Thanks for posting Gary. The CGI does look really well done.

I'll have to dig for the link, but they're using two actual Mk.Ia's and a Mk.V for the Spits, and a Buchon for the 109.  The Stukas and He-111s are large scale RC aircraft.  The article I read said the squadron markings are bogus, and the numbers on the Spits were on Wellingtons.

I've posted the movie trailer link in another forums I belong to and gotten excited reviews. They all can't wait to see it.

Lewbud- where did you hear about the bogus claim and other findings? I know the 109s were used using the Buchons. However, the UK do have a number of flyable Spits and other WW2 vintage aircrafts.

Thanks for the correction, Lewbud!

http://www.warbirdsnews.com/warbirds-news/dunkirk.html

I especially like the image of the 3 spits in early black/white underside camo.

Gary

I just had a close look at the trailer and you can make out the sq code LC on 3 spits in one seen, but none of them have an individual aircraft letter. Couldn't make out markings on the Stuka's or 109's though.

Bish,

Take a look at the photos in the link I posted just before your post.  The 109 has a black "2".

Thanks for the heads up. Looks promising.

GAF

Bish,

Take a look at the photos in the link I posted just before your post.  The 109 has a black "2".

 

Ye, looked at that after i posted. I notice they have not added any unit insignia. Makes sense given their reasons for the Spit markings.

 Looks like quality. I hope it comes out here in the U.S. at the same time. Can't get enough good war movies

lewbud

I'll have to dig for the link, but they're using two actual Mk.Ia's and a Mk.V for the Spits, and a Buchon for the 109.  The Stukas and He-111s are large scale RC aircraft.  The article I read said the squadron markings are bogus, and the numbers on the Spits were on Wellingtons.

 

To the average movie goers, does it really matter? No. They won't even know the difference between a Spitfire Mk.I to a Spitfire Mk.Vb. The same with the Buchon and a Bf-109. So the discrepancies in the film are irrelevant to them.

I'll take the bogus RAF squadron codes and too early use of yellow noses on the German aircraft. As long as they pull off a good enjoyable war movie and tell the tale right. I don't think they are aiming for a docudrama like Tora Tora Tor or The Longest Day, but instead are doing a historical fiction work like Saving Private Ryan to tell the story. 

stikpusher

I'll take the bogus RAF squadron codes and too early use of yellow noses on the German aircraft. As long as they pull off a good enjoyable war movie and tell the tale right. I don't think they are aiming for a docudrama like Tora Tora Tor or The Longest Day, but instead are doing a historical fiction work like Saving Private Ryan to tell the story. 

 

I agree, thats the most important thing.

And nice to see a war movie from the British perspective. To often people in this country complain that Hollywood makes movies which only show Americans and acts as though the US weon the war single handed. They forget thats its not up to Hollywood to show the British side of it.

Well said Bish and stik. Let's not forget, they used Buchons when they filmed "The Battle of Britain" too lewbud.

BlackSheepTwoOneFour

 

 

lewbud

I'll have to dig for the link, but they're using two actual Mk.Ia's and a Mk.V for the Spits, and a Buchon for the 109.  The Stukas and He-111s are large scale RC aircraft.  The article I read said the squadron markings are bogus, and the numbers on the Spits were on Wellingtons.

 

 

 

 

 

To the average movie goers, does it really matter? No. They won't even know the difference between a Spitfire Mk.I to a Spitfire Mk.Vb. The same with the Buchon and a Bf-109. So the discrepancies in the film are irrelevant to them.

 

I think it was this forum where a member quoted someone as saying a Tuskeegee airman film was ruined for him because they used the wrong model Mustang. There will be some who can't stand these inaccuracies. At least there isn't a US warship making a fictional heroic visit that saves the day. Hollywood is usually good for that.

I understand the issues of one having gripes about inaccuracies. But to be dismayed and felt it ruined the film for him because of inaccuracies? Give me a break. It's Hollywood.

Exactly... Hollywood can do fantastic films like "Flags of Or Fathers" or wtf films like "Windtalkers". The story, writing, acting, directing, etc. is what makes the movie. Not the version or markings of an aircraft. "Battle of the Bulge" would still be laughable in its tank scenes even with real Sherman's and Panthers...