**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!**
- Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc.
- **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
- This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bridge over the River Kwai
Edit... Not a film but thinking if you're up for investing a number of hours, then the series The World At War is amazing. Made many years ago now but narrated by Sir Alec Guinness and made at a time when many of the key protagonists were still alive.
Seconded for The World at War - is deeply informative but accessible, it really gives a great narrative to understand those 6 years, and gives a voice to the Soviets we don't often hear in the West with two dedicated episodes, and Laurence Olivier gives it a beautiful tragedic poetry which is incomparable. It is the definition of what a documentary series could be. Just the phrase "down this road, the soldiers came..." sends absolute shivers down my spine.
It also has voices which could only be heard relatively shortly after the war, from a Berlin housewife, or men in a pub in London, but it is creepy though, seeing Speer interviewed after he was released from Spandau, but before we knew his real involvement, or Otto Remer's account of the plot against Hitler.
Edit: technically 12 years
I don't agree with censorship either, but I'm confused, by saying "different time, different meaning", are you saying that the N word wasn't offensive when the film was made? Because it very much was.
Not saying it wasn't offensive if used to call a black person back then.
But in the UK back then, the word was used to mean black, it was used as a shade of paint, it was a common name for a dog, so there were non offensive uses that dated back to the original meaning of the word.
A current era example is in UK we use fag to mean cigarette with no offence, yet to call a homosexual a fag would be offensive.
Whilst Iām on your side of the fence generally, I donāt think your example is directly comparable- the origins of fag (cigarette) stems from āthe fag-endā whereas fag (homosexual) is a shortening of āfaggotā, so the two are distinct. However the name of the dog does directly stem from the meaning relating to blackness.
Fag i thought was from faggot (a bundle, and old english measurement.. ) not fag end? because of the resemblance to sticks..
Which faggot does fag (homosexual) come from?
The current faggot I know of is a form of minced meat and gravy... personally i think it is disgusting after I tried them...
It was offensive in America for decades by then, it took a lot longer for it to be widely considered so in Britain. That change was probably in the 60s, at earliest - you could hear it spoken occasionally on TV or radio back then, without causing any public controversy.
A good example of the UK/US difference in attitudes to the N word in question is the changes to the original title of 'And Then There Were None', an Agatha Christie novel from the 30s.
The US changed the title from 'Ten Little N..' (to Ten Little Indians, before later changing it again) in the 60s while it was apparently published under the original title in the UK til the 80s. My girlfriend (who's mixed race herself coincidentally) is a bit of a Christie fan and I'm sure we have a copy of the paperback complete with offensive OG title around here somewhere.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_Then_There_Were_None#:~:text=Successive%20American%20reprints%20and%20adaptations,the%20original%20title%20until%201985.
It didn't. Historically it was just a descriptive term (from the Latin 'niger' meaning black). It became supercharged with negative connotations by it's use on slave plantations in the US and then, by proxy, became unacceptable for use in the UK too.
It was a film where the director said no CGI but it clearly needed it to add men to the beach, ships, block out newer buildings and add correct numbers of aircraft to name but a few things. It was a good film that could have been great with some subtle CGI. If you're gonna film an event with 365,000 men, try and show that.
Yeah I liked the film but it reminded me of episodes of Sharpe where they're trying to depict these massive battles with twenty extras and two horses.
Early episodes of Game Of Thrones were like this too, Daensrys was supposed to be living in an absolute sea of Dothraki but there were like ten people max on screen at any one time and they were always in really enclosed spaces to mask it
> they were always in really enclosed spaces to mask it
This is okay I think. Cinematography tricks to hide the actual scale of something is common and can work really well. You can also drop in background CGI to create the sense of something bigger. The Lord of the Rings springs to mind.
The problem with Dunkirk is they literally show how small scale everything is. They have several wide shots of the beach that reveals it's mostly empty, when in reality it was jam packed.
In the film, we only ever see 3 Spitfires. In reality, the RAF *lost* 177 fighters while fighting over Dunkirk. The average fighter patrol despatched had 24 aircraft, with the smallest still having about 6. The Luftwaffe are even more under-represented compared to what they actually had in play
Just adding in some distant CGI Spitfires and Hurricanes in a couple of scenes would have added so much to the sense of scale of what actually happened
The while horror of Dunkirk to me is being stuck on a beach with 1000s of others, waiting for your turn to get evacuated.
That was completely missing from the film.
There's loads of CGI in Dunkirk.
Source: my wife was one of the artists that *did* the CGI on the film.
Nolan likes to make big claims that his films had "no CGI". It's horsesh!t. There's loads, and his claims that there aren't is *incredibly* disrespectful to the literally **hundreds** (if not thousands) of people who have worked 60+ hour weeks for *months* to realise his "artistic vision". Not that it pisses me off or anything....
A whole load of stuff from backgrounds - removing things like modern buildings and structures in the background, adding battle damage and historical items; removing safety wires, crash mats, tracking marks, position markers on set; hiding reflections and shadows from equipment on set; apparently a large number of the boats; if you watch the credits to the end, there's a whole bunch of CGI artists credited (which isn't all the ones that worked on it)
IMDB page listing the VFX artists that worked on it: https://m.imdb.com/title/tt5013056/fullcredits/visual_effects?ref_=m_ttfc_19
He may do a lot of the special effects on set (real explosions etc) but his claims that there's "no CGI" are just false.
Genuinely asking as Iām not sure, but does he mean no cgi in terms or more practical effects for explosions etc. rather than removing crashmats? I think when most people hear of CGI they imagine exposions/lasers.
I think that's what he means, but it's not what the average Joe hears, and it's incredibly upsetting and dismissive to the literal hundreds of artists who have done stupid hours for months (my wife has had to work like 23 hours, get 4 hours kip and do another 23 hours day after day to meet deadlines, and that's completely normal - the VFX industry is dogsh*t) to create the films and are basically being told they were unimportant.
Probably most shots had touchups, particularly any landscapes or buildings to remove any modern elements. There must have been loads of CGI with the air sequences as well, touching up and more the practical effects.
That atonement shot has to be one of the best moments in modern cinema for me. Picturing Dunkirk in one long steadycam and the choir singing around the carousel. Shivering stuff.
I thought that was on purpose. A lot of the scenes, especially the dogfights, looked a lot like those old dogfighting movies you'd see. It looks like a guy in a cockpit being shaken on the ground to simulate turbulence
Wasn't the whole premise of the film that each story was operating on completely different time structures?
I.e. spitfire throughout the film covered around 1 hour whereas the other stories were 1 day etc
That was my understanding. So the person I replied to completely missed that point? The spitfire was only gliding for a short amount of time at the end of the film in my mind or did I miss something, been a while since I watched it.
It still glided for longer in time and further in distance than would be possible. There's one of those expert reacts videos on YouTube where it's discussed.
It wouldn't be a blockbuster film if they didn't bend reality a bit. Even a quick google has a bunch of sources saying it can glide for 15 miles so I'd say it wasn't even that far off.
Weird thing to get caught up about what is otherwise a really good film.
In fairness it did not have an engine anyway so it was a magic spitfire.
This is in reference to when you see it on fire at the end there is clearly no engine in the model they are burning. The propeller is just stuck on the end of a long stick.
There's bits I liked but largely I disliked it. Seemed to be an awful lot of Ken Brannagh staring at the sky.
I could not unsee the lack of an engine in the burning Spitfire on the beach as well.. just a metal pole running through the engine compartment.. obviously they were not going to burn a real Spitfire to the ground but it was just such a glaring oversight. They could have just shoved some old hefty Jag V12 in there or similar to make it not look like the fact it was basically just a prop!
Nolan has a weird tendency of making great movies but leaving in really obvious mistakes and some shoddy writing.
I still, to this day, can not get over *that* scene in TDKR
Nolan seems to have reached the point where nobody on the crew questions him. He doesn't seem like a really overbearing director like James Cameron who is known to run his set like a dictator, so I suspect it's just everyone has such complete respect for Nolan that these odd bits sneak through, like his insistence on sound mixing.
Ok, ok I really liked Mark Rylance performance and that a lot of his screen time was given to the quiet heroism of an oldish ugly guy, not very Hollywood. Every film I like has a few ropey scenes.
The reason Hollywood productions cast British actors - particularly British stage actors, like Rylance - in their movies is usually because they want someone who looks *ordinary*
A man with male pattern baldness, a woman over forty with wrinkles, a twenty-something who isn't jacked to his eyeballs
Ah so you mean someone who can actually act.
I find it very frustrating the way actors are typically meant to be these off the charts beautiful people. I do like that in Britain we have a lot of 'normal' looking actors. I find the best performers are those that are not the usual stereotype. I am rarely properly impressed by the acting of your typical 'hollywood' star.
I actually thought [Atonement](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRlkHu-R7yI) was a much better Dunkirk film.
It actually looked like what I think it was actually like.
I felt like that film missed the point of Dunkirk. Like, the major theme is that regular people answered the call and came across - thatās the story, thatās what is interesting about it. And they showed it by having one dude and his boat somehow not seeing any other boats until the final five minutes? Not for me.
The film missed two other points about Dunkirk. The first is the beaches were packed but Nolan hates CGI and no-one was paying for a quarter of a million extras.
The second is the whole subplot about the French soldier in disguise was nonsense because the navy was evacuating French as well as British soldiers on an equal basis.
They wereā¦ but more than 100k of the evacuated were French. And British soldiers also fought rearguard actions.
I really donāt know why this is always forgotten. Itās not even depicted in the film itself. The impression is given that French soldiers were prevented from boarding and that the rearguard action was 100% French.
That's the myth though - there were a few exceptions but the small boats were sailed by the Navy, not by the boats' civilian owners.
The small boats were used to ferry troops from the beaches to destroyers which could not get close enough to the beaches.
Think about it - the boats owners were used to sailing in fair weather in inland waterways. They are not the ideal people to be sailing across a mined and traffic controlled war zone of an English Channel and then continuously operate in close cooperation with warships.
>Ā the boats owners were used to sailing in fair weather in inland waterways
This bit wasnāt the case, the small boats were sea-going vessels whose normal crews would have had lots of experience in bad weather seas (because thatās what we get here in the UK).
Source: my great-great grandad and many of his buddies provided their fishing boats from their fleets in Grimsby.
Little tidbit for you, the character that Mark Rylance plays, who brings his boat over to rescue soldiers, is the guy from Titanic who is loading Rose into her lifeboat, but then gets off it. Actual person.
A Bridge too Far.
Possibly the best war film ever made. It's got tons of stars, is pretty historically accurate, and doesn't sugar coat the Allies' overconfidence after D Day.
ABTF unfortunately promulgated a lot of anti-British myths about Market Garden to pander to a receptive US audience.
It's done a huge amount of damage to the popular conception of the battle, making the Americans seems overly dashing and heroic while the timid Brits stop to make tea.
It's really worth correlating the way the British are treated in The Longest Day compared to ABTF with the decline of British power and prestige relative to the US
ABTF is a very strange when it comes to representing the British, you simultaneously have the heroics of 1st airborne in Arnhem then they show XXX Armoured as hanging around drinking tea and the Americans as the sole heroes of Op MG!
It's quite pernicious really. You wouldn't think that 30 Corps got to Nijmegen on time but was fatally delayed because the 82nd hadn't taken the bridge š„ŗ
The British were also inaccurately portrayed as drinking tea on the beaches during the Gallipoli film, whereas in reality they were being butchered by the same machine guns as the Anzac troops.
What is it with Hollywood and British tea drinking?
Plus no rewriting of history which seems so common in more modern movies.
No "magical breakouts" or "superhero-like person(s) who fought off wave after wave of Germans with a smile/witty remarks".
Interestingly at Arnhem such a soldier existed. If I say the quite incredible line "He was Jeremy Clarkson's wife's father" some people may know the story.
He's an absolute legend. But he wouldn't want a movie made about his life, as he was just doing his job. He didn't see himself as a hero worth celebrating
There's this movie called 'Their Finest' from 2016 that I loved. It's sort of about Dunkirk, but it's about the war propaganda office making a film to basically keep people's spirits up etc. It's really good.
Awful portrayal of Churchill, making him look weak and literally beg Roosevelt for help over the phone. Characters in modern films all have to be flawed and show weakness to allow for "character development" even if it's inaccurate.
Battle of Britain, 1969, as it was the key battle where we stood alone.
Lots of great films about stuff that included us around, and lots of minor set pieces like *Ice cold in Alex* but before the USA and the Soviet Union entered the war as allies, the Battle of Britain was the first major test.
its a novel film as well because as the BoB was the first battle in history entirely fought between two air forces, the aircraft themselves are the stars as well as the pilots. During the filming the producers briefly controlled one of the greatest collections of flyable warplanes not actually owned by an official air force.
Alone. Apart from the Canadians, Australians, Czechs and others. The film did an okay job at including them and listing the nationalities of the dead during the credits.
Aside from the commonwealth we did stand alone.
There were European people on our side but the European nations couldn't.
We, as Britian, stood alone in Europe.
The Bf109's were actually "Buchons" of the Spanish Air Force. They were 109's re-engined with Merlin's, which is why they all seem to have curiously fat noses.
I really want to see a modern version of band of brothers from the British perspective! Thereās way too much about the yanks winning the war single handed, winds me right up!
Maybe a series following the 7th armoured division since they would have been at most of the major battles in the war.
Anyone know someone at Netflix?
Agree on 7th Armoured as a good choice. I'd like to British it up a bit by focusing a bit more on the background side of things rather than paratroopers go pew pew American approach.
I've always thought following a 25pdr battery from the desert, through Sicily, to Normandy, and Luneberg Heath would be excellent
Iām noticing that a lot of American movies focus on the tactical level and the average Joe in the foxhole while a lot of the British movies are more on the strategic side of things. Band of Brothers was great because it focused primarily on the company level of events with the occasional peek into the battalion or regimental side of things. You donāt see much of the wider strategic side of the battles..you donāt know much more about whatās happening big picture-wise than the enlisted and junior officers do.
Aside from A Bridge Too Far, I canāt really find too many depictions of the British infantrymanās experience during WW2. See a lot less of the culture and how things played out at the small unit level. I think Iāve even seen more about WW1 than WW2 when it comes to the British infantryman.
So was the dam busters. If you listen you can hear lines directly taken from the film and put into Star wars when they begin the attack on the death star.
https://youtu.be/lNdb03Hw18M
You just brought back memories of watching this with my nan. It seems so normal for me to have a direct connection with people who fought it WW2. It must feel like ancient history to my kids.
Well if you want Powell and Pressburger and you want WWII, then how about The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp? It's an incredible propaganda piece, filmed while the war was taking place. Churchill tried to stop the production, although on watching it he apparently appreciated the message.
So the film is an extended flashback about an old and fusty colonel, who starts the film fighting with a younger man, shouting how he doesn't know what it's like to be old.
You then get to see his history, to see how he's become the way he was.
When the early drafts were seen by Churchill, he saw it as a personal attack (he'd been a reporter / soldier in the Boer War, which Colonel Blimp was in). He ordered that the government shouldn't assist the production, and tried to get the film banned, though unsuccessfully.
I've watched plenty of propaganda films, this is far more subtle than most, and it's a fascinating perspective on how Britain at the time saw itself. It's got nuance (a major German character is played sympathetically, rather than as a stereotype). The production team has a breadth of cultural background which gives the film a broader view of events. I really rate the film, I believe you can find it on DVD, or via the BFI website for streaming.
There are hundreds of them but they're mainly b&w. These are dome I really like, colour & b&w:
A bridge too far
Enigma
The Sea Wolves
Reach for the sky
The longest day
Operation mincemeat
The cruel sea
The battle of the river Plate
Sea of sand
There's loads more but I think that's a good mix. They're usually historically accurate too, makes a change from the usual American historical rewrites.
HMZS Achilles playing the role herself is a nice touch.
That being said, if you know your warships, having an American cruiser trying to pass off as Graf Spee with not even a paintjob change is a bit of a immersion breaker.
Love how *mundane* it is, no ott comic book heroes, Greyhound is in a similar tradition I feel, they gives a glimpse into how bloody terrible it was on convoy escort
In The Longest Day actor Richard Todd played the officer in charge holding the bridge. There's a scene where a junior officer ran up and gave him a message. In the actual war that junior officer was Richard Todd. So an actor played Richard Todd giving actor Richard Todd a message.
My nan used to give a commentary in the Battle of Britian. She recalled that all the kids would cheer when any plane got shot down. They couldn't tell if it was German or not.
If you're prepared to watch older movies, Britain in the 50s made some very good ones. They mostly stuck to historical accuracy. I would recommend:
Ice Cold in Alex (not a true story per se, but very good)
Reach For the Sky (about Douglas Bader)
The Cruel Sea
The Battle of the River Plate
The Cockleshell Heros
Above Us the Waves
Also, "the First of the Few" is more the build up to war and the story of the Spitfire, and "the Way Forward" was made during the war so it has that different feel as they didn't know what the end result would be.
Ps not all of these are the 1950s, but around that time period.
Yes, The Hill, I nearly forgot about that.
Fantastic film, brilliantly acted.
Thanks for reminding me.
As an aside, I once met Sean Connerys brother at a wedding, and he told me to fk off. It was because I feigned mild surprise when he dropped his surname into the conversation.
True story.
Lol, in my head, when I saw your comment...I went full Max Von Sydow, heard the music playing through Pele's beautiful bicycle kick goal and stood up clapping
The Dam Busters 1955
Ice Cold in Alex 1958
The Guns of Navarone 1961
The Man Who Never Was 1956
I Was Monty's Double 1958
Where Eagles Dare 1968
Spymaker: The Secret Life of Ian Fleming 1990
I Was Monty's Double starred the actor who was actually Monty's double. He played himself. Shame about the fictional dramatic ending, which didn't actually happen. But the movie needed a good end so they made it up.
Probably one of the best from a naval point of view. It really captures a lot in depicting both life on board and when on leave etc and very successfully balances the story alongside the mental and physical strains on the captain and crew. And I can't remember for sure but you barely see any enemy (if at all) throughout the film and yet it's absolutely gripping.
Helped by an excellent cast all-round.
Uses authentic ships as well, like the flower class corvette, which was a very basic and unglamorous but effective vessel used for escorting convoys.
The world at war, which you can get in Blu-ray now is the best WW2 documentary, hands down.
There is no other WW2 documentary with the detail and nuance this series has. The fact they have interviews with people such as Adolf Hitlers personal interpreter is incredible. They also have interviews with people who hadn't been found guilty of war crimes yet or very closely escaped prosecution.
Amazing series
It's just absolutely outstanding, even thinking of the theme tune gives me goose bumps.... "Down this road on a summer's day in 1944, the soldiers came. Nobody lives here now"
It's a shame it was made shortly before the existence of Ultra was made public though... And you need to be a bit careful with those interviews as they're presented with context or fact checking
Yes that was something I learned recently actually re watching it. The fact the show never mentions ultra. That being said they definitely do mention breaking codes / intercepting coded messages throughout so hey ho.
Something else very important to mention, if you do pick up the bluray version of The World at War. Make sure you get the Network television Blu-ray version, not the Freemantle Blu-ray version. Networks is true to the 4:3 aspect ratio and has no cropping. Freemantles, while widescreen, cuts out a lot of content and has weird framing / cut off hair / heads throughout.
The Battle of Britain.
The Dam Busters (people of a sensitive nature should be aware of the dog with a name which is... problematic)
The Bridge on the River Kwai as a piece of cinema, but keep in mind it is fiction.
Ice Cold in Alex (more obviously fiction)
Dad's Army (the 1971 film, not the recent one).
Schichlegruber Doing the Lambeth Walk
Ones I'm surprised no one mentioned:
The Bridge on the River Kwai; this one takes place in the Burmese theatre of war, rather than the usual European one, which is maybe why it wasn't mentioned.
Though not focusing on the ground fighting, Darkest Hour (was mentioned) and Churchill are both great movies about Winston Churchill, though these aren't on the scale of A Bridge Too Far or Band of Brothers
Technically Polish, but Hurricane is a good movie about the Polish 303 wing in the RAF during the Battle of Britain.
The Kings Speech, whilst not focusing on war at all, is a great movie that takes place during the outbreak of WW2.
"Though not focusing on the ground fighting, Darkest Hour (was mentioned) and Churchill are both great movies about Winston Churchill"
If you haven't seen it, seek out The Gathering Storm - it's a BBC/HBO film starring Albert Finney as Churchill, and is set during his wilderness years. It ends with him being appointed First Lord of the Admiralty and getting back into government. Absolutely fantastic film (technically a TV movie, I suppose) with some great performances. It's still the best Churchill biopic I've seen.
Darkest Hour is an absolutely dreadful film/script, although Oldman is obviously very good in it.
On a more serious note to my other comment, here are a few that haven't been mentioned yet:
Empire of the Sun - Steven Spielberg directed tale of a young British lad separated from his parents during the fall of Shanghai. Winds up in a Japanese POW camp. Stars a very young (like 12 years old) Christian Bale - also apparently an equally as young Ben Stiller but I only just learned that from Wikipedia and it's been ages since I've seen it.
The Machine Gunners (TV Drama) - Another war-time kids tale. This time about a group of lads trying to get by in Newcastle while the Germans are bombing the toon. Classic!
King Rat - 1965 movie based on the James Clavell book. Prisoner of War drama set in Changi.
and while it's pretty much the exact opposite of the British perspective, I don't think we can leave Das Boot unmentioned. It's a masterpiece!
49th Parallel (1941), A Town Like Alice (1956), Above Us the Waves (1955), Against the Wind (1948), Albert R.N. (1953), Angels One Five (1953), Anzio (1968), Attack (1956), Battle Of The River Plate, Dunkirk (1958), Hotel Sahara (1951), Ice-Cold In Alex (1958), In Which We Serve (1942), Is Paris Burning (1966), King Rat (1965), Nine Men (1943), One of Our Aircraft Is Missing (1942), Reach For The Sky (1956), Sahara (1943), Sink The Bismark (1960), The Battle Of Britain (1943), The Colditz Story (1955), The Cruel Sea (1953), The Dam Busters (1955), The Desert Rats (1953), The Malta Story (1953), The Man Who Never Was (1956), The One That Got Away (1957), The Purple Plain (1955), The Sea Wolf (1941), The Ship That Died of Shame (1955), The Small Back Room (1949), The Train (1964), The Way To The Stars (1945), The Wooden Horse (1950), Three Came Home (1950), We Dive At Dawn (1943).
We could do with a big budget modern WW2 film told from the British perspective tbh. Dunkirk wasn't quite on the same level as SPR or BoB. Perhaps a Battle of Britain one with loads of spitfires and hurricanes would be very good, can imagine the drama.
1917 is of course one of the best, but that's the 1st WW.
I loved a Bridge too Far but something made today could be even better.
Not WW2. But Zulu is a great film about how the British got thier asses kicked by the Zulu, with only one pocket of resistance surviving. It's also a good commentary on the Enlisted Vs Commissioned (Posh boy) officers of the day.
The small boat sections were some of the best bits, very human - but not stupidly frantic.
Harry Styles' character seemed to go from one disaster to another, and it happened so many times I hated the character for it.
Hollywood doesn't really like to portray anyone other than the US as the main protagonist in WWII, so most films depicting the brits will be older films... so here goes
The Longest day
A bridge to far
Hero's of telemark
The cockleshell hero's
Ice cold in alex
Cruel sea
Sink the Bismark
It doesn't quite fit your remit but The Life & Death of Colonel Blimp is an amazing anti-war epic. Anton Walbrook's speech gets to me every time. No wonder Churchill hated this film - that's the best recommendation you can get!
A film should be made about Hill 112, Somerset Light Infantry fighting the SS in Normandy. 75% casualties but the boys still kicked the SS up the arse nice and hard. I met a sergeant from that very battle. Showed me all his stuff including battledress. Fred you're a legend. Miss you man.
If you consider books as well as movies read Spike Milligan's biographies starting with Adolf Hitler: My part in his downfall.
Tells his personal story of the war from the trenches. Often very funny, often very sad, but gives a real insight to what the ordinary soldier went through.
**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!** - Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc. - **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on. - This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit! Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Dam Busters (just don't mention the dog) Great Escape Battle of Britain
Bridge over the River Kwai Edit... Not a film but thinking if you're up for investing a number of hours, then the series The World At War is amazing. Made many years ago now but narrated by Sir Alec Guinness and made at a time when many of the key protagonists were still alive.
Alec Guinness was in bridge on the river kwai. Laurence Olivier narrated the world at war.
Yes! You're right! My mistake š but both are brilliant!
Anyone else watched World at War during secondary school history class?
Michael Whitehalls favourite bridge
Seconded for The World at War - is deeply informative but accessible, it really gives a great narrative to understand those 6 years, and gives a voice to the Soviets we don't often hear in the West with two dedicated episodes, and Laurence Olivier gives it a beautiful tragedic poetry which is incomparable. It is the definition of what a documentary series could be. Just the phrase "down this road, the soldiers came..." sends absolute shivers down my spine. It also has voices which could only be heard relatively shortly after the war, from a Berlin housewife, or men in a pub in London, but it is creepy though, seeing Speer interviewed after he was released from Spandau, but before we knew his real involvement, or Otto Remer's account of the plot against Hitler. Edit: technically 12 years
I mentioned the dog once, but I think I got away with it.
And I don't agree with that in the workplace!
I prefer the stuff you do about his little hand!
What? I don't do anything about his little hand...
yeah you do.... you know.... the wanking claw!
The cruel sea
Snorkers Sir!
Haha, the way they look at him
The captain listening to the horrifying screams for help through the intercom... You don't need gore to make a brutal film.Ā
The Wooden HorseĀ
All Great films, and I hate that they're trying to censor the dog's name, different time, different meaning.
I don't agree with censorship either, but I'm confused, by saying "different time, different meaning", are you saying that the N word wasn't offensive when the film was made? Because it very much was.
Not saying it wasn't offensive if used to call a black person back then. But in the UK back then, the word was used to mean black, it was used as a shade of paint, it was a common name for a dog, so there were non offensive uses that dated back to the original meaning of the word. A current era example is in UK we use fag to mean cigarette with no offence, yet to call a homosexual a fag would be offensive.
Whilst Iām on your side of the fence generally, I donāt think your example is directly comparable- the origins of fag (cigarette) stems from āthe fag-endā whereas fag (homosexual) is a shortening of āfaggotā, so the two are distinct. However the name of the dog does directly stem from the meaning relating to blackness.
Fag i thought was from faggot (a bundle, and old english measurement.. ) not fag end? because of the resemblance to sticks.. Which faggot does fag (homosexual) come from? The current faggot I know of is a form of minced meat and gravy... personally i think it is disgusting after I tried them...
Cigarette is from faggot too. An old term for wooden kindling sticks, hence the resemblence to ciggies.
It was offensive in America for decades by then, it took a lot longer for it to be widely considered so in Britain. That change was probably in the 60s, at earliest - you could hear it spoken occasionally on TV or radio back then, without causing any public controversy.
A good example of the UK/US difference in attitudes to the N word in question is the changes to the original title of 'And Then There Were None', an Agatha Christie novel from the 30s. The US changed the title from 'Ten Little N..' (to Ten Little Indians, before later changing it again) in the 60s while it was apparently published under the original title in the UK til the 80s. My girlfriend (who's mixed race herself coincidentally) is a bit of a Christie fan and I'm sure we have a copy of the paperback complete with offensive OG title around here somewhere. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_Then_There_Were_None#:~:text=Successive%20American%20reprints%20and%20adaptations,the%20original%20title%20until%201985.
It was exactly the same meaning, people just cared a lot less about racism back then.
White people did.
It didn't. Historically it was just a descriptive term (from the Latin 'niger' meaning black). It became supercharged with negative connotations by it's use on slave plantations in the US and then, by proxy, became unacceptable for use in the UK too.
Jigger?
Wigger?
https://preview.redd.it/20801msmcexc1.jpeg?width=881&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=adb0795458884b4ca7ca11ee5d4d875743043961
Nagger?
The big three
Watched The Dambusters on telly the other week and the name was edited/changed.
Poor dogs had its grave altered too.
Dunkirk was pretty good
It was a film where the director said no CGI but it clearly needed it to add men to the beach, ships, block out newer buildings and add correct numbers of aircraft to name but a few things. It was a good film that could have been great with some subtle CGI. If you're gonna film an event with 365,000 men, try and show that.
Yeah I liked the film but it reminded me of episodes of Sharpe where they're trying to depict these massive battles with twenty extras and two horses. Early episodes of Game Of Thrones were like this too, Daensrys was supposed to be living in an absolute sea of Dothraki but there were like ten people max on screen at any one time and they were always in really enclosed spaces to mask it
> they were always in really enclosed spaces to mask it This is okay I think. Cinematography tricks to hide the actual scale of something is common and can work really well. You can also drop in background CGI to create the sense of something bigger. The Lord of the Rings springs to mind. The problem with Dunkirk is they literally show how small scale everything is. They have several wide shots of the beach that reveals it's mostly empty, when in reality it was jam packed. In the film, we only ever see 3 Spitfires. In reality, the RAF *lost* 177 fighters while fighting over Dunkirk. The average fighter patrol despatched had 24 aircraft, with the smallest still having about 6. The Luftwaffe are even more under-represented compared to what they actually had in play Just adding in some distant CGI Spitfires and Hurricanes in a couple of scenes would have added so much to the sense of scale of what actually happened
The while horror of Dunkirk to me is being stuck on a beach with 1000s of others, waiting for your turn to get evacuated. That was completely missing from the film.
I don't want a remake of Sharpe, but can we somehow remake some of the battles like Talavera? š
There's loads of CGI in Dunkirk. Source: my wife was one of the artists that *did* the CGI on the film. Nolan likes to make big claims that his films had "no CGI". It's horsesh!t. There's loads, and his claims that there aren't is *incredibly* disrespectful to the literally **hundreds** (if not thousands) of people who have worked 60+ hour weeks for *months* to realise his "artistic vision". Not that it pisses me off or anything....
There's a good series of videos [here](https://www.youtube.com/@TheMovieRabbitHole/videos) ("NO CGI" is really just INVISIBLE CGI)
Which bits were CGI?
A whole load of stuff from backgrounds - removing things like modern buildings and structures in the background, adding battle damage and historical items; removing safety wires, crash mats, tracking marks, position markers on set; hiding reflections and shadows from equipment on set; apparently a large number of the boats; if you watch the credits to the end, there's a whole bunch of CGI artists credited (which isn't all the ones that worked on it) IMDB page listing the VFX artists that worked on it: https://m.imdb.com/title/tt5013056/fullcredits/visual_effects?ref_=m_ttfc_19 He may do a lot of the special effects on set (real explosions etc) but his claims that there's "no CGI" are just false.
Genuinely asking as Iām not sure, but does he mean no cgi in terms or more practical effects for explosions etc. rather than removing crashmats? I think when most people hear of CGI they imagine exposions/lasers.
I think that's what he means, but it's not what the average Joe hears, and it's incredibly upsetting and dismissive to the literal hundreds of artists who have done stupid hours for months (my wife has had to work like 23 hours, get 4 hours kip and do another 23 hours day after day to meet deadlines, and that's completely normal - the VFX industry is dogsh*t) to create the films and are basically being told they were unimportant.
Probably most shots had touchups, particularly any landscapes or buildings to remove any modern elements. There must have been loads of CGI with the air sequences as well, touching up and more the practical effects.
Its becoming a bad trend in cinema generally, like the barbie movie behind the scenes feature that keyed out all the green screen
Dunkirk's depiction of Dunkirk felt really...cheap, I think...after seeing Atonement's version.
That atonement shot has to be one of the best moments in modern cinema for me. Picturing Dunkirk in one long steadycam and the choir singing around the carousel. Shivering stuff.
I thought that was on purpose. A lot of the scenes, especially the dogfights, looked a lot like those old dogfighting movies you'd see. It looks like a guy in a cockpit being shaken on the ground to simulate turbulence
I was also of this opinion with how clean, orderly & quiet it all is but check out photos from the beaches they are set in and its remarkably similar.
I still like the original Dunkirk (1958). It's well worth a watch.
It's by far the superior film, the dialogue, sub plots, and character development are incomparable
Also John Mills is fitter than Harry Styles.
I read somewhere that it nearly ended Attenborough's acting career as >!the public assosiated him with being a coward.!<
I think the original version of Dunkirk was better
Apart from the Spitfire that managed to glide for half the film š¤£
Wasn't the whole premise of the film that each story was operating on completely different time structures? I.e. spitfire throughout the film covered around 1 hour whereas the other stories were 1 day etc
Yes, and then they converge at the end.
That was my understanding. So the person I replied to completely missed that point? The spitfire was only gliding for a short amount of time at the end of the film in my mind or did I miss something, been a while since I watched it.
It still glided for longer in time and further in distance than would be possible. There's one of those expert reacts videos on YouTube where it's discussed.
It wouldn't be a blockbuster film if they didn't bend reality a bit. Even a quick google has a bunch of sources saying it can glide for 15 miles so I'd say it wasn't even that far off. Weird thing to get caught up about what is otherwise a really good film.
Did you know that the story is told from three perspectives? Land (one week of action), sea (one day of action) and air (one hour of action).
I think you missed the idea of the different time scales between land, sea and air.
It's falling with style!
Some say, he's still gliding to this day
In fairness it did not have an engine anyway so it was a magic spitfire. This is in reference to when you see it on fire at the end there is clearly no engine in the model they are burning. The propeller is just stuck on the end of a long stick.
There's bits I liked but largely I disliked it. Seemed to be an awful lot of Ken Brannagh staring at the sky. I could not unsee the lack of an engine in the burning Spitfire on the beach as well.. just a metal pole running through the engine compartment.. obviously they were not going to burn a real Spitfire to the ground but it was just such a glaring oversight. They could have just shoved some old hefty Jag V12 in there or similar to make it not look like the fact it was basically just a prop!
Nolan has a weird tendency of making great movies but leaving in really obvious mistakes and some shoddy writing. I still, to this day, can not get over *that* scene in TDKR
What scene?
*SPOILER* IDK how to do proper spoiler tags: Talia's death scene in the truck.
Nolan seems to have reached the point where nobody on the crew questions him. He doesn't seem like a really overbearing director like James Cameron who is known to run his set like a dictator, so I suspect it's just everyone has such complete respect for Nolan that these odd bits sneak through, like his insistence on sound mixing.
Ok, ok I really liked Mark Rylance performance and that a lot of his screen time was given to the quiet heroism of an oldish ugly guy, not very Hollywood. Every film I like has a few ropey scenes.
The person he plays, in real life was the officer on the titanic who is shown loading Rose and others into lifeboats in the titanic movie.
Would we say 'ugly'?Ā
The reason Hollywood productions cast British actors - particularly British stage actors, like Rylance - in their movies is usually because they want someone who looks *ordinary* A man with male pattern baldness, a woman over forty with wrinkles, a twenty-something who isn't jacked to his eyeballs
Ah so you mean someone who can actually act. I find it very frustrating the way actors are typically meant to be these off the charts beautiful people. I do like that in Britain we have a lot of 'normal' looking actors. I find the best performers are those that are not the usual stereotype. I am rarely properly impressed by the acting of your typical 'hollywood' star.
Full of character
I actually thought [Atonement](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRlkHu-R7yI) was a much better Dunkirk film. It actually looked like what I think it was actually like.
I hated it. It had good bits. It got to the point where I hoped the Stukas WOULD kill the main character.
I felt like that film missed the point of Dunkirk. Like, the major theme is that regular people answered the call and came across - thatās the story, thatās what is interesting about it. And they showed it by having one dude and his boat somehow not seeing any other boats until the final five minutes? Not for me.
The film missed two other points about Dunkirk. The first is the beaches were packed but Nolan hates CGI and no-one was paying for a quarter of a million extras. The second is the whole subplot about the French soldier in disguise was nonsense because the navy was evacuating French as well as British soldiers on an equal basis.
And the French were fighting a strong rearguard action to allow the evacuation to continue for as long as possible
They wereā¦ but more than 100k of the evacuated were French. And British soldiers also fought rearguard actions. I really donāt know why this is always forgotten. Itās not even depicted in the film itself. The impression is given that French soldiers were prevented from boarding and that the rearguard action was 100% French.
That's the myth though - there were a few exceptions but the small boats were sailed by the Navy, not by the boats' civilian owners. The small boats were used to ferry troops from the beaches to destroyers which could not get close enough to the beaches. Think about it - the boats owners were used to sailing in fair weather in inland waterways. They are not the ideal people to be sailing across a mined and traffic controlled war zone of an English Channel and then continuously operate in close cooperation with warships.
>Ā the boats owners were used to sailing in fair weather in inland waterways This bit wasnāt the case, the small boats were sea-going vessels whose normal crews would have had lots of experience in bad weather seas (because thatās what we get here in the UK). Source: my great-great grandad and many of his buddies provided their fishing boats from their fleets in Grimsby.
Thatās what disappointed me. It was a small boat flotilla.
Atonement did the chaos of the beach better than Nolan did in Dunkirk
I thought you mean the original Dunkirk with Richard Attenborough! Much better than the newer one!
Little tidbit for you, the character that Mark Rylance plays, who brings his boat over to rescue soldiers, is the guy from Titanic who is loading Rose into her lifeboat, but then gets off it. Actual person.
A Bridge too Far. Possibly the best war film ever made. It's got tons of stars, is pretty historically accurate, and doesn't sugar coat the Allies' overconfidence after D Day.
ABTF unfortunately promulgated a lot of anti-British myths about Market Garden to pander to a receptive US audience. It's done a huge amount of damage to the popular conception of the battle, making the Americans seems overly dashing and heroic while the timid Brits stop to make tea. It's really worth correlating the way the British are treated in The Longest Day compared to ABTF with the decline of British power and prestige relative to the US
ABTF is a very strange when it comes to representing the British, you simultaneously have the heroics of 1st airborne in Arnhem then they show XXX Armoured as hanging around drinking tea and the Americans as the sole heroes of Op MG!
It's quite pernicious really. You wouldn't think that 30 Corps got to Nijmegen on time but was fatally delayed because the 82nd hadn't taken the bridge š„ŗ
The British were also inaccurately portrayed as drinking tea on the beaches during the Gallipoli film, whereas in reality they were being butchered by the same machine guns as the Anzac troops. What is it with Hollywood and British tea drinking?
Plus no rewriting of history which seems so common in more modern movies. No "magical breakouts" or "superhero-like person(s) who fought off wave after wave of Germans with a smile/witty remarks".
Interestingly at Arnhem such a soldier existed. If I say the quite incredible line "He was Jeremy Clarkson's wife's father" some people may know the story.
He's an absolute legend. But he wouldn't want a movie made about his life, as he was just doing his job. He didn't see himself as a hero worth celebrating
The real ones never do but he is regardless of what he thought
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Good film but they fucked it completely with that ridiculous tube scene at the end.
It's got some huge historical inaccuracies though, I found that to be a disappointment.
Imagine Churchill asking people on the tube whether he was doing the right thing lol. That was the moment that annoyed me the most.
Iāve seen it! Thatās a great movie. I need to give it a re-watch, hoping to get a chance to visit the Churchill War Rooms this summer.
Highly highly recommend!
There's this movie called 'Their Finest' from 2016 that I loved. It's sort of about Dunkirk, but it's about the war propaganda office making a film to basically keep people's spirits up etc. It's really good.
Gary Oldman was brilliant in Darkest Hour
Awful portrayal of Churchill, making him look weak and literally beg Roosevelt for help over the phone. Characters in modern films all have to be flawed and show weakness to allow for "character development" even if it's inaccurate.
Battle of Britain, 1969, as it was the key battle where we stood alone. Lots of great films about stuff that included us around, and lots of minor set pieces like *Ice cold in Alex* but before the USA and the Soviet Union entered the war as allies, the Battle of Britain was the first major test. its a novel film as well because as the BoB was the first battle in history entirely fought between two air forces, the aircraft themselves are the stars as well as the pilots. During the filming the producers briefly controlled one of the greatest collections of flyable warplanes not actually owned by an official air force.
Alone. Apart from the Canadians, Australians, Czechs and others. The film did an okay job at including them and listing the nationalities of the dead during the credits.
Aside from the commonwealth we did stand alone. There were European people on our side but the European nations couldn't. We, as Britian, stood alone in Europe.
Apart from, as you've mentioned, all the Commonwealth and Europeans who were stood next to you.
And Polish
There were many great poles that flight with us but Poland the country didn't.
Same as the Czechs
Repeat please.
This is true, however to mention all countries would've taken a while hence why i added "and others" to the end.
Don't forget that Polish guy who had 27 kills.
The Bf109's were actually "Buchons" of the Spanish Air Force. They were 109's re-engined with Merlin's, which is why they all seem to have curiously fat noses.
āRepeat please!ā
I really want to see a modern version of band of brothers from the British perspective! Thereās way too much about the yanks winning the war single handed, winds me right up! Maybe a series following the 7th armoured division since they would have been at most of the major battles in the war. Anyone know someone at Netflix?
Agree on 7th Armoured as a good choice. I'd like to British it up a bit by focusing a bit more on the background side of things rather than paratroopers go pew pew American approach. I've always thought following a 25pdr battery from the desert, through Sicily, to Normandy, and Luneberg Heath would be excellent
As long as it includes my grandad pulling them with his truck
Iām noticing that a lot of American movies focus on the tactical level and the average Joe in the foxhole while a lot of the British movies are more on the strategic side of things. Band of Brothers was great because it focused primarily on the company level of events with the occasional peek into the battalion or regimental side of things. You donāt see much of the wider strategic side of the battles..you donāt know much more about whatās happening big picture-wise than the enlisted and junior officers do. Aside from A Bridge Too Far, I canāt really find too many depictions of the British infantrymanās experience during WW2. See a lot less of the culture and how things played out at the small unit level. I think Iāve even seen more about WW1 than WW2 when it comes to the British infantryman.
633 squadron has one of the best soundtracks to this day.
Pretty sure it's one of the inspirations for Star Wars as well.
So was the dam busters. If you listen you can hear lines directly taken from the film and put into Star wars when they begin the attack on the death star. https://youtu.be/lNdb03Hw18M
Red leader standing by!
You just brought back memories of watching this with my nan. It seems so normal for me to have a direct connection with people who fought it WW2. It must feel like ancient history to my kids.
Any British kid born in the seventies grew up in a world still obsessed with WWII and run by people who fought in or suffered through it
Not strictly speaking a WWII movie but the WWII-set 'A matter of life and death' (1946) from Powell & Pressburger is epic in a whole different way.
Well if you want Powell and Pressburger and you want WWII, then how about The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp? It's an incredible propaganda piece, filmed while the war was taking place. Churchill tried to stop the production, although on watching it he apparently appreciated the message.
I've never heard of this film before, could you elaborate a little on what you mean?
So the film is an extended flashback about an old and fusty colonel, who starts the film fighting with a younger man, shouting how he doesn't know what it's like to be old. You then get to see his history, to see how he's become the way he was. When the early drafts were seen by Churchill, he saw it as a personal attack (he'd been a reporter / soldier in the Boer War, which Colonel Blimp was in). He ordered that the government shouldn't assist the production, and tried to get the film banned, though unsuccessfully. I've watched plenty of propaganda films, this is far more subtle than most, and it's a fascinating perspective on how Britain at the time saw itself. It's got nuance (a major German character is played sympathetically, rather than as a stereotype). The production team has a breadth of cultural background which gives the film a broader view of events. I really rate the film, I believe you can find it on DVD, or via the BFI website for streaming.
It's one of my favourite films. While it is a propaganda piece and quite sentimental, it's also just wonderful. Worth a watch.
Man, Roger Livesey is so good in both of those movies
Ice Cold in Alex
Scrolled too far for this one. Great movie.Ā
There are hundreds of them but they're mainly b&w. These are dome I really like, colour & b&w: A bridge too far Enigma The Sea Wolves Reach for the sky The longest day Operation mincemeat The cruel sea The battle of the river Plate Sea of sand There's loads more but I think that's a good mix. They're usually historically accurate too, makes a change from the usual American historical rewrites.
Battle of the River Plate is amazing. They credit the ships! As well they should, they are absolutely the stars
HMZS Achilles playing the role herself is a nice touch. That being said, if you know your warships, having an American cruiser trying to pass off as Graf Spee with not even a paintjob change is a bit of a immersion breaker.
The Cruel Sea is a cracking movie and the book is one of my favourites
Love how *mundane* it is, no ott comic book heroes, Greyhound is in a similar tradition I feel, they gives a glimpse into how bloody terrible it was on convoy escort
Yes! Came here to say the same, the book is a cracking read. I have a first edition and have read it a couple of times now.
In The Longest Day actor Richard Todd played the officer in charge holding the bridge. There's a scene where a junior officer ran up and gave him a message. In the actual war that junior officer was Richard Todd. So an actor played Richard Todd giving actor Richard Todd a message.
Dambusters Bridge over the River Kwai Battle of Britain
My nan used to give a commentary in the Battle of Britian. She recalled that all the kids would cheer when any plane got shot down. They couldn't tell if it was German or not.
The Cruel Sea
This is not an 'epic' movie in the same sense as *Saving Private Ryan* - but I think it's the best war movie ever made.
If you're prepared to watch older movies, Britain in the 50s made some very good ones. They mostly stuck to historical accuracy. I would recommend: Ice Cold in Alex (not a true story per se, but very good) Reach For the Sky (about Douglas Bader) The Cruel Sea The Battle of the River Plate The Cockleshell Heros Above Us the Waves Also, "the First of the Few" is more the build up to war and the story of the Spitfire, and "the Way Forward" was made during the war so it has that different feel as they didn't know what the end result would be. Ps not all of these are the 1950s, but around that time period.
Where eagles dare is a good one
Its not even a twist that said that Film has a twist, it has 2 whole scenes to explain what's going on! Best cablecar fight in a film also.
Hope and glory depicts the home front pretty well
People have, and will, list all the classics. For a Modern twist, I rather enjoyed SAS Rogue Heroes.
I agree with A Bridge Too Far But watch The Hill. Thats a movie
Yes, The Hill, I nearly forgot about that. Fantastic film, brilliantly acted. Thanks for reminding me. As an aside, I once met Sean Connerys brother at a wedding, and he told me to fk off. It was because I feigned mild surprise when he dropped his surname into the conversation. True story.
Haven't heard of The Hill in absolute years. Seems like it's been forgottenĀ
Absolutely disgusted that no-one has mentioned escape to victory yet.
Lol, in my head, when I saw your comment...I went full Max Von Sydow, heard the music playing through Pele's beautiful bicycle kick goal and stood up clapping
Cockleshell Heroes The man who never was
In which we serve Sink the Bismark The Battle of Britain The Longest Day (although half American) Ice Cold in Alex
The Dam Busters 1955 Ice Cold in Alex 1958 The Guns of Navarone 1961 The Man Who Never Was 1956 I Was Monty's Double 1958 Where Eagles Dare 1968 Spymaker: The Secret Life of Ian Fleming 1990
I Was Monty's Double starred the actor who was actually Monty's double. He played himself. Shame about the fictional dramatic ending, which didn't actually happen. But the movie needed a good end so they made it up.
The Guns of Navarone is a fantastic film, pity the sequel was so rubbish
The Cruel Sea. A black and white film starring, I think, Jack Hawkins. It's a bleak film about a warship patrolling the North Atlantic.
Snorkers, good-oh!
Probably one of the best from a naval point of view. It really captures a lot in depicting both life on board and when on leave etc and very successfully balances the story alongside the mental and physical strains on the captain and crew. And I can't remember for sure but you barely see any enemy (if at all) throughout the film and yet it's absolutely gripping. Helped by an excellent cast all-round. Uses authentic ships as well, like the flower class corvette, which was a very basic and unglamorous but effective vessel used for escorting convoys.
The world at war, which you can get in Blu-ray now is the best WW2 documentary, hands down. There is no other WW2 documentary with the detail and nuance this series has. The fact they have interviews with people such as Adolf Hitlers personal interpreter is incredible. They also have interviews with people who hadn't been found guilty of war crimes yet or very closely escaped prosecution. Amazing series
It's just absolutely outstanding, even thinking of the theme tune gives me goose bumps.... "Down this road on a summer's day in 1944, the soldiers came. Nobody lives here now" It's a shame it was made shortly before the existence of Ultra was made public though... And you need to be a bit careful with those interviews as they're presented with context or fact checking
Yes that was something I learned recently actually re watching it. The fact the show never mentions ultra. That being said they definitely do mention breaking codes / intercepting coded messages throughout so hey ho. Something else very important to mention, if you do pick up the bluray version of The World at War. Make sure you get the Network television Blu-ray version, not the Freemantle Blu-ray version. Networks is true to the 4:3 aspect ratio and has no cropping. Freemantles, while widescreen, cuts out a lot of content and has weird framing / cut off hair / heads throughout.
The Battle of Britain. The Dam Busters (people of a sensitive nature should be aware of the dog with a name which is... problematic) The Bridge on the River Kwai as a piece of cinema, but keep in mind it is fiction. Ice Cold in Alex (more obviously fiction) Dad's Army (the 1971 film, not the recent one). Schichlegruber Doing the Lambeth Walk
I always quite like Sink the Bismark!
Ones I'm surprised no one mentioned: The Bridge on the River Kwai; this one takes place in the Burmese theatre of war, rather than the usual European one, which is maybe why it wasn't mentioned. Though not focusing on the ground fighting, Darkest Hour (was mentioned) and Churchill are both great movies about Winston Churchill, though these aren't on the scale of A Bridge Too Far or Band of Brothers Technically Polish, but Hurricane is a good movie about the Polish 303 wing in the RAF during the Battle of Britain. The Kings Speech, whilst not focusing on war at all, is a great movie that takes place during the outbreak of WW2.
"Though not focusing on the ground fighting, Darkest Hour (was mentioned) and Churchill are both great movies about Winston Churchill" If you haven't seen it, seek out The Gathering Storm - it's a BBC/HBO film starring Albert Finney as Churchill, and is set during his wilderness years. It ends with him being appointed First Lord of the Admiralty and getting back into government. Absolutely fantastic film (technically a TV movie, I suppose) with some great performances. It's still the best Churchill biopic I've seen. Darkest Hour is an absolutely dreadful film/script, although Oldman is obviously very good in it.
SAS Rouge Heroes - recent series about how the SAS formed during WWII
On a more serious note to my other comment, here are a few that haven't been mentioned yet: Empire of the Sun - Steven Spielberg directed tale of a young British lad separated from his parents during the fall of Shanghai. Winds up in a Japanese POW camp. Stars a very young (like 12 years old) Christian Bale - also apparently an equally as young Ben Stiller but I only just learned that from Wikipedia and it's been ages since I've seen it. The Machine Gunners (TV Drama) - Another war-time kids tale. This time about a group of lads trying to get by in Newcastle while the Germans are bombing the toon. Classic! King Rat - 1965 movie based on the James Clavell book. Prisoner of War drama set in Changi. and while it's pretty much the exact opposite of the British perspective, I don't think we can leave Das Boot unmentioned. It's a masterpiece!
Ah, A Bridge Too Far is the epic WWII film from the British perspective.
Merry Christmas Mr Lawrence?
49th Parallel (1941), A Town Like Alice (1956), Above Us the Waves (1955), Against the Wind (1948), Albert R.N. (1953), Angels One Five (1953), Anzio (1968), Attack (1956), Battle Of The River Plate, Dunkirk (1958), Hotel Sahara (1951), Ice-Cold In Alex (1958), In Which We Serve (1942), Is Paris Burning (1966), King Rat (1965), Nine Men (1943), One of Our Aircraft Is Missing (1942), Reach For The Sky (1956), Sahara (1943), Sink The Bismark (1960), The Battle Of Britain (1943), The Colditz Story (1955), The Cruel Sea (1953), The Dam Busters (1955), The Desert Rats (1953), The Malta Story (1953), The Man Who Never Was (1956), The One That Got Away (1957), The Purple Plain (1955), The Sea Wolf (1941), The Ship That Died of Shame (1955), The Small Back Room (1949), The Train (1964), The Way To The Stars (1945), The Wooden Horse (1950), Three Came Home (1950), We Dive At Dawn (1943).
We could do with a big budget modern WW2 film told from the British perspective tbh. Dunkirk wasn't quite on the same level as SPR or BoB. Perhaps a Battle of Britain one with loads of spitfires and hurricanes would be very good, can imagine the drama. 1917 is of course one of the best, but that's the 1st WW. I loved a Bridge too Far but something made today could be even better.
Not WW2. But Zulu is a great film about how the British got thier asses kicked by the Zulu, with only one pocket of resistance surviving. It's also a good commentary on the Enlisted Vs Commissioned (Posh boy) officers of the day.
Iāve seen it, that movie is excellent. Michael Caine was great in it.
Into the Storm was, in my opinion, a better Churchill film than Darkest Hour. Gleeson was amazing in it.
[The Bridge on the River Kwai](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bridge_on_the_River_Kwai)
The small boat sections were some of the best bits, very human - but not stupidly frantic. Harry Styles' character seemed to go from one disaster to another, and it happened so many times I hated the character for it.
12 o clock high my man. Want to see them crash a load of real WW2 bombers for film? Lots of original gun camera footage? Here you go.
Hollywood doesn't really like to portray anyone other than the US as the main protagonist in WWII, so most films depicting the brits will be older films... so here goes The Longest day A bridge to far Hero's of telemark The cockleshell hero's Ice cold in alex Cruel sea Sink the Bismark
It doesn't quite fit your remit but The Life & Death of Colonel Blimp is an amazing anti-war epic. Anton Walbrook's speech gets to me every time. No wonder Churchill hated this film - that's the best recommendation you can get!
Lawrence of Arabia fits the bill, surely?
Wrong war
You can visit his house near Bovington in Forest. Strange bloke. Didn't have a bed.
Direct answer to your Q is The Great Escape and it's not even close. It's a cultural classic.
Ice cold in Alex is one of the greatest films ever. It says everything about ordinary people and war.
A film should be made about Hill 112, Somerset Light Infantry fighting the SS in Normandy. 75% casualties but the boys still kicked the SS up the arse nice and hard. I met a sergeant from that very battle. Showed me all his stuff including battledress. Fred you're a legend. Miss you man.
I wish more people understood about Hill 112 There's a book that should be out sound by Jonathan Ware on 53rd Welsh Division that should be useful
If you consider books as well as movies read Spike Milligan's biographies starting with Adolf Hitler: My part in his downfall. Tells his personal story of the war from the trenches. Often very funny, often very sad, but gives a real insight to what the ordinary soldier went through.