Saw it in Florida about a month ago. An afternoon showing that was packed, mostly with senior citizens. The crowd applauded when the film ended. That is a very good review.
I don't have a problem with the film and Churchill was, no is, a national hero. But was I alone in feeling outraged this morning listening to Piers Morgan. He was claiming Churchill won the war single handedly and slagged off the British people for their ingratitude. This is the British people who lost their loved ones and struggled to help win the war. You don't have to take anything away from Churchill by acknowledging the sacrifices of the people, and being a million times more of a man than Morgan will ever be, I'm sure he never claimed credit for winning the war single handedly.
I'll tell youabout some heroes in the war - everybody will have their own personal family stories. My grandad, Ernest Smith, the reason I am a Charlton fan, was an officer in the navy. He got promoted to a new boat and a few days after leaving his old boat it was sank and all his mates were killed. Morgan, you complete a*hole, did these people not play a part in the war.
I am half Italian - my beloved uncle passed away in December. He fought against the Nazis as an Italian partizan. On one occasion, he was hidinhg in an attic as germans were searching the house he was hiding in, looking for him. If they had caught him, he was dead. His last wish was to have his ashes taken (they don't like cremations in Italy so that was a job in itself) to the wilderness within the Apenine mountains where he and many of his freedom fighting mates were based, where he wants them scattered. We will do this very soon. If you go to the town centres in many Italian towns, you will see the names and photos of people who fell for freedom, some just kids.
A couple of personal stories from within my family and reasons why Churchill was a great man, because the world needed leaders likehim. Biut there were other great leaders and other important people and the ordinary people who did great things - they should not be forgotten. It is not the film's fault if people are too ignorant to understand the artistic elements of it. WW2 should be covered more, we should all fully understand how it happened, what happened and how victory was achieved. Churchill has a prominent part in that story, Atlee's significant part has been largely forgotten, but to call the people who went through it ungrateful, I would love to have it out with Morgan face to face.
Imagine you were on the Normandy beaches liberating Europe from the Nazis with your mates being shot dead around you. If you came back wanting a better life and world for your families, were you ungrateful?
Well my son finished school last year and certainly did WW2 before 6th form and also did Churchill at A Level.
Now doing 30s and age of extremes at Uni so it does get taught.
Regardless to not know anything about Dunkirk shows an amazingly degree of willful ignorance.
Your last paragraph is rude and insulting seeing as you know nothing of the individual concerned. You claim WW2 is taught in school and perhaps it is in some schools. Either way the fact that she has not absorbed the knowledge of WW2 says to me it was either not taught or was simply not interesting enough for a girl of 11 to 16. Exactly how I felt about algebra. When the opportunity arises, I'll have a chat with her on the subject. Meanwhile could you hold back with the insults. Thanks.
I don't have a problem with the film and Churchill was, no is, a national hero. But was I alone in feeling outraged this morning listening to Piers Morgan. He was claiming Churchill won the war single handedly and slagged off the British people for their ingratitude. This is the British people who lost their loved ones and struggled to help win the war. You don't have to take anything away from Churchill by acknowledging the sacrifices of the people, and being a million times more of a man than Morgan will ever be, I'm sure he never claimed credit for winning the war single handedly.
I'll tell youabout some heroes in the war - everybody will have their own personal family stories. My grandad, Ernest Smith, the reason I am a Charlton fan, was an officer in the navy. He got promoted to a new boat and a few days after leaving his old boat it was sank and all his mates were killed. Morgan, you complete a*hole, did these people not play a part in the war.
I am half Italian - my beloved uncle passed away in December. He fought against the Nazis as an Italian partizan. On one occasion, he was hidinhg in an attic as germans were searching the house he was hiding in, looking for him. If they had caught him, he was dead. His last wish was to have his ashes taken (they don't like cremations in Italy so that was a job in itself) to the wilderness within the Apenine mountains where he and many of his freedom fighting mates were based, where he wants them scattered. We will do this very soon. If you go to the town centres in many Italian towns, you will see the names and photos of people who fell for freedom, some just kids.
A couple of personal stories from within my family and reasons why Churchill was a great man, because the world needed leaders likehim. Biut there were other great leaders and other important people and the ordinary people who did great things - they should not be forgotten. It is not the film's fault if people are too ignorant to understand the artistic elements of it. WW2 should be covered more, we should all fully understand how it happened, what happened and how victory was achieved. Churchill has a prominent part in that story, Atlee's significant part has been largely forgotten, but to call the people who went through it ungrateful, I would love to have it out with Morgan face to face.
Imagine you were on the Normandy beaches liberating Europe from the Nazis with your mates being shot dead around you. If you came back wanting a better life and world for your families, were you ungrateful?
Well my son finished school last year and certainly did WW2 before 6th form and also did Churchill at A Level.
Now doing 30s and age of extremes at Uni so it does get taught.
Regardless to not know anything about Dunkirk shows an amazingly degree of willful ignorance.
Your last paragraph is rude and insulting seeing as you know nothing of the individual concerned. You claim WW2 is taught in school and perhaps it is in some schools. Either way the fact that she has not absorbed the knowledge of WW2 says to me it was either not taught or was simply not interesting enough for a girl of 11 to 16. Exactly how I felt about algebra. When the opportunity arises, I'll have a chat with her on the subject. Meanwhile could you hold back with the insults. Thanks.
She's 28. Any blame for not knowing about a key episode in recent history (that you yourself were shocked by) sits at least partially with herself.
and WW2 is taught in ALL schools as it is part of the national curriculum.
A film is a film. If it exists to entertain it must sometimes alter the truth for dramatic effect. Anything that gets people talking and thinking about WW2 is a good thing. It is more the fault of the ignorant if they make statements like Morgan did. When he said the British people were ungrateful, just who were these British people. They were the ones who lost friends, husbands, wives, sons and daughters. They were the ones who risked their lives. Calling them ungrateful is a slur that Morgan should apologise for.
Atlee and Churchill were never friends, but they worked with each other and respected each other. The were string allies in defeating the Nazis. The film focused on Churchill but was a bit naughty for not acknowledging this. But if people decide they want to know about the war as a result, films like this and Dunkirk are forces for good IMO.
Saw it in Florida about a month ago. An afternoon showing that was packed, mostly with senior citizens. The crowd applauded when the film ended. That is a very good review.
Not really a yardstick is it, Americans applaud when a plane lands.
Saw it in Florida about a month ago. An afternoon showing that was packed, mostly with senior citizens. The crowd applauded when the film ended. That is a very good review.
Not really a yardstick is it, Americans applaud when a plane lands.
Yes and planes often land using the autopilot, especially in difficult conditions.
History is a massive subject and schools can't cover everything. Dunkirk was a major and important event but only one of hundreds that could be taught.
I read two or three history books about WW2 a year and I still come across major events that I knew nothing about.
Well my son finished school last year and certainly did WW2 before 6th form and also did Churchill at A Level.
Now doing 30s and age of extremes at Uni so it does get taught.
Regardless to not know anything about Dunkirk shows an amazingly degree of willful ignorance.
Your last paragraph is rude and insulting seeing as you know nothing of the individual concerned. You claim WW2 is taught in school and perhaps it is in some schools. Either way the fact that she has not absorbed the knowledge of WW2 says to me it was either not taught or was simply not interesting enough for a girl of 11 to 16. Exactly how I felt about algebra. When the opportunity arises, I'll have a chat with her on the subject. Meanwhile could you hold back with the insults. Thanks.
She's 28. Any blame for not knowing about a key episode in recent history (that you yourself were shocked by) sits at least partially with herself.
I'll tell her that then shall I ?
and WW2 is taught in ALL schools as it is part of the national curriculum.
All I remember doing in History was General Custer and an ancient dynasty in China, I certainly don't remember doing anything significant (if at all) on WW1 or 2. Anything I know on either is self taught from watching documentaries on the box and YouTube
All I remember doing in History was General Custer and an ancient dynasty in China, I certainly don't remember doing anything significant (if at all) on WW1 or 2. Anything I know on either is self taught from watching documentaries on the box and YouTube
That was a long, long time ago.
Since then there is now a national curriculum with set topics one of which is Churchill and WW2.
As possibly one of the more recent History graduates from secondary school and around the age of those being discussed as a 'farkin disgrace' for not knowing about Dunkirk:
- WW2 was taught as standard - But not in entirety and I got the impression which parts of the conflict were taught were decided by the teacher - Dunkirk was briefly mentioned in my own lessons but only to frame the early part of the war and we were not taught that the evacuation occurred whilst the Germans were bombing the beaches or any of the aerial conflict pre Battle of Britain - Given the above, it really doesn't surprise me that many people my age don't know the ins and outs of Dunkirk. Not that I'm defending it but the textbook/curriculum concentrated far more on the international scale of the war and the political situation (as well as war crimes/genocides/scale of death) and less about individual battles or heroics, and much less about the Home Front than I imagine some Lifers would have liked there to have been.
As possibly one of the more recent History graduates from secondary school and around the age of those being discussed as a 'farkin disgrace' for not knowing about Dunkirk:
- WW2 was taught as standard - But not in entirety and I got the impression which parts of the conflict were taught were decided by the teacher - Dunkirk was briefly mentioned in my own lessons but only to frame the early part of the war and we were not taught that the evacuation occurred whilst the Germans were bombing the beaches or any of the aerial conflict pre Battle of Britain - Given the above, it really doesn't surprise me that many people my age don't know the ins and outs of Dunkirk. Not that I'm defending it but the textbook/curriculum concentrated far more on the international scale of the war and the political situation (as well as war crimes/genocides/scale of death) and less about individual battles or heroics, and much less about the Home Front than I imagine some Lifers would have liked there to have been.
Wouldn't that be strongly influenced by the exam board's choice of topics.
As possibly one of the more recent History graduates from secondary school and around the age of those being discussed as a 'farkin disgrace' for not knowing about Dunkirk:
- WW2 was taught as standard - But not in entirety and I got the impression which parts of the conflict were taught were decided by the teacher - Dunkirk was briefly mentioned in my own lessons but only to frame the early part of the war and we were not taught that the evacuation occurred whilst the Germans were bombing the beaches or any of the aerial conflict pre Battle of Britain - Given the above, it really doesn't surprise me that many people my age don't know the ins and outs of Dunkirk. Not that I'm defending it but the textbook/curriculum concentrated far more on the international scale of the war and the political situation (as well as war crimes/genocides/scale of death) and less about individual battles or heroics, and much less about the Home Front than I imagine some Lifers would have liked there to have been.
Its a very broad subject, I feel I have a fair appreciation and knowledge of WW2, its taken me over 35 years of studying WW2 to get where I am and Im still discovering stories/people that I knew nothing about, so I can appreciate that schools have to give an overview of the 39-45 war.
My uncle made a few documentaries on Churchill, well, his bodyguard Walter Thompson and also Hitler's bodyguard, Misch
Ive got a book autographed by Walter Thompson in 1965, the series Churchills Bodyguard narrated by Dennis Waterman was fascinating, and no he didn't sing the theme tune.
As possibly one of the more recent History graduates from secondary school and around the age of those being discussed as a 'farkin disgrace' for not knowing about Dunkirk:
- WW2 was taught as standard - But not in entirety and I got the impression which parts of the conflict were taught were decided by the teacher - Dunkirk was briefly mentioned in my own lessons but only to frame the early part of the war and we were not taught that the evacuation occurred whilst the Germans were bombing the beaches or any of the aerial conflict pre Battle of Britain - Given the above, it really doesn't surprise me that many people my age don't know the ins and outs of Dunkirk. Not that I'm defending it but the textbook/curriculum concentrated far more on the international scale of the war and the political situation (as well as war crimes/genocides/scale of death) and less about individual battles or heroics, and much less about the Home Front than I imagine some Lifers would have liked there to have been.
Wouldn't that be strongly influenced by the exam board's choice of topics.
The exam paper gave you I think 10 questions and you had to answer 5. I knew those studying under a different teacher did some different topics to us but we all had to sit the same paper. So there would never be more than one question on the same topic.
As possibly one of the more recent History graduates from secondary school and around the age of those being discussed as a 'farkin disgrace' for not knowing about Dunkirk:
- WW2 was taught as standard - But not in entirety and I got the impression which parts of the conflict were taught were decided by the teacher - Dunkirk was briefly mentioned in my own lessons but only to frame the early part of the war and we were not taught that the evacuation occurred whilst the Germans were bombing the beaches or any of the aerial conflict pre Battle of Britain - Given the above, it really doesn't surprise me that many people my age don't know the ins and outs of Dunkirk. Not that I'm defending it but the textbook/curriculum concentrated far more on the international scale of the war and the political situation (as well as war crimes/genocides/scale of death) and less about individual battles or heroics, and much less about the Home Front than I imagine some Lifers would have liked there to have been.
My son is doing his GCSEs this year and his history modules don't include WW2. It's Normans, history of warfare from 1215 and the Cold War. He may have done WW2 earlier but I don't remember him doing so.
As possibly one of the more recent History graduates from secondary school and around the age of those being discussed as a 'farkin disgrace' for not knowing about Dunkirk:
- WW2 was taught as standard - But not in entirety and I got the impression which parts of the conflict were taught were decided by the teacher - Dunkirk was briefly mentioned in my own lessons but only to frame the early part of the war and we were not taught that the evacuation occurred whilst the Germans were bombing the beaches or any of the aerial conflict pre Battle of Britain - Given the above, it really doesn't surprise me that many people my age don't know the ins and outs of Dunkirk. Not that I'm defending it but the textbook/curriculum concentrated far more on the international scale of the war and the political situation (as well as war crimes/genocides/scale of death) and less about individual battles or heroics, and much less about the Home Front than I imagine some Lifers would have liked there to have been.
Its a very broad subject, I feel I have a fair appreciation and knowledge of WW2, its taken me over 35 years of studying WW2 to get where I am and Im still discovering stories/people that I knew nothing about, so I can appreciate that schools have to give an overview of the 39-45 war.
My uncle made a few documentaries on Churchill, well, his bodyguard Walter Thompson and also Hitler's bodyguard, Misch
Ive got a book autographed by Walter Thompson in 1965, the series Churchills Bodyguard narrated by Dennis Waterman was fascinating, and no he didn't sing the theme tune.
Never let it be said that I (pause) could be so good (pause) for you.
As possibly one of the more recent History graduates from secondary school and around the age of those being discussed as a 'farkin disgrace' for not knowing about Dunkirk:
- WW2 was taught as standard - But not in entirety and I got the impression which parts of the conflict were taught were decided by the teacher - Dunkirk was briefly mentioned in my own lessons but only to frame the early part of the war and we were not taught that the evacuation occurred whilst the Germans were bombing the beaches or any of the aerial conflict pre Battle of Britain - Given the above, it really doesn't surprise me that many people my age don't know the ins and outs of Dunkirk. Not that I'm defending it but the textbook/curriculum concentrated far more on the international scale of the war and the political situation (as well as war crimes/genocides/scale of death) and less about individual battles or heroics, and much less about the Home Front than I imagine some Lifers would have liked there to have been.
Its a very broad subject, I feel I have a fair appreciation and knowledge of WW2, its taken me over 35 years of studying WW2 to get where I am and Im still discovering stories/people that I knew nothing about, so I can appreciate that schools have to give an overview of the 39-45 war.
My uncle made a few documentaries on Churchill, well, his bodyguard Walter Thompson and also Hitler's bodyguard, Misch
Ive got a book autographed by Walter Thompson in 1965, the series Churchills Bodyguard narrated by Dennis Waterman was fascinating, and no he didn't sing the theme tune.
My uncle George was research director on that series mate
As an aside to the film, ( and i'm going to sound a bit like Uncle Albert .. during the war..) i'm sure we've all got stories that have been passed down the generations.
40000 people killed in London alone through bombing , 20 x 9 Eleven death toll.
My mum got evacuated to Halifax with her sisters as her school got bombed , she remembers a german fighter plane descending into her street and shooting at her as a kid, putting bullets into the front door , which are still there to this day.
My grand dad stayed behind , he was tool old to fight in the war, i can remember as a kid , people saying to me , what did your grand dad do in the war , i said he was a firemen, kids laughed and i didn't really understand what a fireman would have been doing ( apart from putting out fires) but pulling dead bodies out of buildings etc, i was only 7 when he passed away, i would have loved to have asked him about it as an adult.
This film for me did not convey the horrors of being on the receiving end of the war, which is why although interesting i found it also a bit self serving, and not connected enough with what was going on in the real world.
40000 people killed in London alone through bombing , 20 x 9 Eleven death toll.
And your point is ?
9 Eleven gets a lot of fuss and coverage, and rightly so , but bigger events have taken place that don't get the same treatment, but have had a bigger impact.
Comments
Now doing 30s and age of extremes at Uni so it does get taught.
Regardless to not know anything about Dunkirk shows an amazingly degree of willful ignorance.
The crowd applauded when the film ended. That is a very good review.
I'll tell youabout some heroes in the war - everybody will have their own personal family stories. My grandad, Ernest Smith, the reason I am a Charlton fan, was an officer in the navy. He got promoted to a new boat and a few days after leaving his old boat it was sank and all his mates were killed. Morgan, you complete a*hole, did these people not play a part in the war.
I am half Italian - my beloved uncle passed away in December. He fought against the Nazis as an Italian partizan. On one occasion, he was hidinhg in an attic as germans were searching the house he was hiding in, looking for him. If they had caught him, he was dead. His last wish was to have his ashes taken (they don't like cremations in Italy so that was a job in itself) to the wilderness within the Apenine mountains where he and many of his freedom fighting mates were based, where he wants them scattered. We will do this very soon. If you go to the town centres in many Italian towns, you will see the names and photos of people who fell for freedom, some just kids.
A couple of personal stories from within my family and reasons why Churchill was a great man, because the world needed leaders likehim. Biut there were other great leaders and other important people and the ordinary people who did great things - they should not be forgotten. It is not the film's fault if people are too ignorant to understand the artistic elements of it. WW2 should be covered more, we should all fully understand how it happened, what happened and how victory was achieved. Churchill has a prominent part in that story, Atlee's significant part has been largely forgotten, but to call the people who went through it ungrateful, I would love to have it out with Morgan face to face.
Imagine you were on the Normandy beaches liberating Europe from the Nazis with your mates being shot dead around you. If you came back wanting a better life and world for your families, were you ungrateful?
You claim WW2 is taught in school and perhaps it is in some schools. Either way the fact that she has not absorbed the knowledge of WW2 says to me it was either not taught or was simply not interesting enough for a girl of 11 to 16. Exactly how I felt about algebra.
When the opportunity arises, I'll have a chat with her on the subject.
Meanwhile could you hold back with the insults. Thanks.
That alone is enough to justify your post.
and WW2 is taught in ALL schools as it is part of the national curriculum.
Atlee and Churchill were never friends, but they worked with each other and respected each other. The were string allies in defeating the Nazis. The film focused on Churchill but was a bit naughty for not acknowledging this. But if people decide they want to know about the war as a result, films like this and Dunkirk are forces for good IMO.
I read two or three history books about WW2 a year and I still come across major events that I knew nothing about.
Since then there is now a national curriculum with set topics one of which is Churchill and WW2.
- WW2 was taught as standard
- But not in entirety and I got the impression which parts of the conflict were taught were decided by the teacher
- Dunkirk was briefly mentioned in my own lessons but only to frame the early part of the war and we were not taught that the evacuation occurred whilst the Germans were bombing the beaches or any of the aerial conflict pre Battle of Britain
- Given the above, it really doesn't surprise me that many people my age don't know the ins and outs of Dunkirk. Not that I'm defending it but the textbook/curriculum concentrated far more on the international scale of the war and the political situation (as well as war crimes/genocides/scale of death) and less about individual battles or heroics, and much less about the Home Front than I imagine some Lifers would have liked there to have been.
My uncle made a few documentaries on Churchill, well, his bodyguard Walter Thompson and also Hitler's bodyguard, Misch
Checking the national curriculum, it looks like study of WW2 is non-statutory. Just one of a number of topics.
https://gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/239075/SECONDARY_national_curriculum_-_History.pdf
Good luck with that!
Lots of Blitz type 'creative' projects and trips in the last couple of years of primary school.
http://www.bombsight.org/explore/greater-london/
40000 people killed in London alone through bombing , 20 x 9 Eleven death toll.
My mum got evacuated to Halifax with her sisters as her school got bombed , she remembers a german fighter plane descending into her street and shooting at her as a kid, putting bullets into the front door , which are still there to this day.
My grand dad stayed behind , he was tool old to fight in the war, i can remember as a kid , people saying to me , what did your grand dad do in the war , i said he was a firemen, kids laughed and i didn't really understand what a fireman would have been doing ( apart from putting out fires) but pulling dead bodies out of buildings etc, i was only 7 when he passed away, i would have loved to have asked him about it as an adult.
This film for me did not convey the horrors of being on the receiving end of the war, which is why although interesting i found it also a bit self serving, and not connected enough with what was going on in the real world.