Change Your Image
dannycrossman
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
We Go in at Dawn (2020)
Good effort but let down
Making low budget indie war films is HARD! Having aid tht, if you are going to tackle a military subject, it needs to be believable and as accurate as the budget allows>
Accuray and Believable - The military or SOE content was not very believable, and the characters acted in ways that were totally non-military (or rather they acted like civilians trying to portray soldiers). Many of the costumes and weapons were incorrect which many people won't notice but given that most people watching these films (in my case on Tubi) are looking for historical military content).
Continuity - Many, many continuity issues here - lead drops his knife and never picks it up etc etc. This is a basic filming task and not the editor's fault.
Editing - I found some of the editing and scene or shot transitions very awkward and jumpy. Blocking that could have been used wasn't done, although that is a director's prerogative.
Script - The basic story and plot is fairly sound although some of the character arcs don't complete or get lost. Lots of cliché dialogue here (I'm coming with you then...) and overused phrases. I do like Ben Mole's films, but the scripts do feel like someone writing about the military but with no believable content.
This could have been a decent film, but it gets let down by the military content or lack thereof.
5 Days of War (2011)
Authentic conflict drama
Having served in numerous conflicts, I found that the film certainly had an authentic feel given the support from the Georgian military and the copious pyrotechnics. No bad CGI was found thankfully!
The story is solid enough although some scenes are pretty contrived and made for the screenplay (not always very realistic situations) and sometime the film feels like we are watching actors portraying real life characters.
Whether the historical story is accurate or not is likely of debate and elements of the film verge on Georgian propaganda. Despite this, the film highlights the plight of those stuck in the midst of conflicts and the director does well to bring the journalists story and frequent helplessness to light.
Overall this was an enjoyable film and made me look up the various versions of history.
Behind the Line: Escape to Dunkirk (2020)
Not great but not awful
Story is pretty decent but the ending is wraps up way too quick. Aside from the obvious bad uniforms and German accents, the set dressing could have been much better and the German HQ is also used in another Ben Mole film. As an indie filmmaker I understand how hard it is to make films on low budget but the producers in this film clearly had little military history advice on weapons, tactics, military culture and bearing (or maybe they did but it didn't show). The camera work is decent and lighting efficient. As others have mentioned the boxing scene punches are clearly not hitting each other which adds to the feeling of low budget. The two main a German officers are not very believable and the script a bit too cliche.
Skyggen i mit øje (2021)
Gripping story and visually enthralling
This film masterfully weaves some strong character arcs together without the usual Hollywood verbal expositions and brings all the arcs together at the end of the film in a well synchronized manner. The in-flight visuals are probably the best I have ever seen (bar 1 or 2 small shots maybe) and helped by the cloudy/ rainy sky during the attack.
The director switches between the incoming raid and the kids on the ground with superb tension (not too much, just enough) and leaves perfect tension at the 10-20 minutes which doesn't drag on. There were a few slightly unbelievable script lines and scenes for the RAF characters but the overall acting is superb.
An extremely well done film based on a tragic event, and one that manages to hold the viewers attention throughout.
Lancaster Skies (2019)
Solid and believable WW2 story
Having known that the film was produced on an 80,000 GBP budget, I was interested to see if my reaction would be tainted but this knowledge. Overall, not really. Its a good film.
The strongest element is the story which has a believable main thread and an intriguing and well developed B-story. The film's hanging plot of an ending is actually refreshing amid the worn out story treatment coming out of Hollywood ("Give me the same thing... only different"). The acting was well done, some parts felt strained but overall the character studies were more in depth and interesting than most big budget pictures.
Audiences wanting GCI and epic "Battle of Britain" style aerial drama will moan for sure, but the mixture of real Lancaster bomber ground scenes and the full cockpit and gun turret interiors work very well together. I did find the variation in audio levels hard to follow (lets face it, audio mixing among music score and sound fx is a art form). Much of the film takes place in the pub (a set built by the producers) which, to be honest is where aircrews spent most of their non-flying time.
Initially I was put off by some military technical inaccuracies but forgot them fairly quickly as I engaged in the plot and characters and as my 14 years old commented, "I don't know anything about the military and I thought it was great!". To me, this is the point. Tin Hat (Callum and Andrew Burn) have attempted to make a film in the style of old school B&W pictures and are not aimed at the micro market of military historians.
Overall Lancaster Skies is a very good film, not just because it does well with a little budget, but because it examines the lives of the Bomber Command aircrew who were citizen soldiers who signed up for the 'period of hostilities'. Lancaster Skies now has pride of place on my shelf of classic war movies next to Dambusters.