Battle of Britain (1969) User Reviews

A good film, unfortunately for Hollywood, WW2 started in 1939!

[jmb3222 · 7/10 · 5 March 2002]

This film does have its flaws, but is still a great film. It had to be made when it did (sic) if only because the Spanish Air Force still had their Merlin engined Hispano HA-1109 and HA-1112 "Me 109s" and Casa C.2111 "111s" flying in 1968!

It's good that some "stars" do not have big roles. Michael Caine whilst being "hot box office" is shot down - many pilots who seemed invincible were lost. A number of the parts are based on real characters Robert Shaw's is based on Adolf 'Sailor' Malan - 74 Squadron Ace, Susannah York's Harvey is based on one Felicity Hanbury (who later became the Commandant of the WRAF). The scene where she has to deal with a bombed slit trench is based on what happened when Biggin Hill was attacked. Being burned and still being alive was one of the biggest risks - sitting next to a tank of 100 octane whislt being shot at was risky.

It's chief flaws are i) Hurricanes shot down the bulk of the German losses during the Battle - this "error" is primarily because there were more flying Spitfires available. More serious is depicting "The Few" as a group of equals - in reality the class system was still to the fore in some places more so than others. Officer would not mix with NCOs, Auxilliary Air Force pilots (predominantly from the upper classes) looked down on Volunteer Reserve pilots (predominantly from the working/middle classes). But bear in mind this was made less than 30 years after the event when some of the myths and propaganda surrounding it were still treated as the truth, unlike "Pearl Harbor" and "U-571" and other recent films they haven't just thrown historical fact out because it doesn't fit the desired story line!

Many pilots were killed simply because of the stupid tatics they used - fighting by the 1930s RAF rule book until lessons were learnt. Many didn't see what hit them. In most other ways the film is by and large correct. The British were very reluctant to use Polish and Czech squadrons; despite many of these pilots being much more experienced than British.

Oh and having read the other comments here - this does not follow just one squadron, Robert Shaw is one, Michael Caine another, The Czech/Poles others, Christopher Plummer another. I seem to remember that the film makers went out of their way not to show any one squadron as being the "winners" hence no squadron numbers are mentioned - all aircraft codes are ficticious.

A film has to keep an audience's attention for 100+ minutes real life isn't like that just showing the fear and boredom of sitting around on hot summers days dreading the 'phone call would not make a good movie instead compromises are made. When you watch it remember that this wasn't just dreamt up by some scriptwriter this really happened.

Saving Their Blessed Isle

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 16 December 2006]

Battle of Britain which depicts same owes a lot of its inspiration not only to The Longest Day, but to The Magic Box. In that film Robert Donat played William Friese-Greene who many in the United Kingdom and Commonwealth claim to be the real inventor of motion pictures. It was a biographical film in which as many stars of British cinema that were available got to play even bit parts.

Here as many stars as could be gotten under one roof paid tribute to the valiant fighting heart of the United Kingdom's Royal Air Force which did nothing less than save civilization itself in their defense of their 'blessed isle.' Such folks as Christopher Plummer, Michael Caine, and Robert Shaw portrayed RAF squadron commanders who had to be mobilized at an instant notice to face the German Luftwaffe which outnumbered the Royal Air Force 4 to 1. As Laurence Olivier put it just to stay even our young men will have to shoot down their young men at a rate of 4 to 1.

Olivier plays the guy ultimately responsible for the success of the RAF as Fighter Command chief Air Marshal Hugh R. Dowding. Olivier did very well in capturing the essence of character that was Dowding who was a brooding pessimistic sort not given to wild claims of bravado. That in itself did not near and endear him to his Prime Minister who liked a great show of spunk from his military commanders. Dowding was also into spiritualism and after retiring in 1942 claimed contact with the spirits of dead RAF men from the other side.

Dowding had to referee between dueling Air Vice Marshals Keith Park and Trafford Leigh-Mallory played by Trevor Howard and Patrick Wymark. Leigh-Mallory wanted a more offensive type strategy and Park was for husbanding what resources the RAF had. Good arguments were put forth by both men. Dowding came down eventually on Park's side though after Dowding was retired by Churchill, Leigh-Mallory got his way. By that time through Lend-Lease, Britain had enough planes to do what Leigh-Mallory envisioned. The conflict between these guys was a great deal nastier than portrayed here. But Olivier, Howard, and Wymark give you some insight into the character of each.

My favorite bit in Battle of Britain is not any of the aerial combat sequences which are spectacularly done, nor is it the conflict in the higher command. It's a scene that takes place in Geneva where the ministers from Great Britain and Germany meet. The German minister is not a Nazi party hack, but a career diplomat. Yet he's real full of himself when he tells Ralph Richardson that you British might just as well surrender because we got the resources to take you out right now.

Classical actor that Ralph Richardson was, his reply was in the spirit of John Wayne when he tells them if you think you can, you're welcome to try, just don't make with the mouth. Minister David Kelly was echoing the bulldog defiance of his prime minister who was stiffening the backbone of his people for the long haul.

One thing I wish had been showed in Battle of Britain. There was reference to Buckingham Palace being bombed and it did get hit a few times over the course of the next five years. King George VI and his family stayed there, they certainly could have left for the relatively safer areas where Sandringham, Windsor, and Frogmore were. But they chose to stay as well. Not enough is ever spoken about the King and the other royals in that period. They too were an inspiration to their subjects. I wish that the Royals had been portrayed here, it might give some insight to non-Commonwealth people about why the Monarchy is held in such respect despite recent antics by some of its members.

Of course the Germans took Ralph Richardson's invitation to step up and get the job done and they failed. Thanks to some 600 RAF pilots which included volunteers from other commonwealth countries, from exiles from such places as Poland and Czechoslovakia and even from the USA, Great Britain kept control of its skies and a planned invasion never took place. Although aerial attacks took place over the United Kingdom for the length of the war, the threat of invasion was officially over when Hitler turned his attention east and southeast.

Battle of Britain is a wonderful tribute to the 20th century's noble 600.

Stirring, Beautifully-Done; the Difficult-to-Do Story of Britain's Blitz in WWII

[silverscreen888 · 8/10 · 7 July 2005]

This dramatized biography to my mind represents one of the most difficult sorts of film to make. I believe the makers of "The Battle of Britain" succeeded in making it a stirring war film, and one that deserves to be watched and remembered often. Many people find the battle scenes in the air in this film among the best ever staged. Cliff Richardson deserves praise for his special effects; and Guy Hamilton, director in charge, has frankly done marvelous work of a very difficult-to-achieve sort. He has interiors, intimate scenes, outdoor lectures, strafings, bombings, aerial battles, airplane landings, group shots and conferences to handle.Wilfred Greatorex and James Kennaway. In addition, Ron Goodwin and William Walton supplied memorable music, veteran Freddie Young the lucid cinematography and Maurice Carter wonderful art direction. The story-line chronologically follows the "Battle of Britain", No aspect is overlooked. The success of Luftwaffe air attacks on forward bases is noted; and so is the lucky decision by Hitler to start bombing Londoners instead that caused a shift it tactics and saved Britain's radar towers, key to targeting incoming attackers for interdiction by British aircraft. We hear a lecture by an Air Marshal, see firefighting squads and female drivers in action; we see both sides talking in their own languages--the Germans being subtitled; and we see action in the British War Room and at the highest levels of military planning. A couple is followed to illustrate what pilots and their wives, she being part of the war effort also, had to undergo and the pressures they faced. The pilots are also seen waiting between sorties at their bases; and finally when none come, the first phase of WWII, the expedition and subsequent Battle of Britain is over. In the huge cast are most of the leading male actors in England, including Laurence Olivier as Hugh Dowding, chief of the air effort, Trevor Howard as Keith Park, Patrick Wymark as Mallory, their chief opponent within the air corps,, plus Christopher Plummer and Susannahh York as the troubled couple, Harry Andrews, Michael Caine, Ian McShane, Kenneth More, Curd Jurgens, Nigel Patrick, Michael Redgrave, Robert Shaw, Robert Flemyng, Michael Bates, Ralph Richardson, Isla Blair and Edward Fox. This is a splendid, well-paced and beautiful recreation. The music is superb; the combat footage unexcelled and the acting far-above-average. I rate this film on many counts above anything else ever done concerning the defense of Britain by its air forces during the late war.

A Historic event recreated with skill and wit.

[jlpicard1701E · 10 July 2003]

Perhaps not many new viewers of this gigantic recreation are aware of the fact that this movie was filmed almost 30 years after the actual events took place.

The efforts to put History on screen were huge. Everything in this account of the facts, comes directly from those who were actually involved in it: from the British and German fighter aces to private Londoners, they all contributed to make this not just another "war movie", but rather a dramatized documentary with accurate precision.

This by no means signifies that it is just that. The sky battles were very carefully choreographed, in accordance to rules of combat, which were followed in the 1940s. Some planes were flown by the same veterans, so that when you see a Messerschmitt Bf-109 followed by Spitfire Mk 1, you know it's for real.

The technical efforts were immense and although the Messerschmitts have reworked engines and even the Heinkel He.111s have different aerials and engine specs, because they were updated by the Spanish Air Force for later use after World War Two, the difference is barely noticeable when one watches one of those spectacular aerial battles.

On the whole, this is a history lesson about how a people, isolated from the rest of the world, and in a minority position, withstood the overwhelming crushing machine of the Axis: the Luftwaffe.

More than a movie, this is a celebration to those brave people, both civilian and military, who did commit themselves against all odds, to resist and fight back a very aggressive and dangerous enemy.

This, together with "The Longest Day", "Sink the Bismarck!", "Tora! Tora! Tora!" and "A Bridge Too Far" is one of those rare examples to make history come to life again and should be considered as didactic material for schools.

An excellent multi-national cast and a skillful direction, make this a masterpiece of its genre.

an important moment in history

[blanche-2 · 6/10 · 26 May 2012]

The "Battle of Britain" was one of the most critical battles of World War II, and was fought against Germany by the RAF. The German Luftwaffe planes way outnumbered what the RAF had -- something like 640 vs. 2500 - astonishing - but the RAF went ahead anyway to keep Germany from invading their country.

I'm not a World War II expert, though I'm sure there are plenty of them who have seen this film and posted a review, so I'll leave the critiques about whether or not this was a realistically told story to them.

In my own opinion, it was a lot of stars without much to do and some fantastic aerial battles. The stars include Michael Caine, Trevor Howard (replacing Rex Harrison), Harry Andrews, Laurence Olivier, Ralph Richardson, Christopher Plummer, Ian McShane, Curt Jergens, Kenneth More, Nigel Patrick, Michael Redgrave, Robert Shaw, Susannah York, Robert Flemyng, and Edward Fox. Dirk Bogarde must have been on vacation. Timothy Dalton auditioned for a role but did not get it; Alec Guinness was to play a role that was eventually cut from the script. An astonishing cast.

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. Filming took place in England and Spain.

For some history of the film, I suggest the "trivia" section here, which goes into the collecting of the planes and cites scenes based on real incidents.

If you like World War II films, this sprawling tribute to the RAF is for you.

Great For Widescreen, But Story Is Lacking

[ccthemovieman-1 · 6/10 · 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.

Formulaic, yet uniquely authentic. (Very minor spoiler)

[boazbenjamin · 7/10 · 12 August 2004]

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. Nevertheless, what struck me much more than any of the performances, effects, or writing, was the simple fact that the RAF adviser on this film was the exceptional Sir Douglas Bader, who was one of the most aggressive flyers in Fighter Command despite having lost both legs in a flight accident in the early thirties, while the Luftwaffe adviser on the film was the man who shot Bader down in 1941, Adolf Galland. Each man was a fighter ace, and each was among the most famous and respected pilots on his respective side at the time of the war itself. That is to say that these men were not only in the Battle of Britain, but played significant roles in it and were privy to, if not party to, many of the tactical and strategic decisions and debates depicted in the film. In fact, the sardonic request to Goering to "give me a squadron of Spitfires," voiced by Major Falke in the film, was spoken by Galland in real life. No quantity of flashy CG effects could outweigh the guaranteed authenticity of having the real thing on hand.

An amusing side point: The roll of nationalities at the end of the film concluded with one "Israeli" pilot, a mild anachronism as there was no Israel until 1948. At the time of the war, he would have been referred to as a Jewish Palestinian, or simply a Palestinian, but of course the film was produced shortly after the Israeli victory in the Six Day War (1967), and the term Palestinian was coming to refer uniquely to those Arabs inhabiting the territories captured by Israel in that war.

Anyhow, in summary, while I found much of the melodrama to be overplayed and unnecessary, the central action of the film, both at Headquarters and in the air, vibrates with an authenticity which is ever more difficult to reproduce as the remainder of the wartime generation ages and dwindles, particularly those who were old enough to be in staff and leadership positions during the war.

Holds Up Well

[bjones · 9/10 · 21 January 2002]

I recently reviewed this film after having not seen it since it was new. Being a 31 year military veteran I have a somewhat different frame of reference for watching films such as this. I look for things in a film many civilians never will. I don't think this one has ever been shown on TV in the US, at least not within a couple of decades, so it's certainly not overplayed here. Luckily, the tape I accessed was in excellent condition so it was crisp and new in appearance. It is still a very excellent film depicting one of Britain's most harrowing times and the unwavering heroism of those who fought so desperately to secure their victory. 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. I have found this a similar oddity for many excellent films of war. This is one film that more than adequately stands the test of time and I would absolutely love to see a wide-screen DVD version of it offered. Although it helps to have an understanding of war in general, and in particular the second world war and the actual battle of britain, one can be ignorant of those facts and still come away well entertained. It is a wonderfully produced film, acted with talent and grace by a cast of performers who are now legendary. The sets, costumes and musical score are wonderful and perfectly compliment the cinematography. If I can find a copy I am going to add it to my library.

Somewhat of a disappointment

[buiger · 6/10 · 19 April 2014]

I was very lenient in rating this movie for two reasons: - I am a sucker for these types of movies - I thought that for a movie made in 1969 with very good special f/x for the time, some of the naiveté could be forgiven Otherwise I agree with Ebert. It is not a wonder that notwithstanding that this was am A-grade mega production, it did not receive even one award or even nomination worthy of mention.

This movie is far too slow, especially the battle scenes. The repeat themselves almost endlessly and seem to be the 'raison d'etre' of the movie. What is missing is characterization, introspection, real emotions. We need to feel with the protagonists, see and comprehend their fear, be apart of it. In this film pilots live and die, and somehow we couldn't care less, it doesn't bring up any emotions in us. Historically, the movie is correct, but there again it lacks in detail, more 'behind the scenes' information. What they feed us is only the basic information you learn in 4th grade. Definitely not enough. All in all, average. What a pity, considering the star saturated cast and all the money spent.

The Window of Time....

[bbhlthph · 10/10 · 6 September 2010]

I was a youth living near Hornchurch RAF aerodrome during this battle and vividly remember the hot sunny September afternoons when we could watch great aerial dogfights in the skies above almost every afternoon. We ducked into the shelter if the dogfights were directly overhead, but the drama was too great to stay there if the coast seemed clear enough (This was probably unwise- on one occasion a piece of metal, later identified as part of the engine cowling from a Me 109, whistled into our garden a few yards from us - but what wonderful memories it has left me throughout a long life.) I avoided watching this film depicting the events for a very long time - I did not want to come up with some lukewarm judgment that yes it was quite a good attempt to re-create what I remembered so well. The greatest compliment I can pay this film is to acknowledge that I made a mistake - watching it, I learned what it means to be transported back in time and to be present again during one of the great moments in history. This experience totally transcends any reality TV.

My heading - the window of time- refers to the short period following any great event during which it is possible to create a worthy reproduction of it in pseudo-documentary form. Once this opportunity has slipped away it will never return. Recognition of this finally led to the long planned film actually being created - there were only just enough of the aircraft left flying, many of them having reached the end of a long period of service with the Spanish Air Force. Details like antennae changes were not really important except to survivors of the battle, but it was sad that the film has had to reinforce the myth that the United Kingdom was saved by the magic of its new Spitfire fighters - actually the brunt of the battle on the British side was carried by the more venerable Hurricanes which achieved the majority of the "kills" during this phase of the war. There were not enough Hurricanes still in serviceable condition to enable this to be shown accurately (one of the very few minor historical 'errors' in the film). We can all envisage an attempt to create a similar film today if it had not been made when it was. Very carefully constructed flying models, assisted by close-ups shot in re-constructed cockpits and some computer generated fighting effects, would all look incredibly real on the screen but at the end our reaction would be that we had watched a technological masterpiece, not a feeling that we were present during real events! The cast list reads like a who's who of the great British actors of the period, but as with the real events the Germans and all important Canadians, Poles and Czecho-Slovakians were also appropriately represented. Overall the acting level was consistently good and this film also incorporates one of the all time great moments on film - I am thinking of four very brief linked sequences totalling not much over a minute which essentially summed up the complete story. First Londoners, sheltering underground from the nightly blitz on September 15th, listening to a news bulletin reporting heavy German air attacks all day, their losses 163 planes with RAF losses 40 and 10 pilots safe; then Air Marshall Downing, asked by Churchill for amplification because Capital Hill believed German claims that the low RAF losses showed the final destruction of the RAF, responded "I am not very interested in propaganda, if we are right we have won this battle - if wrong the Germans will be in London in a week." These were coupled with two very brief sequences, one showing returned German pilots assembling for their evening mess dinner and staring dismayed at all the seats which were not filled, the other the German invasion flotillas in the Channel ports being dismantled two days later. Historically this film has few inaccuracies but wisely does not address the ongoing question of whether the Battle of Britain or the Battle of the Atlantic (almost equally well served by the film "The Cruel Sea") was the more important. 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.

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. Some critics dislike a very minor romantic sub-plot involving the wife of a squadron leader serving in the WAAF, who fears hearing of his death every day as she is plotting the movements of the planes - eventually he experiences a bad crash, surviving severely burned and facing a very long period of rehabilitation. But I believe this provided a very necessary reminder that great events are achieved only at high personal cost.

Real history buffs may note that there is a later DVD also entitled 'The Battle of Britain' (Classic Pictures- 2004) It carries the sub-title 'The Official History' and is essentially a documentary assembled from contemporary monochrome newsreel sequences, spanning a longer period that includes the night bombing 'blitz' which followed.

Great film about great events. No spoilers.

[alembic · 7/10 · 4 January 2002]

As a movie depicting mainly the British/Allied efforts during the air battles over Britain in World War 2 this is great entertainment - it does also score points for making an effort to show the German opposition in a more balanced light than mere "Huns in the sun" and the cost in German lives which is quite rare for films of this vintage. Also notable is the recognition given to pilots who were severely disfigured by burning/crashing aircraft or the female and civilian casualties during the war years. Mainly though it is a rousing adventure ( if a trifle " boys club" ) war film. The great Guy Hamilton has directorial honours and from frame 1 you know you are in for a terrific time. Wonderful cinematography and superb aerial sequences ( with plenty of real aircaft to add realism ). Michael Caine effortlessly steals the show but the remainder of the cast are in top form as well. It's a spectacle and an effort has been made to keep historical facts accurate which lends it an air of authenticity. Ron Goodwins rousing music adds the final touch to top entertainment. They can't afford to make films like this anymore..... DVD time please !

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

[fpost2000-1 · 10/10 · 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.

Amazing historical document, but fairly dull cinema

[yawn-2 · 6/10 · 7 February 2005]

I remember following news of the making of Battle of Britian, and as a 10 year old airplane nut and future pilot/flying fanatic, I was stunned at the hardware that was assembled for it. But somehow I never got around to seeing it until now.

One thing is certain: nothing like this will ever be filmed again. No one could assemble the vintage airplane fleet, get the necessary government permissions and most importantly, secure the insurance!

From the Brit point of view, this has to be a national historic treasure. Amateur historians can argue over the ultimate impact of the battle on the outcome of the war; they like that kind of misery. The bottom line is that the battle was an enormously important cultural event for the British people that still resonates today. The DVD is first-rate and I'm sure no one growing up in Britain will get to age 12 without seeing it.

Many reviewers have raved about the aerial sequences; the five minute, nearly dialog-free climactic battle scene is remarkable stuff. 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.

But...wherever we're on the ground, we're struggling to stay awake. With the possible exception of Robert Shaw, no one in the enormous A-list cast makes an impression that lasts longer than a few seconds. The entire Plummer/York marital conflict subplot is not only unnecessary, it's also half-formed and never resolves; it just vanishes near the end. The movie just vanishes at the end as well, but that's in keeping with history.

If you're looking for gripping drama, look elsewhere. But if you have an interest in the history or aviation in general, you must see this.

Such a pity

[igmu · 5/10 · 31 October 2006]

Let me first say that I am and always have been an aircraft nut; especially WWII. I first saw this film on release at my local premiere in Margate, where, as an Air Cadet, I was privileged to be part of the Guard of Honour for several of the real Battle of Britain pilots including Robert Stanford Tuck.

Even then, as a less than critical 14-year old, there were certain parts of the film that were obviously very poor. Now, as a highly critical grumpy old man(!) I still see them. Seeing Spitfires and Hurricanes still thrills me, and a lot of the aerial scenes in the film are of the highest order, so what's wrong with it?

The story or lack of - very piecemeal and unevenly paced. Susannah York's hairstyle - so out of place for 1940. The Christopher Plummer - Susannah York romance. Susannah York in her entirety; some of the worst acting in a film riddled with it. The obvious model Stukas and anything else that needed to be destroyed. The actors. Some of Britain's finest but all way too old for fighter pilots. (Michael Caine -37; Christopher Plummer -40; Robert Shaw -42; Barry Foster -48; Edward Fox -31.) Even Ian McShane who was only 27 would have been an old man to the rest of the pilots. The Battle of Britain was fought in the air by boys - on both sides.

It is all such a pity because although today's technology could improve the effects a thousand-fold they will never get such an armada of aircraft together again, even though, paradoxically, there are now many more airworthy Spitfires and Hurricanes than there were in 1969. Any future Battle of Britain film will be made mainly with CGI. They had one chance to make an outstanding film comemmorating the people and aircraft that took part in one of Britain's defining moments of the 20th Century and they blew it.

Shame. Great shots of wonderful aircraft but as a historical portrayal or film entertainment - forget it.

A Classic!!!

[sawyertom · 2 April 2003]

The Battle of Britain is a classic movie about one of the key battles of World War 2. It stands up there with the epics The Longest Day, Tora,Tora, Tora and a Bridge Too Far. The all-star cast has well known and lesser known English, Canadian, German and others actors who play their roles well. The movie does a good job of portaying both sides of the battle. The special effects and the air battles hold up well after well over 30 years. The criticisms that people have to me are quite unfair. As for charcter development, the movie is about the battle, much like the Longest Day was and there was no time to develop that part of the movie because it focused on the entirety of the battle. Also this is not like Cross of Iron that someone compared it to. Cross of Iron was a fictious story, while this is done in semi-docudrama style.It is an unfair comparison. The best comparison would be with the three previously listed movies. I liked that fact that some big stars characters did get hurt or died just like many of the better pilots did in the the battle and the war. The movie gives an excellent overview of the battle, much like the other movies listed here. I like the fact about the bit of English snobbery concerning the foreign pilots that they were training even if some were as good or better than they were.This is a four star war movie obout Britains Finest Hour. Where if it wasn't for the Brits holding off the German's, the Allies would not have been able to launch D-Day against the German's. The movie showed bravery and courage from both sides men and pilots. It is a great portrayal of young men in battle as knights of the early war skies. Rent it or buy it, because this is a classic.

Warning, Spoilers Everywhere

[aramis-112-804880 · 6/10 · 22 August 2017]

"The Battle of Britain" is a first-class piece of work. "James Bond" co-producer Harry Saltzman spared on expense on making this (heavily telescoped) tribute to the men and women who kept Hitler from invading Britain in 1940. And the money appears on the screen.

Cameraman Freddie Young had already filmed movies like "Lawrence of Arabia" and "Doctor Zhivago" so he had no fear of the epic scope. The cinematography is one of the movie's greatest assets, though shots are held longer then than today, for an audience that grew up watching music videos.

Maestro Sir William Walton ( considered the most important English composer after Elgar) was credited with the score, as conducted by composer Malcolm Arnold (later "Sir"). But here is where the movie begins to unravel. United Artists actually rejected the Walton score, so Ron Goodwin, a professional film composer who had done some big war movies, was brought in to do a replacement score, including the jaunty but overused march. Walton mendaciously gets a large credit.

Directed by Guy Hamilton ("Goldfinger") "The Battle of Britain" is chock-full of some of Britain's best-regarded actors and movie stars. Legendary Laurence Olivier has the lion's share of screen time as Air Marshal Hugh Dowding, while other real people are portrayed by Ralph Richardson, Michael Redgrave, Patrick Wymark and Trevor Howard, all in cameo roles. Other recognizable actors litter the film in tiny parts (Michael Caine, Edward Fox, Ian McShane, Harry Andrews, Robert Shaw, Barry Foster, Nigel Patrick . . . and so on!) This was a good advertising ploy. And it helps the viewer realize that these are actually different people. 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. Michael Caine and Robert Shaw are wily enough actors to give us different characters for leaders of their various squadrons.

So why doesn't the film work? For me, several reasons.

First, the tacked-on love story between Christopher Plummer and Susannah York doesn't have enough screen time to make me care. Neither does the cloying saga of flyer Ian McShane and his family. We might know the actors but the characters are not strong enough for us to care. Having Michael Redgrave in what amounts to a walk-on as one of the brass hats and Harry Andrews glimpsed as an unnamed bureaucrat helps us diversify similar characters (if characters they be). Personal stories can work against a vast backdrop of prominent historical events ("Gone with the Wind" or "Doctor Zhivago") but there the focus is on the characters. 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.

This is the fault of the screenwriters. While many scenes, however heavy, end on either a good laugh line or a shocking one, the writers simply had too much material and the script takes off running in too many directions at once. Olivier does his best to hold the film together, but he's not given the more ample screen time afforded composite characters E. G. Marshall and Wesley Addy in the superior "Tora Tora Tora" (which tells both sides of the bombing of Hawaii by the Japanese in 1941).

Most deadly, for people like me who don't know one airplane from another, are the meaningless aerial shots. I suppose, given the film's "David v. Goliath" approach, the shots of many planes are the Germans while the shots with the fewer planes are English. My father grew up in the war and recognized these planes by their silhouettes, but who knows these day? Furthermore, the pilots all wear masks. We can recognize Michael Caine by his dead eyes, but lots of the other pilots are unrecognizable in the battle scenes ("Star Wars" had the sense to have X-wing pilots, without masks, despite being way out in space).

And while the English are differentiated by having good actors or stars playing various parts (okay, that's Edward Fox waiting at his airfield for incoming planes, and that's the same guy parachuting into the greenhouse), the German actors, while they sound perfectly fine, are nearly all unknown to American audiences (apart from Curd Jurgens).

"The Battle of Britain" was a noble attempt. A beautifully-shot movie with lots of name actors showing why they became stars by making the most of tiny parts (proving the adage, there are no small roles, only small actors). But the cloying sentimentality of the unnecessary "personal" stories (the Battle of Britain isn't exciting enough?), 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. Along with the fact that the movie is so telescoped in time, one needs to read a book on the Battle of Britain beforehand to really comprehend what's happening.

Perhaps, if the edited chunks still survive, a "director's cut" might improve it like a miniseries. But as Guy Hamilton died in 2016, that's unlikely. Nor would DVD rentals return the expense.

Battle of the British thespians

[mark.waltz · 7/10 · 24 May 2020]

This beautifully filmed epic features British actors whose names only be mentioned by their last: Olivier, Redgrave, Richardson for the veterans; Caine and Plummer for newer stars. And they are just a few, the male stars, joined in by one lovely British beauty as well (Susannah York). it is historically a sequel to a film that was never made by this title, "Battle of France", mentioned in the lengthy prologue before the flashy credits roll by. Having taken a beating at Dunkirk, the British empire needs to re-group to become strong again to prevent London from being flattened and the rest of the country taken over. "Beware of the Hun in the Sun" is spoken during an officer's training course that utilizes British humour as a method of training. There are also scenes of women in training, with York particularly touching as she grieves over the covered bodies she comes upon after an air strike.

One thing that is amazing in this movie is that the scenes of the German soldiers has them speaking in their native language without the benefit of subtitles. Even then, it is easy to understand what is going on, and that creates a deeper sense of reality. The Germans, most of them young and very good looking, are made out to be more human here than practically any movie about World War II that I have ever seen. Many of the other movies have them as outwardly charming and polite, then angry and plotting once the unknowing enemy is out of the room. Here, it it obvious that these young man have been manipulated to really believe in what they are fighting for, as repulsive as it is in perspective. Often in movies about the war have them speaking perfect English without a trace of an accent unless it is British or very American. The fact that they are so well mannered and civilized in this movie makes their actions all the more shocking, and even sad as young lives are taken before they have the chance to be rehabillitated.

A scene hinting at the bombing of London is followed by the bombing of Berlin, and for once in a war movie, we get to see the crowded streets of the city before the raid occurs looking as if it was mid-town Manhattan on a hot summer night. This is followed by a scene in an enormous public place where Hitler is heard speaking, never seen except from long shots and from behind. This stadium is so enormous that is enough to make this be labeled as a horror film as close-ups of Gerrman residents (most frighteningly female "children of the fuhrer") are panned over. The music is strong throughout with German marches being joined with reprisals of "Berkeley Square" throughout. Subtle strains of music make the more emotional scenes quite unforgettable, particularly the scene of a British soldier who, after visiting his wife in a church basement where she works aiding air raid victims, tries to help a family stranded. and returns to the church to find that it has been bombed. There are a series of amusing results of what happens when pilots bail out of their hit planes, one crashing into a greenhouse, another landing in a hay field where the workers continued even though planes were attacking each other from above.

The photography is the star here with the stars reduced to cameos or supporting roles. No actor can command a leading part here, but the camera man can, and the outdoor vistas they provide are amazingly beautiful. The battle scenes, of various flight patterns of the hundreds of planes from both sides, are sophisticated and choreographed as if it was a ballet of aircraft. Even the explosions (of which there are many) are artistic in the way they land on the green vistas below. Art doesn't always have to be pleasant, and this makes no effort to hide the fact that war is hell, that people die in the most brutal of ways, and that the mission to protect British soil was as important to them as cultural cleansing was to the Nazi's. There is no shortage of blood in the battle scenes, just enough to show the impact of fighter planes being impailed by bullets. 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. Mayer, very proud. My only compaint was the lack of intent, both sides simply fighting each other because a war was going on even though the audience knew in advance the main reasons for their conflicts. Key elements of what lead to the Nazi's going after the British was greatly needed to make this story complete.

Brits Vs. Nazis

[StrictlyConfidential · 6/10 · 1 April 2020]

The one thing that I really appreciated about this big-budget war picture (from 1969) was that its story (thankfully) didn't involve the Americans (who always seem to be taking the credit for winning WW2).

"The Battle of Britain" (set in 1940) is based upon factual events where the brave men of the RAF defended England against the fierce Luftwaffe air-attacks coming, fast and furious, from Nazi Germany.

All-in-all - I'd say that this picture (with its excellent flying sequences, violent battle scenes, and vintage aircraft) was certainly worth a view.

Favorite Personality WW II Movie

[adamsys-1 · 9/10 · 21 February 2005]

This is my favorite WW II movie and I have seen and liked flicks like "Saving Private Ryan". The kind of War Movies I like are that ones that focus on both sides with personalities and details although most of the personality is on the Allied side. Other War movies that I loved are like this such as "Gettysburg", "Tora, Tora, Tora" and "The Enemy Below". In "The Battle of Britain" everything is realistic except for some special effects which is forgivable since this movie was made in 1969. The French speak French. Poles speak Polish and so on!!! I especially liked watching the Poles who relay this sense of 'payback' on the Germans now that they fly in excellent warplanes. There is this sense of admiration for them as well since they could have sat out the War but chose instead to keep fighting the Nazis. They probably were not even sure that Poland would be liberated from the Nazis. The Poles are still like that today. They gladly help us in Iraq compared to other Europeans. I liked watching the Germans, too, even though they are 'the bad guys' so to say. Just to let everyone know, I myself am Jewish. I watch the hordes of Nazi aircraft swarm over England like a wave of great Evil. I shudder to think what if Hitler really conquered England. Then in the scenes of dogfights, I see the Spitfire blast away a Nazi plane and I cheer. "Die you Nazi !@#$%"!!!" Movies have a way of taking your mind in certain directions especially when you are already pre-disposed. Then right after the Nazi bomber catches on fire, a very contrary camera shot happens. I see the German crewmen want to live. I know that even bad guys want to live, but then you see something else transpire with the German crewmen. These German men think. They feel. They care for each other. They see that combat against a non-pushover European is terrifying and they take no pleasure bombing cities full of civilians. You get the sense that they are only men born into the wrong generation of Germans. In five close up shots I saw these guys courageously help each other. They make sure everyone bails out. They comfort their wounded. Seeing a friend in deep trouble or dead makes them still. In the beginning they were cocky, but that comes after fighting the French, Belgiums, Danes and so on. I rather liked watching Goering with the Staff meeting in the woods fly off the handle at his executive commanders and immediate subordinates. They tell him that they are doing the best they can with what they have. "Nobody is suggesting cowardice!!!!!!" one of them replied to Goering. I was thinking of MGM telling the prospective German Actors that they have an opportunity to show that most Germans are not robots. I myself got to know a lot of Germans in my 45 years on Earth, and I must agree. Now, to the Allied side. Naturally, most of the focus in the movie are on the British characters as it should be. After all, the British must win. Must!!!! I see English wives, children, marital spats, failure and success. A pilot gives his two boys toy Spitfires. But one expects a WW II War movie to show that the allied troopers are more like yourself except for the 1957 movie "The Enemy Below". The 1993 movie "Gettysburg" equally showed personalities on both sides, too, but both sides were American really. The music is also tops. I often hum that intro martial music to myself as well as the British victory tune. This movie is clearly my favorite War Movie.

A watchable film about the war of the airspace in England.

[Captain_Couth · 7/10 · 3 September 2005]

Battle of Britain (1969) was about the famous battle of the British air space during the first half of World War II. The Germans wanted to nullify the infamous Royal Air Force and punish the British Isles. But the Luftwaffe didn't expect to go be beaten back and defeated by a combined allied air force. This was one of the most important battles that decided the fate of the free world. In order to capture England, the Germans had to secure the airways. You can only do such much hit-and-run bombing attacks.

The film makers did an adequate job of recreating the battle. I was impressed by the aerial dogfights and detailed air warfare tactics. The only problem I had was with the uneven acting from the cast. The movie was recently restored on d.v.d. I haven't seen this movie in awhile and when I watch the new transfer and print of the film I'll re-review the restored version.

Recommended.

Review of Battle of Britain 1969

[karakhitai · 10/10 · 11 August 2005]

I first saw this movie in the theater in 1969. In the middle eighties I purchased the VHS tape for a whopping $69.95! I did this because I have been and remain a life long WW II addict. In my humble opinion this is the finest WW II Fighter movie ever made, bar none. Considering the constraints the movie makers were working under, their efforts resulted in a 99% historically correct movie. Only Tora Tora Tora is in this class. All of the of events, both RAF and Luftwaffe, are portrayed in their proper sequence. Every effort was made to show the correct aircraft. WW II crazies like me will recognize the minor errors and omissions i.e. no Bf-110's, Ju-88's, or Do-217's.

With superb casting there is no Hollywood overacting. The British audience also played a part as most of the survivors were alive and would have laughed a mediocre effort right out the theater. The furor created by the later production of A Piece of Cake will bear witness.

If you love high quality WW II movies and there certainly not enough of those you can't go wrong in purchasing a DVD copy.

Sixties British War Movie

[August1991 · 6/10 · 25 August 2004]

Late night TV in Bulgaria and Russia, at least in Soviet times, involved war movies. Or rather, tank movies. (A tank crew, lots of tanks crossing fields, usually B&W but occasionally colour.) In a similar vein, I guess the best German war movie involves a submarine (Das Boot), the best American war movies involve infantry and platoons (Patton) and the best French war movies involve civilians and occupation (Le Dernier métro, Une affaire de femmes). And the best British war movies involve airplanes.

I first saw the "Battle of Britain" in Toronto's 2000-seat Carlton Theatre (where an organist rose out of the stage at intermission). The movie was a blockbuster with a cast of all Britain's who's who. But as a kid, I was impressed instead by the planes (particularly the Spitfires) and the scene with the pilot's reconstructed face.

Well, I recently bought the widescreen DVD in a bargain bin to see how it holds up. It doesn't really. It's a war movie without a plot. Or rather, it's a well-made tank movie. In colour.

A movie that directly appeals to lovers of aviation--others may be a bit less impressed

[planktonrules · 9/10 · 10 May 2006]

This movie will not appeal to everyone. Depending on who you are, your reaction may be very different and I venture to say this movie probably had a wider range of scores than most other movies on IMDb. Some have told me they didn't like it because it was hard to tell who people were and what, exactly, was happening in the film. This is probably the average person. Whereas, aviation lovers have told me that the film is BRILLIANT! Me, being a history teacher and a bit of a know-it-all when it comes to WWII aviation, naturally loved the film! When it comes to historical accuracy, this film is great and it tried so hard to get it right. The producers scoured Europe for real WWII vintage planes (getting most of the German aircraft from the Spanish air force). What you see in the film was actually the correct model plane that COULD have been seen in the battle. Lots of early models Bf-109s, He-111, Spitfires and Hurricanes were used for the movie. They didn't have any airworthy Stukas (Ju-87), so they made 1/3 scale models and seamlessly integrated them into the film. So, the picky historical accuracy monster within me was appeased. All too often, the planes shown in WWII movies are either models that were NOT flying when the battle occurred or are made up of crappy and grainy old film footage from the era (like the abysmal film MIDWAY). In this case, it's all authentic. The only MINOR problem is that you might think the Germans only flew these three models of planes in 1940--other common bombers like Do-17s and Ju-88s were not used in the film--probably because they simply weren't available. This is certainly understandable.

Now I must acknowledge that when the movie was NOT showing air combat, it did lag just a bit. The story line involving Susanna York and Christopher Plummer did seem "tacked on" and the guest appearances weren't really necessary, though I liked the very sad role played by Ian McShane--it was very touching seeing what happened when he went home on leave. Also, the victory itself seemed a little bit anti-climatic at the end.

However, for pure accuracy of detail and love of the material, this film can't be beat. See it and if you are not a huge historian or aviation buff, relax and you'll find the film STILL has a lot to offer.

By the way, months after writing my initial review, I read one review here on IMDb that said this film was "strictly TV fare". Hmmm,...I sure bet this person didn't see the movie on the big screen back in 1969 but I did!! It was much better and amazing to watch the aerial battles on the huge screen. Even though I was a kid, it still stands out in my mind better than almost any film I've seen in the theater! "Strictly TV fare"?! Rubbish!!

Good WWII Film

[Wulfstan10 · 7/10 · 25 March 2005]

The Battle of Britain is a good WWII film that does a good job at portraying the basic events and circumstances of one of the war's critical campaigns.

The film has some weak points. The plot is a little thin and there's not much character development, examination, etc., so that this film is not particularly deep. It is pretty much only about the battle and the bombing, etc. The film also doesn't really go into the real handling of the campaign as a whole or specific "real" events within the Battle of Britain the way, say A Bridge Too Far Does. Also, there are some anachronistic elements in costume, etc., although they are pretty minor.

The good points, however, are much stronger. While the plot is a little thin and lacks depth, its approach succeeds in getting across the situation facing the British people, pilots, etc., and how they handled it. It shows things from dogfights to taking shelter in bombed-out London. It is also very accurate, overall, in its portrayal of uniforms, equipment, pilots waiting for the enemy, scrambling, the planes, and the air battles, etc. Of particular significance is the unusual accuracy of the airplanes, etc., for, while there are discrepancies in the exact models, they actually used real Bf109s, Spitfires, He 111s, etc. This greatly adds to the historical realism and the value of the film in a way that was pretty uncommon. it also generally keeps the momentum going well so that the film does not seem to drag on or fall apart.

All-Star WWII Epic.

[AaronCapenBanner · 5/10 · 15 September 2013]

Michael Caine heads an all-star cast including Trevor Howard, Christopher Plummer, Harry Andrews, and Sir Laurence Oliver as this Guy Hamilton directed film attempts to recreate the historical account of how the Royal Air Force(RAF) valiantly defended Britain from the Nazi air assault of 1940, which cost the lives of many fine airmen, as well as a huge number of civilian deaths along with Airplane and property destruction that cost England dearly, though which ultimately turned the tide against Hitler's Germany.

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. A good documentary on the subject may be more interesting and informative than this, unfortunately.