IMDb > Battle of Britain (1969) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Battle of Britain
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Battle of Britain More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 3 of 14: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]
Index 135 reviews in total 

7 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

The producer shot down and killed Adolf Galland's brother Hans

10/10
Author: fpost2000-1 from United States
2 January 2006

I've read a bunch of these comments and I agree with almost everything I've read here. A few additions: the officer with the burnt face DID get burnt in a hurricane, S. Bernard Fisj (spelling?) the associate producer began and ran the whole project; Harry Saltzman just put up 13 million dollars. Fisj was a Polish pilot in the RAF and he really did shoot down Galland's little brother. The character in the movie named Von Falke was modeled after Adolph Galland, the top German ace during the Battle of Britain. The production was just crawling with B of B veterans and Susanna York who began the movie as a very liberal pacifist ended the job being exceedingly grateful that there were decent men who had the guts and ability to stop "the Huns" or any nasty types. Men like Norman Del Mar, the English Symphony orchestra conductor who flew a fighter in that war. (I'm not sure which he flew, "Spit" or "Hurri".) I've talked with a few of "the few" and admire them tremendously.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Did they really destroy Spits, Hurricanes and Heinkels?

Author: Piotr Smolenski from London England
4 December 2002

Good factual film with top class acting and some affects that Hollywood can't produce today. When Michael Caines Spitfire gets destroyed. It really looks like they sent a real one up there and blew it up. Plus setting fire to old docklands buildings and have them crashing into the Thames is another amazing piece of footage I've yet to see bettered. The story line sticks very closely to the recorded events of the battle and manages to compress nearly all events in the film. Only downsides are wrong German aircraft (wrong engines and cowlings) and silly love story.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

An honest film

10/10
Author: Shane (shane@amitar.com.au) from Perth Australia
28 July 2002

I found this movie to be very honest in it portrayal of the events that happened in those days when England stood to get defeated.

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.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

Great For Widescreen, But Story Is Lacking

6/10
Author: ccthemovieman-1 from United States
11 April 2006

If ever a film was made for widescreen photography this has to be it, as excellent panoramic scenes abound in this film. But, you must see this on the new two-disc special edition DVD that was recently released, to appreciate those ultra-wide scenes.

Those shots, and the airplanes, of course, were fun to look at. The more interested you are in either aviation or World War II, the more you going to like this film. There was also more action in here than I expected, almost too much of the same type of shots that got a little repetitive.

That, and the fact that the characters just didn't involve the viewer much are the downfalls of the film. There is a fairly big cast and we never really got to know any of these pilots. I thought the story was bit disjointed, too, and lacked suspense. Perhaps if I knew more about this part of the war, I would appreciate this more.

Note: My DVD said this was rated "G." How can that be? There were numerous swear words in here, certainly enough to qualify for a "PG."

All in all, a decent film but not one I'd watch numerous times. It just isn't as dramatic as it should be.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Under Rated Big time.

Author: inspt71-1 from Kentucky
19 June 2004



Battle of Britain is a great war movie. It contains an all star cast and a great story line. I think this movie is better than some of the war movies out there. I think this was over looked at the oscars of 1969. Freddie Young should have been nominated for cinematography because it was great. Somebody made a mistake here. The aerial dogfight scenes are great even for it's time and Ron Goodwin provides a great music score for this movie. Originally Sir William Walton was to have done the music and Walton was given the full credit for the music in the DVD release of this movie. I've heard Walton's score from the new soundtrack of this movie from Varese Sarabande records and I'm glad they went with Goodwin's score even though Walton's wasn't bad at all but it's didn't fit. Watch this movie and if you've seen it before and didn't like it, watch it again.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Good wartime flick

Author: Shannon from So*Cal
30 May 2004

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

POSSIBLE SPOILERS

The film, "Battle of Britain," is quite good. It's shorter than "A Bridge Too Far," but it's still a good war movie (even though ABTF is better).

Laurence Olivier, Michael Caine, Christopher Plummer, and others really did give a good performance. Hermann Goening's reaction to the Nazi defeat of the Battle of Britain was hilarious and it stayed true to history (when the Luftwaffe was facing off with the R.A.F, Hitler refused to listen to his military experts and listened to the incompetent Goening, who was in charge of the Luftwaffe...fortunately for the Allied forces). I'm surprised my history professor didn't recommend this film.

3.75 out of 5 stars.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Last real war-movie made.

Author: iannicholls from Northern California
15 March 2004

There's something about watching Spitfires tipping-over and savaging Heinkel formations that just makes your stomach roll a little.

This movie was made before filmstars demanded millions of dollars for cameo-appearances, and we are lucky that so many of the era's greatest actors were brought together for this last-hurrah for the British movie industry.

The cast reads like an Academy Awards Ceremony, and mixes the then younger-generation of actors with the likes of Michael Redgrave, Ralph Richardson, Laurence Olivier, and Trevor Howard to name just a few.

Modern television has innured us to war, making us forget that once upon a time, fighter-pilots had to get close enough to see the men they were shooting at, and while no movie could really capture that intensity, this movie comes closest of all in my opinion.

The real treat, however, is to see the "younger" stars of this movie early in their careers. Michael Caine, Ian McShane, James Cosmo, and Edward Fox look so young it's almost scary. Now they are the "elder-statesmen" of movies, being to young talented actors in modern films as Olivier, Patrick More, Robert Shaw, and Patrick Wymark were at the start of their own careers.

Maybe it's a good thing that movies like this are no longer made, allowing us to hearken to the days when a movie had to rely more on the talents of the actors than on the talents of the SFX Department.

Rates in my Top Ten favourite movies.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

classic war spectacular

8/10
Author: katherine-gallimore
27 September 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I remember being taken to see this at the Gateshead Odeon as a child. It was a big colourful spectacle then and is still is now. Only spoilt by some boring romantic scenes with Christopher Plummer.

The tone of the film is set as it opens with the inspection of the masses of German bombers to Ron Goodwin's stirring march, as Britain seems lost in the face of such overwhelming numbers.

Spectacular aerial combat scenes using authentic WW2 aircraft of both sides has never been surpassed, despite inspired attempts by George Lucas in Star Wars, and on Pearl Harbour (probably more influenced by Star Wars than BoB).

Just to put the record straight regarding the score: British TV papers often preview this film and for some stupid reason talk about Sir William Waltons "wonderful" score. This is of course rubbish. The film only contains one scene where the Walton music is used, and it is indeed very tense and adds a bit of bite to the film. However, all the rest was written in just 3 weeks by Ron Goodwin, when the studio dumped the Walton score. This has now been re-discovered, but would have been best left it's can in Eric Tomlinson's garage, being more reminiscent of of a quaint b+w film about a British boarding school than a war time action spectacular. Its childish references to Wagners "Siegfried" is at best irritating and with the exception of the scene that did make it into the movie, has nothing memorable about it, despite the snobbish bleatings of British journalists who seem intent on exaggerating the quality of a dumped score that they almost certainly had never heard themselves when writing.

The DVD contains the the film with the full RG as-released and remembered score, including the RG end scene and title which is now regularly replaced by the WWalton ending on British TV. It also has the film with the Walton music that was dumped - it is a totally different film, as if someone has put the brakes on. Ron Goodwin's music lifts this film at least 2 points over what it would have been without it.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

good 1969 war film

8/10
Author: toonnnnn from Hartlepool England
14 May 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This film explains the battle of Britain very well, having just watched the DVD version of it, the clarity is excellent.The acting is of a high standard but I feel Laurence Olivier and Trevor Howard are very good indeed,For people who are fans of Coronation Street you will spot Fred Elliot in his younger days.The DVD explains the problems in filmimg the story which are immense.The film works in the same way as the longest day ie there's lots of famous faces to look out for,perhaps the film is not as emotionally pulling as it could be, but I think it gives a good account of the story it seeks to tell.I would recommend this film to people who like war films with a touch of reality and an overview's of the battle of Britain.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Never again...

8/10
Author: Mike Brown (wb2jwd) from United States
21 January 2005

What struck me most when watching this movie is that movies like this will probably never be made again, and that's a shame. Newer movies, like "Band of Brothers" have used a small number of real aircraft, and then digitally multiplied them (for example, there were only three real C47s used in the film). It works, but you can't beat the feel of dozens of real planes.

The dogfight scenes in "Battle of Britain" had a reality you don't see today because they were REAL - the airplanes in the dogfights were real airplanes dogfighting, not CGI constructs battling in a computer. So many of these aircraft have been lost over the years, and those that are left are becoming more valuable and fragile in the 35+ years since this film was shot, that it's nearly impossible to assemble this many flying WWII planes today.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 3 of 14: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history