Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

jjc1-1 How a scintillating trilogy like this could be transformed into a lifeless parody of itself by filmmakers is a complete mystery. It is lugubrious, slow and mistakes slapstick for wit. Waugh would have been appalled by this work. He was a nasty man in private life--a friend of Randolph Churchill whose boorish behavior was legendary--but he had high literary standards. Daniel Craig, incidentally, does not do humor well. The first review on this site must have been written by the movie publicist. The actress who plays his first wife is as wooden as Craig himself -- zero chemistry there -- and there is a supporting cast who clearly didn't have their heart in any of this. A total waste of time, so don't bother. I hope I have made myself clear in padding this out to the full 10 lines required. Left to me, I would have kissed it off with a simple, "No, don't think so. Take your dog for a walk instead."

ianlouisiana Desperate to find some cause to hitch his waggon to,Guy Crouchback, introverted,middle - class,Catholic,is a man determined to find honour and redemption in war.To assist him in this effort he commits himself whole - heartedly to the Halberdiers,an obscure but "superior" British regiment which after years of idleness suddenly finds itself confronted with the realities of modern warfare. Actually proving a rather good and popular officer,he fights a losing battle against the tide of cynicism,opportunism and political in - fighting,corruption,self - aggrandisement and general rottenness from his contemporaries,a victim of their jibes,their genial or sometimes not so genial contempt and condescension. Bloodied,appalled and bruised by what one of his colleagues calls "the whirligig of war",he gets the chance to "do the decent thing" by marrying his ex - wife,Virginia, who is pregnant by an odious fellow - officer,thus,by proxy,continuing the Crouchback line which dates back to mediaeval times. When Virginia Crouchback is killed in an air raid,Guy comes home and sees "his" son for the first time. Awkwardly,clumsily,he says to the boy,"I'm your father" as the camera cranes up and we leave the two of them to a hopefully happier future. Adapting Waugh's marvellous trilogy of war novels for television was no mean task,and leaving aside any petty intellectual snobbery from old school Waugh admirers who might baulk at his masterpiece being sliced up and presented as popular entertainment no matter how well done,it must be said "Sword of Honour" is something of a triumph. Mr D.Craig is quite excellent as Guy and conveys well the gradual change in his character as his wartime experiences have an increasing effect on him. Mr L.Phillips - a man whom I would normally walk a mile to avoid on the screen - is sensitive and moving as his elderly father,a man unshakable in his beliefs and quietly indomitable in his courage.Miss M.Dodds as the flighty Virginia gives the best performance,displaying the easy charm existing in a total moral vacuum but somehow fatally attractive. The production values are high,the battle scenes well above par for a TV production and,in line with the original,the TV adaptation takes on a very bleak aspect towards the end. By giving legitimacy to Virginia's son,Guy redeems himself in a way that he signally failed to do in combat. Channel 4 is to be congratulated.

z28rikard I might sound blunt here but this is a movie recommended to watch only if intoxicated with illegal substances. Otherwise you will either fall asleep or look for a victim to get rid of your frustration. A typical "a'la Stephen King" failure trying to make a movie out of a book. it's like when you listen to a CD book and the narrator is trying very hard to get the listeners attention with a poor try in narrating acting. What did the actors think when they read the script or did they just read the book and trust that the director could get this on the screen by magic.Don't waste your time on this one.

grhmb This is a splendid effort by all concerned, especially given the time constraint of about 200 minutes. As well as men and women are still marching off to war to save Western civilization, the movie has a contemporary message. The brevity of the movie, given that it tells a story, originally told in three novels goes against it. So much plot and many characters have been left out seriously compromising Waugh's comic vision. Waugh's original novels contain very amusing dialogue and much of the novels are just dialogue, the writer creating character out of what people say. Although the script used snippets of Waugh's dialogue,there is lots and lots unused. However, the script writers and all the people involved in the production did a masterful job of salvaging something of Waugh's original story. The other major flaw is in the casting of Daniel Craig as Guy Crouchback. Craig does not have the aristocratic presence to play Guy. His features, stature,and movement suggest a working class hero; he is great for contemporary characters where class is not an issue. But Waugh's works are all about class and Daniel Craigdoes not look the part of an aristocrat. He would be fine as a Lawrencian hero, Birket in Women in Love, for example. The rest of the casting is more or less spot on with some splendid choices of actors for Guy's father, Virginia, Ivor Claire, Ritchie-Hook,and Trimmer and everybody else. The book is both so much more outrageously funny and profound about life than the movie. Read the book but enjoy the movie,too; the chaps who made the film have obviously put on a good show in difficult circumstances. I am now going to reread the book for the umpteenth time. The movie inspires that.