>>507214220>look at 1916 for example, the whole movie is about england running away and pretending germany didn't specifically allow the civilian boats to pick up the english soldiers while the french got slaughteredYeah this lol. Dunkirk is pathetic. The Brits get off on the humiliation I think. Aussies are the same with Gallipoli. I am Aussie, we've won battles before, even against Germans, but no, the national battle we all remember is the time literally fucking Churchhill himself stole our troops for a retarded beach landing against TURKROACHES and then we lost and couldn't get past them but had a super smart sneaky way of running away.
FFS it's a glamorized loss tale. And then Britain goes and does this about Dunkirk. The soldier at the end rightfull felt ashamed of his loss and running away, and the stupid hero's welcome was pathetic.
>i'm pretty sure at the time, everyone was like wtf. who gives a shit about one soldier... oh boo hoo his brothers died...Not at all. Maybe before they watched the movie, but once the film started no one gave a shit about the story. This was a squad action movie, the story is a reason for the battle scenes. It's like story in a video games, in a war movie, you expect the story to be there, and it's retarded if it's not, but it's just there to connect the gunfights and give them context so we care about the soldiers death more.