Home Blog Page 3

First image of Tom Hardy as Al Capone

0

Seems like Tom Hardy likes historical roles. After playing a frontiersman in The Revenant, and a British soldier in Dunkirk, and an adventurer in 19. century London in TV series Taboo, now he plays mobster Al Capone in Josh Trank’s Fonzo. 

At first mention of Tom Hardy and Al Capone, it seems that they have nothing in common, at least not in physical appearance. But Hardy will play the infamous mobster in his late years, following nearly a decade of imprisonment, as dementia rots his mind and his violent past comes back to haunt him.

Hardy already played the role of a mobster, actually two of them; twin brothers Reggie Kray and Ron Kray in 2015 movie Legend. 

Below you can find a picture of Hardy’s Al Capone, as revealed on Hardy’s Instagram. The film also stars Matt Dillon, Kyle MacLachlan. A release date has not yet been set.

 

Chasing Fonzo…🔥🙏🌅🇺🇸🌠🌠🌠🌠😇😇😇😇

A post shared by Tom Hardy (@tomhardy) on

 

DUNKIRK History Review: Best of historical accuracy

Dunkirk (2017): Directed By Christopher Nolan / Countries: United Kingdom / United States / France/ Netherlands / Starring: Harry Styles, Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy, Kenneth Branagh, Mark Rylance.


Dunkirk (2017) is the movie with the greatest effort for historical accuracy among blockbusters. This is more interesting if you know that all characters are fictional, but a story is very much real. Dunkirk earned $525 million worldwide and making it the highest-grossing World War II film of all time. Some critics describing it as Christopher Nolan’s best to date, as well as one of the greatest war films ever made.

The movie shows one of the most painful English’s losses in World War II. Nevertheless, they turn this loss in victory because of saving the huge number of soldiers from German captivity. Aproxymetly 330.000 Allied troops were saved from Nazi German forces by all kind of vessels; cruiser, destroyers, minesweepers, yachts, small boats etc.

The movie depicts experience and fate of common soldiers in chaos on land, sea, and air. How much did filmmakers manage to show a real history find out in Dunkirk history review.

DEVELOPMENT

An idea and inspiration for a movie came to Nolan and his wife while, producer Emma Thomas, travelling over the English Channel in the 90s., They travelled for 19 hours because of rough see in a small boat, just like many soldiers did during the Dunkirk evacuation.  The more the Nolans studied evacuation, more did they wanted to show it in a movie. There was one problem; there ware no Americans in Dunkirk evacuation. Nolans waited until they had enough trust from a studio that they would let them make it a British film, but with an American budget.

History VS Movies Dunkirk history review
Dunkirk (C) Warner Bros

Nolan threw himself into reading first-hand accounts by people who had been there; a lot had been collected by the Imperial War Museum. Historian Joshua Levine had compiled a book called Forgotten Voices of Dunkirk, and he came on as a historical advisor. Joshua Levine later wrote book adaptation, Dunkirk: The History Behind the Major Motion Picture. Nolan spends some time with veterans of Dunkirk and because of their different interpretations, he decides to show different points of view; land, sea, and air.

MAKING

Great effort was made to display accuracy in all possible ways. Clothes ware specially made; the heavy wool fabric was made from scratch, tailored for the main cast and over a thousand extras. The costume department then spent three weeks ageing them. Costume designer Jeffrey Kurland studied look of clothes at the British Museum, RAF Museum, and Imperial War Museum, in magazines from the era, photo archives, and books. The mole, were soldiers ware board on boats, rebuilt over four months in accordance with the original blueprints and sand was brought back from Dunkirk.

Filming took place on dates as real evacuation and on the same location on the beach. Street scenes were shot in nearby Malo-les-Bains because most of the buildings in Dunkirk were destroyed in the war. That is why the city looks too good in the movie.

History VS Movies Dunkirk review
Spitfires in action  (C) Warner Bros

A most important part of making was a decision to minimize the need for CGI. They used cardboard cut-out props of soldiers and military vehicles created the illusion of a large army. Real or scale model fighter aircraft and real warships and boats provided a realism that could not be achieved from CGI.  Briefly, they put tremendous effort to effort recreate real evacuation and to bring it closer to the audience.

SOME THINGS STILL MISSING

Despite the effort, mistakes ware made and some of them ware intentional. German plane noses were painted in yellow for better distinction from British Spitfires. This was not actually done until a month after Dunkirk. In the time of shooting there was no more usable British cruiser so the cruiser on screen was French. Hardly noticeable, but with some experienced eyes it did not go away.

Contrary to Hollywood usual habits Dunkirk is missing bombs, chaos and filth. Scenes are to clean; soldiers waiting in the line on the clean beach, a nice little town on the beginning is in contrast with devastated real Dunkirk and bombs are not so destructive as in real life. We hoped to see something similar to the devastating and chaotic 5-minute scene from Atonement. That five minutes gave is more sense of reality and soldiers despair then whole Dunkirk movie.

Atonement (2007) depiction of Dunkirk chaos. 

Lack of CGI and using real vehicles lead to a smaller number of main vehicles than in real events. In the whole movie, we saw three British Spitfires guarding Allied soldiers contrary to usual much larger formations. The Brits ware saving planes for Battle of Britain, but three planes for Operation Dynamo is just craziness. It should be pointed out that Spitfires only had 14 seconds of ammo and couldn’t land on beaches.

Similar to planes, there is only a handful of destroyers and most of them ware shown as sink so the soldiers are saved by small ships. The audience is misled because it is estimated that small ships saved about 5% of all soldiers, and 41  destroyers operated in Operation Dynamo. Rescuing with cold and big destroyers don’t make a warm human story. It is worth pointing out that seventy percent of the vessels were sunk because of collision and misadventure and only 30 were sunk because of air attack.

One thing that misses a lot is portraying other nations other than the white British soldiers. French have limited part in the movie although they helped defend the town of Dunkirk while the evacuation was in progress. During operation Dynamo over 100,000 French soldiers had been brought back to England in. The involvement of African and Indian soldiers was also either limited or left out of the film.

The movie also missing real feel regarding wounding and death like in Saving Private Ryan. Deaths are too clean and ships sunk too fast.

CONCLUSION

Dunkirk is history experiment that turned right; a blockbuster movie without Americans and without a victory that made a lot of money and received prominent nominations and awards.  It is one of best effort to bring history closer to the audience although all characters are fictional. Perhaps, that it is a better way because no one could say; that is not a way it happened to me/my father/etc.

Lack of CGI and use of real objects bring us closer to actual history, but it also makes the opposite effect. Everything looks empty. From sky and planes to the beaches, ammo, rifles, all vehicles and people everything looks and feels smaller and less important. Nevertheless, film crew did a superb job of making clothes, finding and painting vehicles, recreating docks etc.

Without generals and their big plans, we are left with survival stories of common people trapped in one peculiar time and place. There are no big heroes in the movie with big moves that change the fate of war. We don’t even see villains because we don’t see Germans. All that is a big plus because we had enough of big history; with mention of Second World War most people we all first think on Hitler, Churchill, Stalin etc. Rarely someone thinks of a plain soldier stuck in a mud, trying to get out and survive. Dunkirk exceptionally well shows us that plain soldier, his efforts, decisions, problem and we all can hope that we will have more similar movies in the future.

Real Dunkirk VS movie Dunkirk
Real Dunkirk chaos VS movie Dunkirk

History and Oscar Winners 2018

We can not complain; history movies got a large number of nominations and a considerable number of Academy Awards.

OSCAR WINNERS

First of all, we must mention the biggest award for history movies; Academy Award for Actor in a leading role for Gary Oldman. No one deserved it more than him for a brilliant performance portraying Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour. Movie crew that transformed chinless Gary Oldman into chin-friendly Churchill received second Darkest Hour Oscar for Makeup and Hairstyling. One of the crew even describe it: There is nothing similar about the two faces — Gary looks like a greyhound and Churchill resembles a bulldog. 

Dunkirk didn’t receive Oscar in main categories such as Best Picture, Cinematography or Directing. Dunkirk got three Oscars for Film Editing, Sound Editing and Sound Mixing. That is a little disappointment, but it understandable considering the strong competition in that categories.

List of other notable winners is very short. Phantom Thread won award Costume Design and Allison Janney won the award for Actress in Supporting Role (I, Tonya).

Darkest Hour history review will be soon available on our page.

 

 

History and Oscar Nominations 2018

0

Another good year for history on Oscars. Superhero movies maybe bring money, but history movies get you Academy Award nomination, at least the good ones. We could say history and Oscar get along.

WORLD WAR II

Of course, if it is war movie is probably about World War II and we are not complaining about that. Nolan’s Dunkirk leads historical genre with 8 nominations including Best Picture, Directing and Cinematography. Without a full-blooded lead actor, there could not nominations for best and supporting actor for Dunkirk and any nomination for best or supporting actress is failed in a start.

Contrary to, the Darkest Hour‘s strongest part is lead actor Gary Oldman, as Winston Churchill, and who is competing for Academy Award for best actor. Darkest Hour has 6 nominations including for Best Picture.

OTHERS

Beside two Second World War movies, there are few more movies based on true events or fictional stories who’s the action takes place in history.

The Post depicts the true story of attempts by journalists at The Washington Post to publish the Pentagon Papers, classified documents regarding the 30-year involvement of the United States government in the Vietnam War. Director is Steven Spielberg and in main roles are Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep who is nominated for best actress.

Phantom Thread is a historical period drama set in London in the 1950s. Beside nomination for Best Pictures, there is 5 more nomination for Phantom Thread. Although this is the last movie from Daniel Day-Lewis, we set our hopes on Gary Oldman. 

Mudbound is also a historical period drama that depicts two World War II veterans – one white, one black – who return to rural Mississippi each to address racism and PTSD in his own way. 

Several movies are more or less loosely based on true stories:  Molly’s Game, The Disaster Artist, Victoria & Abdul and I, Tonya starring Margot Robbie as  Tonya Harding received three nominations.

All the Money in the World recieved one nomination, Christopher Plummer in leading actor for portraying J. Paul Getty. This role was originally played by Kevin Spacey, but after multiple sexual misconduct allegations against Spacey, the role was recast with Plummer. Scenes were reshot a month prior to the film’s release.

RAZZIES

There is a key to avoid Razzie nominee and award; just make good history movie. The second key is to avoid fabrication of Egyptian history. Last year Gods of Egypt won two Razzies and this year Tom Cruise received Razzie for his part in The Mummy. Perhaps there is Egyptian curse for fabricating their history.

 

 

The Current Wars Trailer: First serious Hollywood movie about Nikola Tesla

0

 

Ok, the movie is about a competition of Thomas Edison, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, and George Westinghouse, played by Michael Shannon, to bring us best current and most cash to them. They are main characters in The Current Wars, an upcoming historical drama that will hit theatres on November 24. We are longing for a good, big-budget movie about Nikola Tesla and it seems we will have to still wait. Magical Tesla from Prestige (2006) doesn’t count as serious effort.

The trailer doesn’t bring us good stuff. Apparently, Thomas Edison is portraited as good guy and inventor and not as sleazy businessman. Tesla, played by Nicholas Hoult, looks more like a problem-solving nerd from sitcoms than a world best scientist. Furthermore, we get only a glimpse of him. There will be no lack of drama; in the trailer, we hear “only” two times that who controls that current, controls the future.

The Current Wars history

In 1878 Thomas Edison saw a market for a system that could bring electric lighting directly into a customer’s business or home. His direct current systems (DC) would be sold to cities throughout the United States, making it a standard with Edison controlling all technical development and holding all the key patents. Edison biggest weak point was relatively short useful transmission range. Plants ware situated in the middle of population centres and could only supply customers less than a mile from the plant.

In 1884 George Westinghouse entered the electric lighting business and soon begun to develop an alternating system (AC) which could transfer electricity to very long distances. The Current Wars lasted about a decade and ended with AC win. In meantime, there were few dead people and a dozen electrified animals.

 

New trailer for Hostiles (2017) with Christian Bale and Rosamund Pike

0

There is a new trailer for Scott Cooper’s Hostiles (2017) with Christian Bale, Rosamund Pike and Wes Studi.
The fictional story is set in the 1890s and follows Bale character on a quest to escort a former Cheyenne enemy from New Mexico back to his tribal lands in Montana. The two men are joined by a suicidal widow, played by Rosamund Pike, who is still grieving over the murder of her family by Comanche Indians.

The movie premiered at Telluride over the Labor Day and was the rare festival entry to not have a distributor. Surely that strong performance from Bale and good reviews will make sure that they will sell distributor rights for a fair price. There are some talks about being Oscar contender if the movie will be released this fall.

The trailer promises good and bloody Western movie, and it is been a long time since we had that kind of movie. Christian Bale looks excellent in his role of racist captain and can wait for Hostiles to come to theatres.

 

Trailer for Mark Felt; Liam Neeson VS Richard Nixon

0

There is a new trailer for history movie and it is for Mark Felt: The Man Who Brought Down the White House.  

We all know that Liam Neeson is a badass, and this time he is an FBI Associate Director who brought down Richard Nixon. Neeson will not use weapons, but his best skill, a voice. He will be portraited Mark Felt, who was suspect to be the Deep Throat, an informant who provided information to Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post. Only in 2005, he admitted that he was Deep Troat, and wrote a book about that. Universal pictures and Tom Hank’s immediately bought rights for a movie, but it took them 12 years for the movie; probably they were waiting for the first president that is in a quarrel with FBI.

What about History

It took almost 2 years from the start of Watergate scandal to Nixon’s resignations so we don’t have high hopes in historical accuracy. Hollywood is always looking for drama and to cut out paperwork, letters, long and boring conversations. It is certain that history will suffer in the movie. To this point, it is controversial why Mark Felt become the informant, who later got a nickname based on a famous character from a porn movie.
Doubtless is that the movie will show us the one and only reason; for America (and freedom of course). Once again; the movie makers probably trying to show us that they are calling for a hero we all need and deserves (and who can make the president resign).

Diana Lane plays Felt’s wife, and Maika Monroe plays their daughter. Actor Julian Morris is in the role of Bob Woodward. The role previously portrayed by Robert Redford in All The President’s Men. It is unclear who is playing Carl Bernstein. The movie starts in theatres on September 29th.

 

TOP 5 SCHINDLER’S LIST HISTORICAL MISTAKES

Steven Spielberg did a brave job with making Schindler’s List (1993).  In 1968 MGM bought rights to make a movie from Schindler story, but the project rotted, as many Hollywood ideas do, so they never produced the movie. In 1982 Australian author Thomas Keneally published a novel of historical fiction Schindler’s List, and Steven Spielberg made from it a three-hour movie. Immediately there was an accusation of pasteurizing the horrors of the Holocaust for popular consumption and of rendering history’s greatest horror as entertainment. Nevertheless, the movie introduced viewers to the horrors of the Holocaust and influenced many other films with a similar theme. Below are TOP 5 Schindler’s List Historical Mistakes.

There was no Schindler’s List

By the end the movie we see Oscar Schindler making a list of “essentials” Jews which he will take in Brünnlitz (today Czech Republic) from his Poland factory. This was necessary because Red Army drew nearer and Hitler ordered all Jews, “essential” or not, to the death camps. Schindler and his helper Itzhak Stern, frantically are making the list and they know all the names from a head. Problem is that Oscar Schindler was in prison at that time, and Stern didn’t work for him in that period. Truth is that there were different lists of various authors, but that Schindler had almost nothing to do with the list.

Schindler's List History VS Movies
Two men who didn’t create list (c) Universal Pictures

The role of the Poles

Except for last minutes, all action was on the soil of occupied Poland. All the scenes in the film featuring Poles portray them as anti-Semitic Nazi collaborators. While Polish-Jewish relations were often painful during Nazi occupation, Spielberg’s depiction of interactions between Poles and Jews is one-sided and lacks accurate historical context. All Poles in movie collaborate with Nazis; concentration camp guards and doctors are Poles, women in camp shower command them in Polish etc. On the end of the movie, there is a note saying that the Jews Schindler saved and their descendants number is 6,000, while Poland’s present Jewish population is less than 4,000. He failed to mention that by the end of the war there were 350,000 Jews in Poland.

Jews – perfectly submissive, helpless victims

In the movie Jews are shown as perfectly submissive, helpless victims. In one scene we see a group of male Jews lined up for shooting. Nazis line them up so that they can be killed with one bullet, and the group just followed the order. In another scene, a group of women went to the showers knowing that they will be killed by gas. The only resistance shown was when they try to escape from Nazis.  This was not the case in Schindler’s Krakow; young Jewish resistance fighters killed several Germans there before Frank’s barbarous ghetto sweep.

Schindler's List - train
Itzhak Stern (c) Universal Pictures

The return of women from Auschwitz

While travelling to the safety of Brünnlitz three hundred women ended up in Auschwitz by mistake. They were sent to showers expecting death but end up in the real shower. Schindler went personally to Auschwitz and saved them by bribing the officer with diamonds: It’s just that I know
that in the coming months, we’re all going to need portable wealth“. This was a total fabrication; dramatized to show how that women felt being in Auschwitz. Also, Schindler never went to Auschwitz; according to Emilie Schindler, Schindler’s wife, her husband sent to Auschwitz a female childhood friend identified only as Hilde, to take care of the release of the women. Emilie Schindler described her as beautiful, slender and graceful. It is not necessary to say; the job was done.

Unpleasant character

Schindler's List - Girl in Red
In the movie, this is Schindler turning point. (c) Universal Pictures

Oscar Schindler saved approximately 1.200 Jews and his story today is inspirational to all generations. The question is why we didn’t receive ecranisation of his story, and the reason is in his character. Schindler came to Poland as soon as Poland was conquered and took over the business. There are clues that he was in spy for German counterintelligence and involved in planning on Nazi invasion of Poland. Also, there were rumours that he stole from Jews, and ordered them beaten. He wasn’t a stereotypical Hollywood hero who experienced enlightenment and transformed into the hero; He cheated wife on a mass scale, and spend all money on booze and women.
Spielberg showed more human side. He even showed Schindler transformation in saviour when he saw “girl in red”.
Spielberg didn’t mention that Schindler sold his gold ring, a gift from saved Jews, and spend money to buy booze.

 

DUNKIRK – History back on menu

0

As we have all have hoped Dunkirk (2017) is a real history movie with an excellent level of details for historical fidelity. Moreover, we hope that Dunkirk brings back history movies in theatres and set the new level for history in movies. Dunkirk is first movie this year who was in first place of Box Office (US) that isn’t part of some franchise (we are all tired of superhero movies). Some say that this is best Christopher Nolan movie, and others say that this is greatest war movie of all time.

Dunkirk poster History VS Movies
Dunkirk poster History VS Movies

Christopher Nolan did his best to show us dramatic days of evacuating 338,226 soldiers from claws of Nazi Germany. The film covers three points of view: infantry, navy and air forces. Christopher Nolan said that for the soldiers who embarked in the conflict, the events took place on different temporalities. On land, some stayed one week stuck on the beach. On the water, the events lasted a maximum day; and if you were flying to Dunkirk, the British Spitfires would carry an hour of fuel.

Box Office

The movie grossed 50,513,488 $ in the opening weekend, and currently, he is on 274,070,738$ worldwide. With estimated production budget of 100 million dollars, we can only hope that this is not the last Christopher Nolan’s history movie. Heck, we hope that others will follow his example, so we won’t have to see movies like Braveheart etc.
The movie even prompted the debate about the role of women in this evacuation.

Dunkirk history accuracy

Off course, nothing could be all historical correct; fictional characters and storyline, the weather was worse than during the real evacuation, the German planes had their noses painted yellow in the film to better distinguish them; in reality, this was not done until a month after Dunkirk, the involvement of French, African and Indian soldiers was either limited or left out of the film etc.
That all will be soon covered in a review, but in the meantime enjoy the movie.

 

 

 

 

 

Churchill as warming for Dunkirk; The most anticipated historical film of the year

It is a good time for all World War II lowers; Churchill (2017) is in theatres, and Dunkirk (2017), most anticipated historical film of the year, is coming in theatres in July. Although Churchill did not receive good scores it is surely better than box office fiasco King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017). Churchill shows a period of 3 days before D-Day and Churchill’s dilemma about his second landing. First one was during World War I and it was a disaster; the landings at Gallipoli during World War I. Screenwriter of Churchill is Alex von Tunzelmann, a historian herself, but judging by first reports she took too much freedom. Historical accuracy will be a theme of our future history review.

Dunkirk

We are one month apart from Dunkirk and we can’t wait for it anymore. This is first real trip of director Christopher Nolan in history movies. We will not mention too much The Prestige (2006) with Nikola Tesla as a wizard rather the scientist. We expect a lot from Dunkirk because last few Nolan’s movies were well prepared and written gems with a special touch for the details. Interstellar brought a futuristic story with all details scientifically possible. Will Dunkirk have that level of details in historical accuracy or will the accuracy be neglected because of a drama? Do not forget Matthew McConaughey’s all that crying and tears in Interstellar. Judging by Nolan’s previous efforts and preparations; we will have a true history treat better then Hacksaw Ridge.