Reviews
Bloody Sunday (2002)
Bloody Farce
This film leaves us still waiting for an unbiased objective film about the 'troubles'. The makers behind this film were also behind other films taking the republican side..In the Name of The Father etc..
A travesty which excuses itself by claiming to be based on the truth, while making obvious assumptions of guilt on the British side , whilst not exploring the many claims of guilt and involvment from the republican side.
The villans and good guys are left as black and white as in a chidrens pantomime. Can a film so obviously operating an alternative agenda and so lacking in balanced perspective ever be considered a good film...no
Releasing this now, at the time of an official tribunal is at best niaive at worst it may be considered reckless.
There is no Bloody Sunday, for the innocent victims of terrorist activities in Northern Ireland, on both sides, every day is Bloody.
Bloody Sunday (2002)
Bloody Farce
This film leaves us still waiting for an unbiased objective film about the 'troubles'. The makers behind this film were also behind other films taking the republican side..In the Name of The Father etc..
A travesty which excuses itself by claiming to be based on the truth, while making obvious assumptions of guilt on the British side , whilst not exploring the many claims of guilt and involvment from the republican side.
The villans and good guys are left as black and white as in a chidrens pantomime. Can a film so obviously operating an alternative agenda and so lacking in balanced perspective ever be considered a good film...no
Releasing this now, at the time of an official tribunal is at best niaive at worst it may be considered reckless.
There is no Bloody Sunday, for the innocent victims of terrorist activities in Northern Ireland, on both sides, every day is Bloody.
Bloody Sunday (2002)
Bloody Farce
This film leaves us still waiting for an unbiased objective film about the 'troubles'. The makers behind this film were also behind other films taking the republican side..In the Name of The Father etc..
A travesty which excuses itself by claiming to be based on the truth, while making obvious assumptions of guilt on the British side , whilst not exploring the many claims of guilt and involvment from the republican side.
The villans and good guys are left as black and white as in a chidrens pantomime. Can a film so obviously operating an alternative agenda and so lacking in balanced perspective ever be considered a good film...no
Releasing this now, at the time of an official tribunal is at best niaive at worst it may be considered reckless.
There is no Bloody Sunday, for the innocent victims of terrorist activities in Northern Ireland, on both sides, every day is Bloody.
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
marred
a good film which is marred for many Brits, with the inclusion of that quip against Montgomery, repeated by some reviwers.
Montgomery and the British divisions face the toughest forces on D-Day, they were up agianst the only SS Panzer divisions on the day. Montgomery wanted to go careful to lessen casualties, nothing wrong with that - after all the British and their Commonwealth allies had been fighting since 1939.
The Americans created their own difficulties at Omaha, by landing away from the original beach.
Zulu (1964)
Best film ever...
simply my favourite film. A true story well told.
I wanted to clarify some points from recent reviwers which I hope help exlain some questions. Mainly from Geofbob.
The two Lts. Chard and Bromhead - were new to battle. The reason Chard performed so well may be largely due to the fact that he was an engineer who knew about building defences. The mealie bag wall they build in the film was vital in order to slow up the thousands of zulus.
The victory was not a sure thing because they had guns. The zulus had hundreds of guns capture that morning from the other 1700 British troops that had been killed by the zulus armed with spears.
As to where the Hawkins character went to ? In reality he legged it away from his mission before the battle - later submitting a bill for damages to the British government.
No explanation into the reasons for the battle. No bad thing as the true story of men against men is a worthy tail on its own and any explanation would be open to interpretation - read the history yourself!
One last point everyone enjoys the Men of Harlech scene. Whilst this is poetic license - a very similar incident happened in the Afghan war at the same time. A Btirish regiment cut off and fighting to the end, sang God Save The Queen just before the final Afghan attack - they survived - remember these were very different men from today, no political correctness here and possibly a lot more courage. 10/10
Oh, and by the way Colour Sgt Bourne - very much existed in real life. He was awared the DCM and lived until 1945, the last survivor of Rorkes Drift.
The Patriot (2000)
An American fairy tale
I watched this film on DVD for the first time having avoided it for so long. My concerns were justified and echo many of the posts here.
It is claimed that historical innacuracies and little rewrites of history are to be allowed in any film. What concerns me is that all of these inncuracies in many films are ALL pointed against the British. They form a steady drip, drip of anti Britishness which can hardly be warranted. I feel that reasons for this are possibly that our inherent sense of decency means that we tolerate such criticism, and that we are easier targets than some of the real villans in the world, whom Hollywood seems frightened to portray.
Let me mention one scene in particular
SPOILERS *****
The burning of the people in the barn, this has been mentioned previous, and obviously this never happened. What is disturbing is that the only well documented instances of this actually happenning was when the Waffen SS burned the village of Orudur in France in 1944 with all of its inhabitants. and also in countless villages on the eastern front. The director, Roland Emmerich, a German, should be ashamed for linking this atrocity with Britain who did more than any other country to fight such tyranny in WW2 - disgraceful ! and remember Britain led the world in doing away with slavery when the colonies fought to retain it. Even the Alamo, was fought to retain slavery in Texas after the Mexicans had banned it - didn't see that in the film of the Alamo.
This is a fairy tale - read the history books.
Shackleton (2002)
excellent, in the footsteps of Scott
I have only just finished watching this compelling two parter. I have previously been a fan of the Scott of the Antarctic story and the John Mills film of the same; I was apprehensive of the outcome of this made for TV version.
However, the result was superb. The acting , cast and script matched the quatilty of the original tale. An epic true human story of Endurance, deserved to be well presented and it was. You can only be left in awe of the men who took part in the original incident. Treat yourself to this if you have not already seen it, but wear some warm clothing, you feel the chill of the realism - I loved it. 10/10