Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Movies - What have you watched lately?

Jump to new
Darkest Hour. What was fact. What was fiction ? Good analysis by British Historian
What’s Fact and What’s Fiction in Darkest Hour



By John Broich

171130_MOV_WinstonChurchill.jpg.CROP.promovar-mediumlarge.jpg

Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour and the real Winston Churchill.
Focus Features and Imperial War Museums.

Joe Wright’s Darkest Hour is a piece of historical fiction that undertakes a serious historical task: to present Winston Churchill and the British people’s choice to stand up to Hitler as just that … a choice. In hindsight, after eventual victory, the decision to fight against the Germans can appear a foregone conclusion. Since we all like to imagine that we personally would never fold to the Nazis, it can be hard to understand that reasonable people, most of whom had no love for Hitler, seriously considered a truce in spring 1940, during the days depicted in the film. To their eyes, fighting on after the approaching fall of France would only delay the inevitable at the cost of mass civilian slaughter. Better to come to terms now while they still had the leverage of an army and aircraft factories.

However, the film does invent a few details in order to make this very dramatic time even more dramatic. As a British historian who teaches and writes about World War II, I break this all down below.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/12/08/what_s_fact_and_what_s_fiction_in_darkest_hour.html
 
SWINGING SAFARI

Well the women who went with me may not have found it too funny, but I laughed my head off.

Every cliche there eva woz in this one:D
 
Hogan Lucky

Pretty decent heist movie from the director of the Ocean's trilogy.

Not as smart as Gene Hackman's Heist but it catches you. Don't remember a dull moment.
 
I enjoyed “goodbye Christopher Robin”, based on the true story of A.A Milne and his son, and the creation of Winnie the Pooh

 
The Post

Top cast directed by Spielberg so it's watchable on that cinematic perspective. But this being one of Speilberg's "serious" movies, it's a lightweight and biased towards American exceptionalism, freedom, free press and all that stuff.

I mean, Spielberg study histories and have made some of the best historical films around. But here it seem he follow the traditional, popular, beliefs on the Vietnam War and inadvertently show how the free press and that defender of the public are in the hands of what boils down to a handful of media magnates. Not the message they were sending, maybe not directly I hope so credit to them if that's the case.

One aspect of history the movie exposed that I don't think I've seen in movies before was that JFK isn't a saint, that he ordered or permit the CIA's operation to take out Diem. So while Nixon isn't a very nice guy, his war on Vietnam was just a continuation of US involvement in IndoChina tracing back to Truman... JFK really got it started, Johnson expanded it, Nixon pick it up a few notches.

Daniel Ellsberg's character was saying something like: 10% of US effort was to help the South VNese, 20% to stop Communism, 70% was so that the US wouldn't be humiliated for losing to a peasant army. And it's that 70% of US soldiers dying that drove Ellsberg to leak the Pentagon Papers.

I find that untrue, too simplistic and something a man like Ellsberg wouldn't have said or the reason for him to leak the papers.

I mean he, working as an analyst and nuclear war planner at Rand Corp. would know the real reason for Vietnam, know its military objectives... and those reasons aren't on the top 100 list of priorities to enter and keep the war going.

So while the movie tries to be complex and layered, and to a great extend it is for a movie, it's pretty shallow.

Then there's Kathleen Graham's rise to greatness. It's a nice story. Shows what a civic conscious media baron could achieve etc., the question it raised is what if the press barons are more of the Murdoch, Bezos type rather than the Graham type? Democracy is screwed then?

If Graham decided not to publish the papers it'll not be published. And people like Ellsberg would've been in prison, war crimes and other state policies could be hidden away.

Heroic deeds are all fine and good. A system that doesn't rely on such traits might be better?
 
luutzu said:
The Post

Top cast directed by Spielberg so it's watchable on that cinematic perspective. But this being one of Speilberg's "serious" movies, it's a lightweight and biased towards American exceptionalism, freedom, free press and all that stuff.

I mean, Spielberg study histories and have made some of the best historical films around. But here it seem he follow the traditional, popular, beliefs on the Vietnam War and inadvertently show how the free press and that defender of the public are in the hands of what boils down to a handful of media magnates. Not the message they were sending, maybe not directly I hope so credit to them if that's the case.

One aspect of history the movie exposed that I don't think I've seen in movies before was that JFK isn't a saint, that he ordered or permit the CIA's operation to take out Diem. So while Nixon isn't a very nice guy, his war on Vietnam was just a continuation of US involvement in IndoChina tracing back to Truman... JFK really got it started, Johnson expanded it, Nixon pick it up a few notches.

Daniel Ellsberg's character was saying something like: 10% of US effort was to help the South VNese, 20% to stop Communism, 70% was so that the US wouldn't be humiliated for losing to a peasant army. And it's that 70% of US soldiers dying that drove Ellsberg to leak the Pentagon Papers.

I find that untrue, too simplistic and something a man like Ellsberg wouldn't have said or the reason for him to leak the papers.

I mean he, working as an analyst and nuclear war planner at Rand Corp. would know the real reason for Vietnam, know its military objectives... and those reasons aren't on the top 100 list of priorities to enter and keep the war going.

So while the movie tries to be complex and layered, and to a great extend it is for a movie, it's pretty shallow.

Then there's Kathleen Graham's rise to greatness. It's a nice story. Shows what a civic conscious media baron could achieve etc., the question it raised is what if the press barons are more of the Murdoch, Bezos type rather than the Graham type? Democracy is screwed then?

If Graham decided not to publish the papers it'll not be published. And people like Ellsberg would've been in prison, war crimes and other state policies could be hidden away.

Heroic deeds are all fine and good. A system that doesn't rely on such traits might be better?
Click to expand...

Probably not the thread to talk about the historical truths about the Vietnam conflict and maybe we can pick it up in a dedicated one. But what I recall it was "all the way with LBJ" that escalated the war.

For the record I think there was about 60,000 of the 500,000 coalition troops who bit the dust and about 4 million locals.
 
Watched Bohemian Rhapsody last night at the movies. Enjoyed it immensely. If you want to take your partner to a great movie I would HIGHLY RECOMMEND this one.
Excellent job done in the making.
 
Seen a few movies Lately.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Loved it. Bizarre but suggests some great insights behind the movie scenes. Recommended.
The Joker. Loved this too. Dark, but a great take on the Joker / Batman history.
Knives Out. While I heard great things, it was all just faces talking early in the piece and I fell asleep. It would be unfair for me to judge.
The Good Liar. A great movie. Highly Recommended.
 
https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/1091872835776/team-spirit

This thrilling drama is based on the true story of Jérôme Kerviel, who was involved in an unprecedented scandal that shook the financial markets worldwide in 2008. The young trader, nicknamed “the cash machine” by his colleagues, was accused of unauthorised trading, which resulted in the loss of more than 5 billion euros for his company, the Société Générale.
 
Watched Zappa tonight at the Luna outdoor theatre in Perth. I got the last ticket. Been in a reflective mood for a while and chanced upon this (Zappa) being shown. A kid at high school said I was like Frank Zappa (without the mo and lower lip goatee)...
anyways I enjoyed the movie, I didn't appreciate his musical depth and commitment. Worth a look if you get a chance.
 
Top