I am interested in this one. Sounds fun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1pe_eRiMiE

EdiT: Wait it is already out the F,

I missed it? Can anybody tell if it is any good.

 

Your average US primary education is going to cover WW2 fairly extensively. But even then, it will probably only take up one or two months in any given course. Huge chunks of that time will be spent on the sociopolitical conditions that lead to the conflict, Hitler's rise, the establishment of th third reich, the holocaust, pearl harbor i.e. the beginning of American involvement, japanese internment, the end of the pacific war, and the end of the european war. A single event / battle not directly involved in one of those topics is probably only going to get 20 mins of coverage in any given class.


I was in AP World History all those years ago. Pre Dunkirk movie announcement I would've been able to tell you that I vaguely recalled being taught that people went out in fishing boats to bring back soldiers from the front, but I sure as shit would not have been able to give you even a whiff of detail.

 

Saw it a couple of weeks ago. It was an alright timewaster but nothing more than that. Plot is a bit ridiculous as you might expect but there are enough funny and heartwarming bits to keep you interested.

 

And absolutely no mention of the real heroes of Dunkirk, the French.

 

I don't think I really learned about Dunkirk until AP Euro in my senior year in high school. Maybe it was mentioned before then, but not in enough detail for me to remember this long after. Even then, battles and such were always overshadowed by preaching about social issues.

 

In my high school, Dunkirk was definitely mentioned, but mostly in passing. It was something like "As France fell to the Nazis, the British were surrounded at Dunkirk. They managed to get out by enlisted all of the civilian boats they could to carry the British troops across the Channel." I doubt it was much more than a paragraph in the textbook.

As Heather and Khan said, there's been a transition away from what armies were doing towards socio-political things. It affects the way the rest of the war is taught as well--when we were talking about the Pacific Front in my course we kinda just skipped from the Battle of Midway in '42 to Iwo Jima in '45, with everything else that went on getting about as much attention as Dunkirk.

 

The first Dark Tower trailer just dropped.

https://youtu.be/DlxzbTK3YHc

Looks like it took a LOT of liberties with the source material, which is both good and bad. The decision to have a portion of the film take place in the real world is a bit disappointing because the unique world is probably the best part of the dark tower. But it also looks like it's ignoring most of the later books which can only be good.

What do you all think?

 

The lack of awareness of Dunkirk doesn't surprise me that much; I'd never heard of Iwo Jima until Clint Eastwood's film a few years ago, and I still couldn't really tell you much about it beyond 'big battle, famous photo'. Not that I'm saying I could give you a detailed analysis of Dunkirk, mind, but much more so, certainly. It's probably a big focus in those countries involved in it, and an interesting footnote elsewhere.

 

I've only read the first Dark Tower book, but that trailer doesn't look a whole lot like what I remember reading. It looks pretty cool, granted. I don't like when they make characters a different race, pretty much ever, but I do like Idris Elba.

 

The only issue I have with changing race is the naked hypocrisy.

Idris Elba being cast: 'You have a problem? You're racist!'

ScaJo being cast: 'What's this whitewashing BS?!'

At this point, I'm just happy if they cast excellent, likable actors (which Elba and ScaJo are for me).

 

Saw Guardians of the Galaxy 2 yesterday.

Fun movie, Mantis was my favorite character.

 

Gotg was great. Some of the jokes were flat but most were spot on.

 

I'M MARY POPPINS Y'ALL!

 

First full trailer for Blade Runner 2049 https://youtu.be/gCcx85zbxz4

I really, really want this to be good, and it does look promising, if a little more action packed than I was expecting.

 

The Dark Tower looks like lots of fun. Maybe not Stephen King creepy, but still entertaining. Idris Elba is one of my favorite actors so this is promising.


Blade Runner 2048 looks gorgeous but confusing. Unfortunately I predict lots of hot takes about how it's (from what I see) all white cast is racist/problematic. Guaranteed to the overshadow the actual film.

 

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword was fantastic and entirely undeserving of the cool reception it has received from critics. Soundtrack was amazing and I'm very hopeful that some miracle occurs and they continue with the plans of a franchise despite it being unlikely that they'll recoup its budget.

 

Like TWT, I though King Arthur was brilliant.

You could tell it was a Guy Ritchie film (frantic camera, funny angles, awesome soundtrack), and I loved it.

I wasn't a fan of the jumping around the timeframes during plans and such, but it did work well. It was just momentary confusion as to whether this was all hypothetical or not.

Definitely worth watching, and I'd recommend watching in cinemas, rather than DVD. I didn't see it in 3D though, so can't talk about that.

 

See the marketing for it made it look like a crappy film. Surprised to hear King Arthur was actually a good film. It was one I was just planning on renting but I guess I'll go see it at the dollar theater

 

Atomic Blonde looks indeed badass.

We need more movies like this.