Allies got fucked up and had to abandon shit hole in france.

>>67507170
>Allies got fucked up and had to abandon shit hole in france.

So..France?

>>67507170
So basically Omaha if Tom Sizemore didn't show up?

>>67507192
Yeah. It's a big deal for the English because they were so well organized at running away. Also Germans not just pushing was lol.

>>67507087

Brits get stuck on a beach in full retreat getting their shit pushed in. Churchill got everyone with a boat to go across the english channel and pick them up. Everything goes better than expectet.

>>67507208
Yeah if allies were defending

Allies declared war on Germany, got rekt and chased back across France, at Dunkirk they were surrounded and had to wait for their ships to come and carry them over the channel, they got desperate to the point where they even used fishing trawlers and whatnot. The Germans just stood by and watched the entire time for reasons that are still debated today (they feared they had overstretched their army, the needed to resupply, internal power struggles in the German leadership, Hitler wanting to spare the British because he was a Britboo etc). Eventually they all managed to cross the channel and turned it into some "we did it boys, our magnificent spirit made us survive" thing.

>>67507350

So basically Hogan's Heroes: Grimdark edition

An important victory during a time of defeat

>>67507350
So Vietnam basically?

>>67507087
just another propaganda film to try and change already accepted narratives of Britain and France getting btfo early in WWII after starting the war and then Churchill throwing a bitchfit begging the U.S. for full support and selling the entire remains of the Empire to get it, i'm sure they'll include plenty of Shoah as well

>>67507432
>retreating
>victory

ayy

>>67507541

>After starting the war

Cheeky /pol/

Don't you dare respond saying "BUT THE ALLIES DECLARED WAR SO THAT MEANS THEY STARTED IT" cause you know that's some bullshit

>>67507541
Moron

>>67507612
It was Poland when they massacred Germans.

Is Christopher Nolan American or British?
If he is the latter, then I'm deeply afraid that he may alter the events of Dunkirk into some "lol we wuz defending 'em coasts of France while frogs were running away" scenario. The only reason Dunkirk in 1940 was the tragedy that it was is because it meant the retreat of Brits from the mainland theater, but also because it sacrificed the French army in protecting the British in their escape. Not that I'm asshurt I am ;-; but basically having the French defend the pocket while the British were fleeing destroyed any hopes for the Aisne offensive, where the French army was meant to cut the Wermacht's advance by dividing their forces. So eh, feels bad man that our only act of valour in WW2 will be converted into some praise for the British army, and not for the sacrifice of the French army. Damn anglo propaganda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6C5P-AYGdY

>>67507643
dumb frogposter

>>67507729
Pretty much :^(

>>67507643
Seems like a cool premise, I am excited to see how it looks visually and how he films it.
Most importantly I am interested if he has learned how to film gunfights better and with more style (his achilles heel imo) compared to previous titles.

>>67507755
I suppose so. I doubt he'd fail us in how it's filmed and choreagraphed, but what most worries me is that so far, the strength of his movies resided in his screenplays. Here, he'll not have too much liberties for where he takes the narrative, since the studios probably want him to conform to the universally-believed version of Dunkirk. Only time will tell, but I don't like this idea of a director like Nolan having his hands tied for where he can take the story.