Let me first say that I am and always have been an aircraft nut; especially WWII. I first saw this film on release at my local premiere in Margate, where, as an Air Cadet, I was privileged to be part of the Guard of Honour for several of the real Battle of Britain pilots including Robert Stanford Tuck.
Even then, as a less than critical 14-year old, there were certain parts of the film that were obviously very poor. Now, as a highly critical grumpy old man(!) I still see them. Seeing Spitfires and Hurricanes still thrills me, and a lot of the aerial scenes in the film are of the highest order, so what's wrong with it?
The story or lack of - very piecemeal and unevenly paced. Susannah York's hairstyle - so out of place for 1940. The Christopher Plummer - Susannah York romance. Susannah York in her entirety; some of the worst acting in a film riddled with it. The obvious model Stukas and anything else that needed to be destroyed. The actors. Some of Britain's finest but all way too old for fighter pilots. (Michael Caine -37; Christopher Plummer -40; Robert Shaw -42; Barry Foster -48; Edward Fox -31.) Even Ian McShane who was only 27 would have been an old man to the rest of the pilots. The Battle of Britain was fought in the air by boys - on both sides.
It is all such a pity because although today's technology could improve the effects a thousand-fold they will never get such an armada of aircraft together again, even though, paradoxically, there are now many more airworthy Spitfires and Hurricanes than there were in 1969. Any future Battle of Britain film will be made mainly with CGI. They had one chance to make an outstanding film comemmorating the people and aircraft that took part in one of Britain's defining moments of the 20th Century and they blew it.
Shame. Great shots of wonderful aircraft but as a historical portrayal or film entertainment - forget it.
Even then, as a less than critical 14-year old, there were certain parts of the film that were obviously very poor. Now, as a highly critical grumpy old man(!) I still see them. Seeing Spitfires and Hurricanes still thrills me, and a lot of the aerial scenes in the film are of the highest order, so what's wrong with it?
The story or lack of - very piecemeal and unevenly paced. Susannah York's hairstyle - so out of place for 1940. The Christopher Plummer - Susannah York romance. Susannah York in her entirety; some of the worst acting in a film riddled with it. The obvious model Stukas and anything else that needed to be destroyed. The actors. Some of Britain's finest but all way too old for fighter pilots. (Michael Caine -37; Christopher Plummer -40; Robert Shaw -42; Barry Foster -48; Edward Fox -31.) Even Ian McShane who was only 27 would have been an old man to the rest of the pilots. The Battle of Britain was fought in the air by boys - on both sides.
It is all such a pity because although today's technology could improve the effects a thousand-fold they will never get such an armada of aircraft together again, even though, paradoxically, there are now many more airworthy Spitfires and Hurricanes than there were in 1969. Any future Battle of Britain film will be made mainly with CGI. They had one chance to make an outstanding film comemmorating the people and aircraft that took part in one of Britain's defining moments of the 20th Century and they blew it.
Shame. Great shots of wonderful aircraft but as a historical portrayal or film entertainment - forget it.