in the video. If the film was being more truthful about the whole event I wonder if so many people would care to watch it. I see it as a way of spreading the word and getting people to want to learn more about WW2 and its heroes. Just like me I just watched it and immediately wanted to know if those things really happened. Also I think that making the characters nearly invincible is not that bad for the film itself. I see it as a way of thanking them for their service, although they should have included their sacrifices in the credits. As I said real life heroes. ❤And maybe juuuuuust maybe I liked the film that much because I just love seeing Nazis bite the dust 😂 greetings from 🇦🇹!
I think the original mission is more than exciting, in the hands of the right director it could've been done.
This operation in 1942 was followed by a similar in 1943 in Goa. It was called operation Creek. It was done by retired officers of the Calcutta light horse. They had seen service during ww1. This operation was organized by SOE India, they were to capture or sink 3 German merchant ships. It also was turned into a movie, called The sea wolves.
I'll vote for this film also. Bottom line...it was a wonderful discovery and 2 hours of fun.
I think the "superhero" like characters was a way to honor all of the traits of the real people, it doesn't depict them in ways that are not flattering or disrespectful. I loved the movie and it honestly was good at it's job because I wouldn't know about these people if it weren't for it
Loved this movie. Surprisingly fresh.
Oh God, you're dumb.
Inglorious Bastards is loosely based on British Troop X, an all Jewish commando group in WW2.
I've heard of an all Jewish Commando unit, according to Google it's 10 Commando.
@@MarkARhodieHence the X
If you want to know the full details of this escapade, read the book: Churchill’s Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare by Giles Milton.
This is the TH-cam CHANNEL i needed ... thank you
About using the bow and arrow both in fiction and reality (people already mentioned the real soldier Mad Jack) - even though it can be deadly when used by an expert (and in the same time being the most silent ranged weapon on the battlefield) it also requires A LOT of training and experience, something that a man can only acquire in years of practice. Just as in Middle Ages, the British Longbowmen were trained from childhood to be bowmen. So it would be unfeasible in WW2 (and actually in any modern war ) to "introduce" the bow and arrow, as it would be impossible to train men in it's use in due time. UNLESS you happen to have someone who is already trained and proficient in the weapon, (and you might include his skills in a "covert ops" type of mission, if the particular mission might benefit from them, but not conventional warfare) but these people are rare and far between.
Great video and first of yours I have seen so will checkout more. In relation to the movie, it was a shame it came out such a box office failure as it deserved better support, but it was the Lock Stop and Two Smoking barrels version of Operation Postmaster and a bit too jokey for me. Also I note that a really similar version of the forming of the Special Air Service was made in the UK in 2022, written by Steven Knight and though that sticks more closely to the origins of 1st SAS Regiment in North Africa, a bit like this movie it had a quiet childish and cartoony feel to me and I was putoff by the music of ACDC being played by Stirlings jeeps were being driven through the desert. But one positive thing I will say as a British Amateur military historian and military veteran myself it is always good to see real stories re told, even if in a slightly unbelievable way as it does educate the young people about WW2 which has to be a good thing!
Was loosely familiar with Operation Postmaster from other readings of SOE ops. I didnt expect accuracy, but enjoyed a "boys own adventure" which reminded me so much of Guns Of Navarrone that I went and re-watched Guns, Ice Station Zebra, and when Eight Bells Toll =D
Rambo and Chuck Norris films have much to answer for - there were very few WW2 Special Forces types that resembled these characters - consider the actor David Niven, who actually was a real life WW2 Commando, and apparently capable of some fairly cold blooded actions - he doesn't really fit the Rambo mold, does he?
Christopher Lee too.
According to Christopher Lee at least
Still a good movie tbh shit was entertaining as a "movie" should be
The pre-closing credits sequence does actually mention March Phillios as the model for 007.
Read the true account of this opeartion "Ian Fleming's and SOE's Operation Postmaster" by Brian Lett. You will also learn how the 00 (of 007) meant a license to kill. The officers involved in Operation Postmaster were assigned codenames such a W.01, the 0 meaning that they were TRAINED (assassinate a better word?) to kill, not licensed; licensed to kill would be redundant as everyone in the military is licensed to kill. He was initially under the command of Admiral Godfery and several years later under the command of General Gubbins whose code name was M.
The movie DOES mention the James Bond connection… you didn’t pay attention.
Ca I suggest you read and comment on the book which is a brilliant bit of work and has so many other stories that need to be pictured
the part about not using a bow & arrow sounds odd limey commandos used a cross bow and mad jack churchill captured more than a squad of krauts with a bow & arrow
Is it Brit or American idk becuz there no theatrical release in Uk and limited to Prime video
you could say this about every single war film to come out of Hollywood ffs
Good point but when Hollywood gets even wrong the title ( Krakatoa East of... ) it's needed
The worst being U-571, claiming the Americans capturing the Enigma machine, not the British. I think the British PM complained at the time. lol
Saving Private Ryan is pretty realistic to the time apparently
The film is not a Hollywood production. It was produced in Britain, & filmed in Britain & Turkey (standing in for Fernando Po). Like many independently produced films, several different companies & agencies for states, provinces, cities & so on, helped fund the production. That's why the list of producers (& co-producers, executive producers, associate producers, & line producer) numbers 31 total. See the IMDB rundown for that list.
@HistoryvsHollywoodOfficial I have read everything in Danish about and in English on Anders Lassen. He was once in SOE training tasked with providing extra food, for his team and hunted a deer with only a knife and that was why he was selected for Op Postmaster. His cousin was a German, von dem Busche and he was originally tasked with planting a bomb next to Hitler in 1943, but his führer moment was cancelled due to an allied bombardment. Von dem Bussche was scheduled to show some new officers uniforms to AH
Yep, Axel Von Dem Busche volunteered to be a suicide bomber with a pair of hand grenades under his coat. Hitler decided to cancel the appointment shortly beforehand (Allegedly having had a bad feeling about it) and Von Dem Busche had to excuse himself and disarm the grenades with a minute to spare...
The dirty dozen, which is based on the fithy 13, was a great older movie.
So the black and female characters are DEI hires to qualify the movie for Academy Award consideration. got it.
Now you're getting it 😂
This film is not going to win anything. It was just another Guy Ritchie mess.
There was a women working undercover on the island with the SOE. Plus they were initially going to enlist, local African help and had lots of local help in the planning. Maybe just read the book or learn some more about it.
@@eddiel7635 There were a number of women in the SOE thruout the war. But they weren't the pistol-toting mamas as portrayed in the movie.
Likewise, given the locality, it is not surprising to find arabic or black Africans in the mix.
They offered support, and their roles were peripheral. Giving them extended screentime and lengthy dialogue are what I called it in my post, Acadamy award considerations.
@@eddiel7635she was not working in this capacity at all. And “were” going to enlist isn’t the same as enlisting. We want to honor everyone’s little efforts in this, but not overblow and lie. This was absolutely a dei hire.. why not just admit it? It’s just true.
You might not know this. but 'gubbins' means 'bits and pieces'. There are infinite unusual words that are not used when addressing foreign people.
Interesting. Guess that’s why he was called M instead.
@@HistoryvsHollywoodOfficial I'm not sure why he's called M but Gubbins is obviously a pseudonym
@@iwanttocomplain
Incorrect - Gubbins was his name.
I knew Brigadier Beyts,
who was Gubbin's second in command at SOE,
and I have met Gubbins' great-nephew,
so I can tell you
that Major-General Sir Colin McVean Gubbins, KCMG, DSO, MC
definitely existed.
The Gubbins came from France,
and were then first recorded in Ireland.
/
My mother
was part of French Section of SOE,
but never spoke of her war,
which I discovered through deduction
after her death.
She was an Ensign in FANY,
and knew the Beaulieu area very well.
/
Another point.
The German officer on the train
was not wearing an SS cap -
looked rather Wehrmacht to me.
/
@@zen4men well it's true there are about 500 words only british people know what the meaning is.
Operation Anthropoid is not ideal example of operation SOE as you mention. It was Czechoslovak army operation, more likely Czechoslovak goverment in-exile operation as active proof for british government in order that czechoslovak people actively fighting against nazies. Gabcik and Kubis, others members from their group were just prepared and trained by SOE. "Brain" of the operation was Frantisek Moravec, head of the Czechoslovak intelligence services and it was approved by Edvard Beneš, head of Czechoslovak goverment in-exile.
I hope they make a second part. I loved this WW2 movie. Best 2024 movie untill now.
Fun fact: Cary Elwes is actually related to TWO of these SOE bad asses... Lieutenant-Colonel Billy McLean and Major Oswald A. J. Cary-Elwes...
I thought it was common knowledge that, when it comes to movies, 'based on a true story' pretty much always means 'loosely inspired by'.
Agreed.
If a film were to stay true to what actually happened, it should say “a true story”
Because it is.
Anything else: “based on”, or “inspired by”
I just watched this movie & was entertained, if I wanted to see what really happened I'd come to a page like this & here I am, the appearance of the dread pirate Westley was a nice touch too.
Very entertaining movie. Although, as someone who read the book. They couldve made a tv series about the reat of the amazing feats they accomplished.
I have to say that i absolutely enjoyed this film . Yes it was over exaggerated but it was great
"Churchill's Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare : The Mavericks Who Plotted Hitler's Defeat" by Giles Milton tells a more detailed version and several aspects of the book show that it was actually very much like the film fantasy in a broader sense.
I totally take most of these points. However, i don't know anyone who would expect a completely historically accurate film from Guy Ritchie (especially when we're tipped off heavily on the intent with the Queen soundtrack). However, i will defend a couple of points. The mixed up timeline of the film, helps to move the film along but may make people forget that that boat journey took a very long time and that that long time is adressed in the film. The run in with the British ship also highlights that not everyone was happy to have this operation going on, without holding up the screenplay for too long. This also means that when the injurred commando is clearly badly wounded, when they arrive back on the British ship, the scene with Winston Churchill will have taken place weeks (at best) and possibly months later. Plenty of time to recover.
Loosely inspired by a true story is literally the same thing as based on a true story. Neither says “exactly like the true story”, so it’s really weird to be trying to make a distinction between two interchangeable things. Based on a true story means that reality served as an inspiration for a fictional stury. Soon after that you say the movie doesn’t tell you one of the characters was an inspiration for James Bond, except the movie does tell you that. I get what the purpose of the video is, but not paying attention to the movie itself is a bad way to go about it. If you can’t get things about the movie right, how do you expect people to believe you abou the historical bits?
The film DOES mention that Gus March Phillips was the inspiration for James Bond
My Goooood loose a little bit this is not a docu movie or a docuseries, is a fictional/Action/Adventure/Comedy movie i think that they did what they were task to do To Entertain, that´s it, if you want to know more about history read it and educate yourself
Then market it as such.
Nice video. I didn't hear you discuss another aspect of this film, after pointing out that there waa no females, as well as digging as far as the possible female being hispanic to explain the casting, and that is the casting of "roids' in two of the key male roles. Your historic photos show men that were no where near as big as several of the modern actors.
It is too bad Christopher Lee isn't around to give us his thoughts on this new release.😜
I can safely say he wouldn’t have thought much of this film.
Best film around right now by far.
Well, a film about historical events does definitely not need to add combat... It can simply add tension and suspense, portraying the actual events. I think the action scenes are great to watch, but they aren't needed per se. Look at great movies based in a world war II timeframe like "The Imitation Game" using character building and emotion instead of violence and gore. It's still a great movie, but it wouldn't be a bad movie, if Ritchie had dialed down the violence in favor for more realism and suspense between the characters. 😎
The real story reads like a cross between Guns of Naverone and Inglorious Basterds. Can't believe what these guys really did.
Honestly, those are both films I’d rather have been watching.
It's a movie, it doesn't matter, it never states "here is a history lesson" why do people have to pick apart things if you want facts go to the history channel and stop criticising, I don't understand why someone would make a video like this .
It’s funny how in the movie everyone has a beard but in real life none of them did
Also the hair cuts look very modern in the cast
Just nice to have a ww2 film that suggest maybe it wasn't just the usa doing all the fighting. Makes a nice change that.
Guy Ritchie shits all over the UK. At every turn he's made us sound pathetic and weak.
Oh yeah, this was so much better. The British winning the war one masterful commando operation at a time. Total German dead & missing 3.6 million. 2.7 of them fighting the Russians. 900,000 on all other fronts. It's rather obvious who did most of the fighting. Yet not many western movies about the Eastern Front.
@@jasonstarks3796Stalingrad is still the high watermark imo.
@@jasonstarks3796I really enjoyed “Enemy at the Gate” also based on a real sniper duel in Stalingrad great film
The film literally says at the end. That his character was said to inspire the James Bond character…..
GREAT FREEKN MOVIE!!!🔥💯👍 Guy Ritchie is FANTASTIC!!
Dude, it's a movie! Just enjoy it. We are all grown-ups, nobody is expecting a minute by minute true account of the real events. It's never been the goal of the movie.
About the ONLY 100% accurate thing in this film is that the Brits only ever assigned suppressors to the STEN gun for Special Forces to use. Since the gun was very light, suppressors made it much longer and heavier, so they only ever gave them for special forces type missions in WW2. I was shocked when they got that part right. Considering there wasn't many suppressors made for the STEN gun, its interesting that they got a couple. (could have been fake tho).
I can safely say without fear of contradiction that Alan Richer will look nothing like the man he is portraying.
Sounds like people aren't familiar with Guy Ritchie
When I want entertainment, I watch a movie. When I want real history, I read a book.
I wanted to know about Alvarez and Heron, sad they were just invented but good story
As usual and American has to knock a story based on true events (all be it with extra gunfire and explosions). Yet Americans are taught that the events of U-571 genuinely happened! It was only after significant backlash that a little note was added that it was fictional and that the Royal Navy captured the Enigma long before the US were in WW2. The MoUW is a film, sit back and enjoy it.
The photo damian lewis used on the book cover is of the long range desert patrol group somaliland camel corp.on deployment.i do wonder who gave kind permission for the use of said photo?
Lewis's book is a great read.
I enjoyed your video, but one niggly little criticism: " . . . the HMS Violet . . ." Please do not use an article when a ship name is preceded by the abbreviation HMS, which stands for His/Her Majesty's Ship.
very entertaining movie!
"....that is exactly what Churchill would have done" - which makes it a factual truth in some people's eyes today. that it never happened is irrelevant.
Movie was Guy Ritchie trying to be Tarantino and turn real events into an inglorious style flick but because it was trying to have a foot in both camps it fell short.
Passable popcorn flick but could have been so much more. If they wanted spec ops and explosions then the St Nazaire raid would have been a better choice but given how this movie ended up its a good thing they didn't go there.
Alan Richson cutting a bad guys heart out smells like a great plot point for Reacher season 4
Is there a season 3? Mildly disappointed by season 2 compared to 1.
@@dulls8475 season 3 is in the box already to go there's roughly 20 books in print
any how, this movie was flagged
@@billhobbs7077 I have read most of the books. Season 2 was not as good as 1 but that is just mu thought.
He was reacher playing reacher on steroids, the real Anders in the book isn't this bloodthirsty, at least at first he does go very dark in later missions when the Germans start reprisals.
It was 4 weeks later when he saw Churchill.
It is a great story about brave and resourceful warriors risking their lives for their country. The movie was a cartoonish affront to the memory of those men.
The way people are saying nazi would not work with black people is blowing my mind they could never conquer Africa with force
It's not a documentery, so i don't mind how "Hollywood" it is now. I do enjoy the shorts. And i wish they had survived, and been able to life their lives after the war. I do like the history behind the film.
It has always struck me as odd that the British are criticised for operations conducted in neutral countries such as Fernando Po & the Altmark incident in Norwegian waters, while ignoring the fact the Germans were using the same neutral countries for their benefit & advantage.
It was all politics. That was part of the reason why Churchill was in favour missions like this. Better to ask for forgiveness after than permission before.
It was entertaining, but like you, I found the way the protagonists effortlessly blasted through lots of enemies without being phased or even lightly wounded for most of the film very offputting. I don't expect it to be a documentary, but equally I don't expect the action scenes to be so over-the-top that they remove any thought of the heroes being in danger.
seems this is where Quentin really got inspiration for his version.
Similar story line but in Inglorious Bastards they were all Americans not British. Both great hilarious movies btw.
The big thing for me wasn’t the Guy Richie-ness of the movie but there is no way the Nazis at the costume party (Nope) would be listening to jazz, which they considered to be degenerate due to the majority of the musicians to be black or jewish.
what movie crap!
And those actors who just got out of the gym and are supposed to recreate real characters that existed in the 40s!
It's no surprise that younger generations have no idea what the Second World War was like.
That’s a good point I didn’t mention in the video. While the real guys weren’t out of shape, they certainly didn’t have time to spend several hours a day in the gym and they certainly didn’t look like Reacher or Henry Cavill. There were more important things, like a war going on.
@@HistoryvsHollywoodOfficialplus being absolutely huge like that would have required massive amounts of rations. There’s a very good reason why even today, most special forces soldiers are built like greyhounds.
And of course all the actors are massive and jacked when the fighters back in the day were built like lightweight soccer players.
Of course, the woman and the black man are fictional
DEI Shit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Doesn’t matter much, most of the plot is fictional
At least she is Jewish, that will piss off the Left. lol
"The truths of storytelling are not the truths of reportage."
- John Milch, Deadwood
Its a great movie. After the immediate post war British movies about WW2 like the Dambusters etc. Hollywood took on the subject with High action Romps light on realism like Where eagles dare, Guns of Naverone and a bit later Kelly's Heroes. Casting themselves as the Heroes who won the war on their own! A kind of golden age of WW2 action movies, not too bothered by realism but great entertainment. If a little bit unfair in their re writing to make America the sole victors. We are now reclaiming our war back from the Americans telling fantastic tales about the many operations carried out by Brits and their European and colonial allies. And doing it with fun and the same derring do as Hollywood did. And about time. Realism would be dull. This hits the spot perfectly blending fun comic book action with a foundation in fact. A great movie. If you like this watch the series on BBC i player SAS rogue Heroes. Similarly bending reality to tell a fun and fab tale with a foundation in fact. To analyse this type of movie and criticise it for its fantasy aspects is frankly to completely miss the point .
I think of it like the movie: the death of Stalin. Love it
I enjoyed the movie. It was never meant to be historically accurate. Just a tongue in cheek Guy Richie wartime heist movie. I feel critising it for historical accuracy is unfair
I didn't like Henry Cavill as Superman because he was poorly written and directed. But I watched this movie twice. This was a good movie in this day and age a good movie is hard to find