Best WW2 movies that involve the British

[bored]

Hello can anyone recommend any good WW2 movies that mainly involve the British

[Indy Benson]

Battle of Britain (1969) starring Michael Caine and Robert Shaw

[Katarn07]

A Bridge to Far is the only one I saw but that was just a big Monty foul up anyways. I know Connery and Denholm Eliot both appear in it. I think Connery stops off during a battle for tea. And no that's not a crack at the British, I seriously think he and his men do.

It deals with Americans and the Polish as well.

[Joe Brody]

Originally posted by Katarn07
A Bridge to Far is the only one I saw but that was just a big Monty foul up anyways. I know Connery and Denholm Eliot both appear in it. . . .

. . . .and don't forget Anthony Hopkins and Laurence Olivier. If you overlook Redford and Gould, the film has great acting. Good pic Kataran07, Bridge Too Far would be a good place to start. Bridge Over The River Kwai is also a classic.

[Finn]

<i>The Guns of Navarone</i> is one (disregard the sequel, even though it <i>does</i> have Harrison Ford). Another that comes in mind is <i>The Desert Rats</i>, it's not as good but it fills up the Brit factor. It's difficult to find a WW II movie with no Americans involved, since a lot of these flicks have been made with Hollywood money and they've needed at least one or two American officers there.

Some others majoring Brits that popped in mind: <i>The Eagle Has Landed</i> (which is an interesting piece, since it has several top notch British actors playing <I>German</i> officers), <i>The Man Who Never Was</i> and <i>633 Squadron</i>...

[skywlkrinc]

The Longest Day has a fair share of British screen time.
"Hold until relieved."
It also has Connery.
You can't go wrong with a film that contains both Sean Connery and John Wayne.

Luke

[Indy Benson]

All of you folks need a copy of "Enigma".

Yeah...if you're having trouble sleeping at night. You'll be asleep in no time. ;)

[Luckylighter]

Originally posted by Indy Benson
Yeah...if you're having trouble sleeping at night. You'll be asleep in no time. ;)

I actually liked "Enigma" a lot, and I liked the book even better. I would also suggest, "The Hill" with Sean Connery, and my absolute favorite WWII movie, "Where Eagles Dare" with Richard Burton and a young Clint Eastwood--quite possibly the most intelligent war movie ever. But before you think it is too intellectual, the action is also outstanding.

Basically, Burton is leading a team of commandos to a Nazi occupied village. There is a huge mountain that dominates the area, and on top of the mountain is a castle, occupied by the Nazis. A captured American soldier is being held by the SS because he worked alongside one of the generals planning D-Day. Burton is with the British Intelligence and has been ordered to get the soldier before he talks.

But it does not end there. It's all window dressing for something much bigger. People are not who they claim to be. It is part action thriller, part spy thriller. And it is all explosive.

I love, love, love, love, LOVE this movie!

[Katarn07]

I just saw To End all Wars and I thought it was one of the best movies I've ever seen. It deals with a Scottish regiment's survival in a Japanese Prison Camp for three years. Very very moving in my opinion. Just kinda hard to understand since the accents are pretty strong at times.

[Finn]

What about movies that throw us to the opposite side of the lines? I mean, <i>Das Boot</i> is pretty good one.

And of course, I'll have to promote... http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0048752/

<i>This</i> is the best war movie I've ever seen. Ever. And I'm not even wearing my blue-and-white glasses.

[Indy Benson]

I found Enigma to be slow, just plodding along. I like a slow, steady pace as much as the next guy, but it really did put me to sleep.

[VP]

Originally posted by Finn
And of course, I'll have to promote... http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0048752/

<i>This</i> is the best war movie I've ever seen. Ever. And I'm not even wearing my blue-and-white glasses.

http://www.bananapress.fi/Army/ArmyK4/y-667.jpg

Rules 4ever.

[Luckylighter]

You know, another good movie that came out fairly recently was "Enemy at the Gates", with Jude Law, Rachel Wietz, and Ed Harris. It tells the true story of a Soviet sharpshooter during the battle of Stalingrad, and how he goes head to head with the greatest Nazi sharpshooter ever.

A good, quirky WWII movie is Hell in the Pacific with the great Lee Marvin and the late great Toshiro Mifune. They play two pilots--one American, one Japanese...d'uh--who crash on a small uninhabited island. And the global conflict between the two countires is played out more personally with these two warriors stranded on the island. It is almost darkly comic in some parts, but very good, and like I said, quirky.

Speaking of Lee Marvin, do yourself a favor and get The Big Red One. Another of my all time favorite war movies. And it's got Mark Hamill. Lee Marvin leads a unit of sharpshooters through different theaters of war during WWII, from Africa to Italy to France and onward to Germany.

[skywlkrinc]

Originally posted by Luckylighter
Speaking of Lee Marvin, do yourself a favor and get The Big Red One. Another of my all time favorite war movies. And it's got Mark Hamill. Lee Marvin leads a unit of sharpshooters through different theaters of war during WWII, from Africa to Italy to France and onward to Germany.
They aren't a unit of sharpshooters, they are just GIs from the 1st Infantry division (i.e. Big Red One). This movie is pretty good.

Luke

[Luckylighter]

Originally posted by skywlkrinc
They aren't a unit of sharpshooters, they are just GIs from the 1st Infantry division (i.e. Big Red One). This movie is pretty good.

Luke

Thanks for the clear up, Luke...I've never been any good at telling the difference between a unit, division, squad, etc. Anyway, I may have misspoke when I said they were a unit of sharpshooters...I should have said that they were unofficially sharpshooters, since he kind of taught them how to shoot like they were.

[Indy Benson]

I have U-571 on dvd, so maybe I'll watch that and give Enigma another chance.

[Finn]

U-571 is a piece of... should-I-say-what. The historical inaccuraties in context and other things that are just against the logic... if you ever list them on print, you need a forklift to move that amount of paper around.

[Joe Brody]

[lightheartedly]. . . .and we're all fans of a movie set in 1936 that showcases a flying wing . . . and uniformed German soldiers on British contolled soil . . . .

I liked U-571 -- inaccuracies and all.

[Finn]

But the case is different with Indy. Everyone knows that it's fiction and nothing but fiction... someone watching U-571 however may think that things actually were similar to that IRL too.

[Joe Brody]

Finn, you may want to go back and check out the film. I think the film, prior to the closing credits, acknowledges the real history (and the Brits) and somehow acknowledges that the film was simply 'inspired' by actual events. Still deceptive? Well, that's open to discuss.

[skywlkrinc]

Originally posted by Joe Brody
Finn, you may want to go back and check out the film. I think the film, prior to the closing credits, acknowledges the real history (and the Brits) and somehow acknowledges that the film was simply 'inspired' by actual events. Still deceptive? Well, that's open to discuss.
I was going to post something similar. U-571 doesn't claim to be accurate, it claims to be inspired by several historical events relating to the capture of several Enigmas.

Luke

[Finn]

Because... as I said: the complete context is different with Indiana Jones. You see Indy hanging under a truck, the power of God destroying the Nazis, etc... the whole story makes itself clear this is fiction and <i>nothing</i> of this has ever happened in reality... and tricks Indy does should not be tried to do at home.

But with U-571, fact and fiction are completely mixed. There are notes about things that have really happened and similar notes about things that have not. Unless you're well versed about the era, you can't tell what is bogus and what is not. The flick for example gives you an impression that you need just a handful of men to steer a WW II sub - even a sub that is somewhat foreign technology... but the context this flick is showed does not make it that clear you can't do it IRL. - Even though they did admit some of the inaccuracies, it was still just too plain calculatively clichy.

Another thing I hate about it is that it shows <i>Americans</i> doing all the important things. Yes, the Allies did steal an Enigma during WW II, but the ones who did it were the <i>Brits</i>. There were too many things left inaccurate for the price of boosting the American ego... a price that is not worth it in my mind.

In Indy, it's an archaeologist hunting a lost treasure in 1936... a context you have not heard before seeing the movie.
In U-571 it's about stealing an Enigma machine during WW II... a context you prolly have heard before.

See what Gilles says about Pearl Harbor here. (http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?threadid=6446) Same appeals with U-571.

[Pale Horse]

Originally posted by Finn
See what Gilles says about Pearl Harbor here. (http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?threadid=6446) Same appeals with U-571.
appeals or applies? :D

[VP]

<small>Apples.</small>

[Finn]

Bugger. <i>Interdum dormitat bonus Homerus.</i>

[Joe Brody]

Originally posted by Finn
But with U-571, fact and fiction are completely mixed. There are notes about things that have really happened and similar notes about things that have not.

That's your best argument. Things like context and bad inferences cease to be relevant when there's a specific textual disclaimer -- at least that how modern contract interpretation works. So when there is a specific disclaimer, the question then becomes a question of the sufficiency of the notice. I see your point when a disclaimer is mixed with notes on historical fact. I, for one, had no problem with the footnotes -- but I recognize that a lot of people don't stick around for the final fade and those that do may well not be paying close attention, so I concede there's an issue.

And if the producers were concerned with boosting anything, I'd submit that it wasn't American Egos - but American box-office receipts. That's all that really matters, isn't it?

[Finn]

You know, I have never finished watching a movie before the credits have scrolled. Only after that can I decide did I like the flick or not.

I guess one of the major buggers with me is that the movie was so damn clichy - just check the movie cliché thread and see how many things apply.

RotLA however wasn't clichy, because it was the first in line to introduce us things that would later on become clichés.

[Finn]

Originally posted by Renderking Fisk
From the whole group, I’m seeing some inconsistency here (I started this post to trash Finn… but then I stopped cause I’ve already been too harsh on him today.) Ren, I don't think you can ever be too harsh on me... I always enjoy a good debate. And even more, because I think that when I really get to it, I'm one of those rare people who can send the dung back to you, perhaps even more than that what you put going in my direction.

[British_Lion_2003]

The Great Escape

[Aussie Jones]

The Dam Busters, Hope and Glory, Zulu, Reach for the sky, Bridge Over The River Kwai, and Lawrence of Arabia.

[agent5]

Lawrence of Arabia is set during World War I you idiot.

[Original Raider]

Originally posted by British_Lion_2003
The Great Escape

Thank you British Lion! One of the best, if not #1, war movies of all times. Steve McQueen is fantastic, so is the cast. You'll recognize the lead Brit as John Hammond from Jurassic Park.

[Indydan13]

My favorite WW2 movie was not British nor old or a actual movie. Band of Brothers is a story on how war brought men in a company close together like brothers. It was an american mini-series on HBO.