Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

SnoopyStyle This is a documentary of the Dunkirk evacuation over 10 days in the summer of 1940. The British Expeditionary Force is trapped against the coast along with French and other Allies. It is purported to be accurate. There are the shakey cam recreations intersperced with some old footage. There are recognizable actors. It's quite straight forward in its telling. After watching Nolan's Dunkirk recently, this is a good companion piece. It has some more information and the rear guard action that is missing from Nolan's movie. There are compelling real historical figures. It's solid work for TV doc that is compelling to watch all the way to the end.

boblin2-1 I watched this dramatization some years back and thought it did an excellent job of telling the real-life story, capturing the desperation of the retreat, case in point, only smoke bombs for one group of soldiers tasked with holding back the German tanks!Buy it on Blu-ray or DVD if you can find it. Perhaps its also downloadable. Its well worth the time spent watching it.After watching this re-enactment, I found Nolan's 2017 Dunkirk to be an utter disappointment. It greatly saddened me to see how the Dunkirk story could be so badly told, and more so when I read reviews about how it gives you a sense of what war is like - rubbish. These people really should watch the 2004 Dunkirk dramatization and Saving Private Ryan, and I'd also recommend Schindler's List.

Robert J. Maxwell I couldn't watch this program all the way through. It's an important subject, the performances are decent, the reenactments convincing, the interior monologues touching, and the budget was adequate.But it's ruined by the directorial style. The camera seems to be held by a drunk. It wobbles all over the place. There are zip pans from one face to another, and multiple closeups of faces. One pivotal figure, Tennant of the RN, muses over the task he's faced with. And what does the screen show us? A safety razor placidly plowing through a cream-coated face, leaving some ugly black stubble in its wake.I think this fad -- the cinema of hypermania -- may have begun with MTV because, after all, you can't expect an audience of fourteen year olds to sit quietly and watch a static shot of Elton John playing the piano. You must keep their attention prisoner by cutting rapidly from his face to his fingers to his feet to his shades and when you run out of that, you introduce a display of fireworks.Maybe it's my fault because I'm too tired or too old. I was very disappointed.

BusyBusey After seeing the BBC Adverts for "Dunkirk" i was honestly looking forward to seeing this Docu-Drama showing us the events leading up to and the evacuation of over 300,000 British,Belgian and French troops from the beaches at "Dunkirk".It must have only been 10 minutes into the first episode of the Three part series that i began to feel let down by a programme that at best i can only describe as OK.With the BBC's experience of helping to make "Band of Brothers" and resources that should have been made available for such a project,OK just isnt good enough. Did the BBC not think that showing black and white stock footage of Stuka dive bombers and German soldiers might impede the viewers ability to actually feel like they were there with there soldiers.The whole thing contradicted itself,make a Docu-Drama for realism then show old footage(in black and white!) Germans Aircraft and Troops? Just as i found myself getting into "Dunkirk" some stock footage would pop up,presumedly just to remind the viewer that the non black and white images arent actually real,which of course is true but thats not the point. The use of stock footage only showed me that this is a Low budget programme and it didnt take long before my thoughts were confirmed. As in one of the so called "Action" scenes a dozen or so British soldiers are attacked by around 7 German troops and some Tank Tracks.Bizarrly as soon as the Officer sees those Tank Tracks he orders his men to surrender giving the impression that they fought for around 2 mins before giving up.Now this is annoying(even if you do ignore the lack of an actual Tank) because in reality one of the reasons those men were taken to the barn and executed was because they had fought stubbornly and inflicted heavy casualties on the SS soldiers they faced.The German Commander(Moltke) was annoyed by this and the British troops payed a terrible price for their stubborn fighting.Overall i thought "Dunkirk" was badly let down by its (obviously)Low budget.As it was made by the BBC it really shouldnt have been so cheaply made,is this all our Veterans deserved?. The BBC might do well to bare this in mind for future projects,if youre not going to do it properly then dont do it at all.