Subscribe
Notify of
guest
7 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tony Barratt

A point I think is little covered is the way Adm Ramsey et al and the Railways cleared the ports to stop backlogs of the rescued clogging up the system. I really think that this is a story in itself

Ted

So I finally got to watch ‘Dunkirk’ (2017).
No where near enough soldiers, far too few Royal Navy ships and way, way, too many RAF Spitfires.
Much of the BEF in 1940 was the regular British Army and recalled reservists together with called up TA enthusiasts. A more hard bitten lot, especially by modern standards, would be hard to find. The British soldiers in this film are nothing like even modern British soldiers, never mind those of 1940, who were rougher and tougher by a fair way. The two film soldier ‘heros’ , both minus their rifles, try to con their way onto a ship with a casualty. Not at all typical of the British Army today or in 1940.
In 1940 the Royal Navy was still the largest navy in the word, she sent 1 Cruiser and 39 Destroyers to Dunkirk, along with 382 smaller RN warships. About 311 British merchant craft took part in the evacuation, many of them with Royal Navy crews. Generally the smaller boats picked up troops off the beaches and ferried them to larger, mostly Royal Navy, ships. No British women served on any British Destroyer in 1940, not a single one.
In 1940 the RAF Fighter Command had almost 700 first line aircraft, two thirds of them were Hawker Hurricanes and one third Supermarine Spitfires. Hurricanes fought in the battle of France and did not do too badly. Dunkirk was the first battle that the RAF used Spitfires in. Firstly if you want your fighter to have good range, you do not fly at low level. A Spitfire, or almost any other WWII aircraft, can fly further at say 12,000 feet than at low level. In addition flying low down was something only a fighter pilot with a death wish would ever do. Height in a fighter dual is the difference between winning and losing, certainly in 1940. It was because the RAF engaged the German Air Force at high altitude behind the evacuation beaches, so the soldiers never saw them, that resulted in a good many RAF men being assaulted in pubs and bars, etc, by soldiers after Dunkirk.
On the whole this film hugely annoyed me and had very little to do with what actually occurred in 1940. Want a far, far better film about this, Check out ‘Dunkirk’ (1958) a much more accurate film than this utter modernist nonsense. Dunkirk (2017) is utter crap.

Todor

Regarding the comment about Brexit, I personally do not view this to be the case and see no connection between Brexit and the film. I am unsure as to how this comment aids the reader’s perception of the film as generalising on someone’s opinion of Dunkirk based on how they voted in Brexit is a little far-fetched.
Am I missing something, and if so what could it be?
Though on the whole I really enjoyed the article, it’s a good read.

blank

Ted is very right. My father was at Dunkirk after volunteering when calls were made for gunners, being in charge of one on a merchantman berthed at Southampton for some of that time, & spoke of ‘Three sleepless days & nights with the Hellfire Regatta in Hellfire Alley’. Those are the types of spirited names they gave to affairs like that in those days.

Bruce Williams

A lousy totally inaccurate film and I would not recommend it to the local cub pack

Bruce Williams

A totally inaccurate film. An insult to the allied soldiers and sailors who were there. You British should look to your history and ENSURE that your navy becomes strong as well as your shipyards and merchant marine. That will more than help to keep you safe!!!