Battle of Britain (1969) - Action, Drama, History

Hohum Score

13

Watchable

In 1940, the British Royal Air Force fights a desperate battle to prevent the Luftwaffe from gaining air superiority over the English Channel as a prelude to a possible Axis invasion of the U.K.

IMDB: 7
Director: Guy Hamilton
Stars: Michael Caine, Trevor Howard
Length: 132 Minutes
PG Rating: G
Reviews: 21 out of 156 found boring (13.46%)

One-line Reviews (84)

while they sit and eat in high style in dining rooms with more empty chairs every day.

This overlong and boring film with its very obvious models and overage cast of middle-aged pilots must have seemed like a film from the 1940s.

At just over two hours, this is a fascinating historical record given the lavish MGM treatment that would have made their old leader, Louis B.

My only major gripe is the contrived love story between Colin and Maggie (Plummer and York) respectively, I couldn't really believe their story and it seemed surplus.

I thought the story was bit disjointed, too, and lacked suspense.

Gorgeous cinematography by Freddie Young, gripping aerial sequences using real aircraft (no CGI back then folks) that puts the audience right in the midst of the action in a realistic way that modern cinema today fails to effectively achieve - for all it's computerisation and 3D frippery.

However the crowning glory of this film is that it manages to convey almost perfect historical accuracy, and at the same time makes it very watchable and utterly fascinating.

Battle of Britain or more appropriately titled Battle of Boredom is the worst WWII "movie" ever.

), the aerial confusion, the lack of a center despite Olivier's valiant effort to hold the reins, and the disappointment of seeing favorite actors (in my case, Michael Redgrave) reduced to bit players (to be fair, it appears large chunks of the movie were edited to give it a bladder-respecting running time--you don't want audience members rushing to the restrooms and miss any of the interminable airplane shots) all conspire against this flick.

Whilst both were vital to an allied victory, the former was shorter and more intense - which made it easier to reduce to the scale of a film - whilst the latter dragged on right until the end of the war and ultimately claimed many more lives.

In a vast film that focuses on several RAF airfields where the similarities might otherwise have been confusing, and which takes us to many otherwise faceless bureaucrats and high-ranking officers who might look the same in uniform, it's good to have recognizable faces.

This film has about a million such action scenes, many of which are exciting, but they quickly get dull as aerial combat can only be so exciting.

Really excellent air battle scenes capturing the confusion and chaos of the fights.

wherever we're on the ground, we're struggling to stay awake.

The in-between story telling can be slow.

This might only be of interest to aviation enthusiasts or history buffs, but so what: it's an historic film, the only occasion outside of newsreels that you'll ever see these aircraft in their element, and it's breathtaking.

Plummer is a great actor and he's quite compelling as the heroic leader.

And later, after the last exhausting air battle, we see the German pilots, so full of life and eager for action at the start, sitting silently at the dinner table, glancing at the conspicuously empty chair of a fallen comrade.

It is a Dull Movie the only interesting shot is when Susanne York bends down in the bedroom.

In Australia this one has beeen dragged out on Saturday afternoon TV ever since its debut to educate generations of young boys - a great when one discusses 'Warries'.

If you're looking for gripping drama, look elsewhere.

) in full 40's u/wear was very exciting when I was 16.

Overall I found this film to be very entertaining.

That said the aerial battles are still pretty enjoyable despite the poor effects when the planes explode!

"Battle of Britain" is a rousing, entertaining war movie with more stars in the cast than you can count.

During the opening titles we hear a rousing piece of music which continues during the entire sequence as the German officers inspect the assembled fleets of Heinkels on the ground in France.

The subplot was uninteresting, melodramatic, clichéd, distracting and predictable.

This to me represents the typical pro-Allied propaganda evident in many films in the 1960s/70s.

Fifty years later the aerial footage is still stunning.

i found this WWII movie boring in comparison to other WWII movies,and i have seen quite a few others.

Not only is the movie jam-packed from end to end with essentially authentic aircraft in flight, but the photography makes the most out of it, with countless exciting, full-color shots of carefully choreographed combat sequences.

I found the secondary sub-plots and "personal dramas" to be hokey and formulaic, to wit, the Susannah York character Maggie is horrified and transfixed by the appearance of a badly burned pilot, only to hear moments later (in screen time) that her own pilot boyfriend has been badly burned.

It's easier to make an exciting action movie when the good guys win, after all.

The film didn't enjoy many fine reviews when it was new as it was compared, as most war films are, to the plethora of fiction produced by the movie industry and REAL history usually comes off looking mundane by comparison.

true,i could only get through to about 40 minutes before quitting,but up to that point,i was bored out of my skull.

It is an excellent recreation but sometimes the dialogue became dull.

For all the breathtaking aerials, there is the constant visual reminder that real people were being butchered on the ground and in the air.

Only spoilt by some boring romantic scenes with Christopher Plummer.

The apparently disjointed plot and timeline become clearer if you understand the battle really was the messy and drawn out affair portrayed here.

Amazing historical document, but fairly dull cinema .

Wonderfully entertaining piece of history .

It's perhaps not very special and not as good as other classics like "A Bridge too Far", "All Quiet on the Western Front" or "The Bridge on the River Kwai", but it certainly is worth watching.

I watched the fascinating episode of "The World at War" (narrated by Olivier, incidentally) dealing with the battle a few days ago.

Excellent aerial battle scenes but boring plot .

Very entertaining all the same.

The fact that they do have them at all is a thrilling treat for any WWII aviation buff.

Battle of Boredom .

The aerial sequences are riveting, the action is compelling - this is a copper-bottomed action adventure.

The views from both the German and British sides of the conflict is helpful in maintaining a perspective that I found to be riveting.

"Battle of Britain" is an exciting movie to watch.

This movie is far too slow, especially the battle scenes.

The film is also unflinching in its depiction of the sudden, yet horribly slow deaths many of the pilots suffered, making it an unusually honest war film for the 60's.

The battles are perfectly staged and consistently exciting - with the authentic aircraft making it even better as often films use models or later vehicles painted up to look like the real thing.

Thrilling.

If it has faults it is that it can sometimes be a bit dull as it is very historically accurate, as it was a very well documented battle and presumably because when it was made many of the participants were still alive (and some still are).

2-Dimensional Characters but Visually Stunning Epic .

The aerial scenes are good, but become repetitive.

For - Stunning cinematography, a masterclass in fact.

I'd recommend a film like EAGLES OVER LONDON, as it does have an intriguing plot and lots of action on the ground, set against the backdrop of the Battle of Britain.

Though at times, the screenplay seems a little slow, it does allow one to grasp an idea of what the war must have been like then.

Even the Battle of Britain itself was hopelessly confusing because you had to deduce the decisions that had been made by the Germans and why they changed the balance of the battle.

Ron Goodwins rousing music adds the final touch to top entertainment.

The aerial shots were breathtaking and the silent scene (As my Mum & Dad said) "were just how they used to watch the dogfights and felt very sad at every plane that came down as it was someone's son"Over all i think it did justice to both side in the conflict.

I say this because there is no plot to the film, the inconsequential love story is pathetic, the characters are all forgettable, the sound editing is horrendous and worst of all the acting is non-existent.

There are Heinkel 111s, Spitfires, Stuka-87s, Messerschmidt 109s, it really is quite visually stunning and remember there was no Industrial Light and Magic back then.

Set to perfect music, the aerial ballet of this scene is breathtaking.

Very realistic and historically accurate, it is capable of entertaining, and the aerial fights were extraordinarily well filmed.

Photographed in widescreen and color, the aerial fights are the most exciting moments in a film that manages to be dull despite the important story it has to tell.

Guy Hamilton's best film by a factor of about 100, also my favorite pro-war movie, "Battle of Britain" is fast-moving, violent and surprisingly involving cinema, far superior to junk like "The Longest Day (you ever spent watching a bad movie)" and "A Bridge (and an hour) Too Far (and long)" - how many times is "The Longest Day" exciting?

Though the aerial dogfights between the RAF and Luftwaffe are impressively recreated, this film is otherwise disappointing, as it never creates an involving story with its characters, or any kind of compelling dramatic story, which is strange, since the potential was there.

Well rounded cast cannot save this dull treatment of a potentially interesting subject.

Indeed, several survivors of that conflict became fast friends, each side's propaganda still moot.

boring .

For a very long time to come this film will remain a standby in schools trying to increase awareness of key events that have shaped their world among today's children - many uninterested per se in history, But I was too personally involved to assess its likely appeal for other IMDb users - all I can say is that it a well made and gripping film which will not be quickly forgotten.

" It has a compelling, historic attraction based on the actions of the RAF to provide England with sufficient breathing room after the fall of Europe to fight on in WWII.

For the most part, this is a boring war movie, though a good history lesson.

Tight stunts also had me on the edge-of-my-seat.

It's a gripping effort from beginning to end which also serves as a decent history lesson, despite being highly anachronistic in appearance(check out those 60s hairstyles).

Here, the big events and strategy of the Battle of Britain swallow personal stories, which waste screen time that might be better used to explain just what on earth is going on.

Unfortunately, this is a plot-less movie.

Characters therefore weren't fully developed - there were so many of them - but the real story is in the skies where the battles rage, with some very exciting flight sequences as well as some glorious scenery.

Mainly though it is a rousing adventure ( if a trifle " boys club" ) war film.

Engaging a British cast to die for, the entire campaign is handled with both ruthlessness and compassion.

It's worth watching just to see Christopher Plummer.