IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,6/10
19.805
IHRE BEWERTUNG
April 1940. Die Augen der Welt richten sich auf Narvik, eine kleine Stadt in Nordnorwegen, die das für Hitlers Kriegsmaschinerie benötigte Eisenerz liefert.April 1940. Die Augen der Welt richten sich auf Narvik, eine kleine Stadt in Nordnorwegen, die das für Hitlers Kriegsmaschinerie benötigte Eisenerz liefert.April 1940. Die Augen der Welt richten sich auf Narvik, eine kleine Stadt in Nordnorwegen, die das für Hitlers Kriegsmaschinerie benötigte Eisenerz liefert.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 3 Gewinne & 3 Nominierungen insgesamt
Mathilde Holtedahl Cuhra
- Bjørg
- (as Mathilde Cuhra)
Billy Campbell
- British Consul George L.D. Gibbs
- (as Ollie Campbell)
Magnus Dugdale
- Giles Romilly
- (as Magnus Dugdale Lyseng)
Isak Bakli Aglen
- Corporal Larsen
- (as Isak Aglen)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
While looking at what others said on here I found one outstanding and very comprehensive review. I completely agree with everything said by Erik_Surewaard and hope he won't mind me quoting part of his to make up the word count. I strongly recommend reading Erik's comments in full.
If I read quite some of the other user reviews, I see many complaints about the movie being too focussed on the story of one family. This instead of on the battle itself. And I can partially agree with those comments. But to use this as the main argument for giving this movie an IMDd rating of only somewhere between 1 to 4 stars, is totally unjustified. This is like saying that "Titanic" is a bad movie because it focusses to much on a love story between two people...
I personally think that "Narvik" succeeded pretty well considering its relative meagre production budget of 'only' 63.2 million Norwegian Kroner, equalling around 6.4 million US$. So before drawing conclusions, let's first take a look at a comparable... For instance "Das Boot" - a WW2 movie that was made in germany over 40 years ago - had a budget of 15 million US$. And mind you, those are 1981 dollars! So it seems that a budget of 6.4 million is peanuts if you want to make a WW2 movie.
If I read quite some of the other user reviews, I see many complaints about the movie being too focussed on the story of one family. This instead of on the battle itself. And I can partially agree with those comments. But to use this as the main argument for giving this movie an IMDd rating of only somewhere between 1 to 4 stars, is totally unjustified. This is like saying that "Titanic" is a bad movie because it focusses to much on a love story between two people...
I personally think that "Narvik" succeeded pretty well considering its relative meagre production budget of 'only' 63.2 million Norwegian Kroner, equalling around 6.4 million US$. So before drawing conclusions, let's first take a look at a comparable... For instance "Das Boot" - a WW2 movie that was made in germany over 40 years ago - had a budget of 15 million US$. And mind you, those are 1981 dollars! So it seems that a budget of 6.4 million is peanuts if you want to make a WW2 movie.
As "Narvik" (2022 release from Norway; 108 min; original title: "Kampen om Narvik" or "The Battle for Norvik") opens, we are introduced to the historical background as to why Norway declares itself neutral at the beginning of WWII, and yet Germany invades it. We then get to know Gunnar Tofte, a soldier in the Norwegian army, and his wife Ingrid, who runs a hotel and becomes an interpreter for the head of the German occupying force. At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.
Couple of comments: this WWII movie is a nice change of pace. Did you know that Norway was officially neutral when WWII broke out? Me neither. And why the Nazis invaded Norway anyway? I'm not going to spoil any of the plot, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out. I wasn't familiar with any of the cast, and it didn't bother me in the least. I really enjoyed the photography, done on location in Norway. Please note that the listing of this here on IMDb as "Narvik: Hitler's First Defeat" is inaccurate and never appears as such anywhere in the movie. Last but not least: I read that "Narvik" sold more movie theater tickets in Norway than any other movie released there in theaters in 2022.
"Narvik" bypassed US theaters, and started streaming on Netflix about a week ago. Netflix recommended it to me based on my viewing habits. Glad I checked it out. If you are in the mood for a decent WWII movie from a Norwegian perspective, I'd readily suggest you check it out, and draw your own conclusion.
Couple of comments: this WWII movie is a nice change of pace. Did you know that Norway was officially neutral when WWII broke out? Me neither. And why the Nazis invaded Norway anyway? I'm not going to spoil any of the plot, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out. I wasn't familiar with any of the cast, and it didn't bother me in the least. I really enjoyed the photography, done on location in Norway. Please note that the listing of this here on IMDb as "Narvik: Hitler's First Defeat" is inaccurate and never appears as such anywhere in the movie. Last but not least: I read that "Narvik" sold more movie theater tickets in Norway than any other movie released there in theaters in 2022.
"Narvik" bypassed US theaters, and started streaming on Netflix about a week ago. Netflix recommended it to me based on my viewing habits. Glad I checked it out. If you are in the mood for a decent WWII movie from a Norwegian perspective, I'd readily suggest you check it out, and draw your own conclusion.
Ok, first of all: this is a good movie on its own merits. It's got good writing, good pacing and is engaging for what it is. But odds are you're not going to like it if you know your history, and if you don't, this movie isn't going to teach you anything.
The problem, however, is that it tries to deal with two different subject matters at once. It tries to be about the Battle of Narvik, but it also tries to be about the fate of civilians - in particular it tries to show how people could be pushed to collaboration, even though there's only the one example. And this seems to be the main focus of the movie. Had the title been more honest, this would have been a better movie. We are only offered a couple of skirmishes to represent the actual battles, and these skirmishes lack any sense of scale. The landing at Bjerkvik, for example, is represented by a small handful of Norwegians along with 4-5 French and 2-3 Polish soldiers, fighting against 5-10 Germans defending a single railway gun which looked to be no heftier than an 88. And this was the biggest engagement shown.
I don't think I saw a single British soldier in any of the skirmishes - there were a total of three - and the entire Allied operation seemed to hinge on the ability of a single woman to gather intelligence for two British consuls hiding in a shack. If that sounds silly it's because it is.
In the end, I give it a 6/10 because it's an engaging movie - but also quite the disappointment. Had they ommitted all the "battle" scenes, focused entirely on the female protagonist and her struggle between doing right by her family or right by her country, and not pretended this was a movie about the Battle of Narvik, this would have been a better movie.
The problem, however, is that it tries to deal with two different subject matters at once. It tries to be about the Battle of Narvik, but it also tries to be about the fate of civilians - in particular it tries to show how people could be pushed to collaboration, even though there's only the one example. And this seems to be the main focus of the movie. Had the title been more honest, this would have been a better movie. We are only offered a couple of skirmishes to represent the actual battles, and these skirmishes lack any sense of scale. The landing at Bjerkvik, for example, is represented by a small handful of Norwegians along with 4-5 French and 2-3 Polish soldiers, fighting against 5-10 Germans defending a single railway gun which looked to be no heftier than an 88. And this was the biggest engagement shown.
I don't think I saw a single British soldier in any of the skirmishes - there were a total of three - and the entire Allied operation seemed to hinge on the ability of a single woman to gather intelligence for two British consuls hiding in a shack. If that sounds silly it's because it is.
In the end, I give it a 6/10 because it's an engaging movie - but also quite the disappointment. Had they ommitted all the "battle" scenes, focused entirely on the female protagonist and her struggle between doing right by her family or right by her country, and not pretended this was a movie about the Battle of Narvik, this would have been a better movie.
This is a war movie but also a movie about relationships in wartime.
It's good to know about the circumstances that lead to the Battle of Narvik in 1940. Truth is, this film has a similar vibe to "All Quiet on the Eastern Front," the German movie that deals with war in the trenches in World War I.
What makes this film engaging is the performance of the main character Ingrid. She portrays a Norwegian hotel staff who's fluent both in German and English, and is tapped to interpret both sides during their meetings prior to the outbreak of hostilities, and who remains as interpreter for the Germans when the conflict begins. She has to deal with the consequences of this role. She's convincing in here, and the viewer avidly waits for the outcome of her choice.
Kristine Hartgen is a competent actor. She's able to bring to the screen the angst that Ingrid feels as she struggles with her situation. The viewer empathizes with what she has to do for the sake of a loved one.
Carl Martin Eggesbo and Henrik Mestad whom we saw in Occupied (Okkupert) lend strong support to a great story.
The fight scenes are credible. Cinematography is excellent.
Again, this film like other worthwhile war movies before it, clearly brings to the fore the ugliness of war. Man has yet to find a better way to settle differences and to rein in his impulse to dominate and subjugate others.
It's good to know about the circumstances that lead to the Battle of Narvik in 1940. Truth is, this film has a similar vibe to "All Quiet on the Eastern Front," the German movie that deals with war in the trenches in World War I.
What makes this film engaging is the performance of the main character Ingrid. She portrays a Norwegian hotel staff who's fluent both in German and English, and is tapped to interpret both sides during their meetings prior to the outbreak of hostilities, and who remains as interpreter for the Germans when the conflict begins. She has to deal with the consequences of this role. She's convincing in here, and the viewer avidly waits for the outcome of her choice.
Kristine Hartgen is a competent actor. She's able to bring to the screen the angst that Ingrid feels as she struggles with her situation. The viewer empathizes with what she has to do for the sake of a loved one.
Carl Martin Eggesbo and Henrik Mestad whom we saw in Occupied (Okkupert) lend strong support to a great story.
The fight scenes are credible. Cinematography is excellent.
Again, this film like other worthwhile war movies before it, clearly brings to the fore the ugliness of war. Man has yet to find a better way to settle differences and to rein in his impulse to dominate and subjugate others.
Here comes another important and interesting movie about the Hitlerian occupation in Norway during the Second World War. It shows accurately how the Nazi and the Norwegian opposition wanted to defend their territory.
The locations were beautiful and the costumes created with authentically.
It's a touching story and I don't want to spoil any details here. I just recommend to check it out on Netflix. The main actors did a good job and the director too. The combat scenes are well executed with good special effects.
The Norwegian locations are beautiful and they are just perfect to turn there this documentary.
7/10.
The locations were beautiful and the costumes created with authentically.
It's a touching story and I don't want to spoil any details here. I just recommend to check it out on Netflix. The main actors did a good job and the director too. The combat scenes are well executed with good special effects.
The Norwegian locations are beautiful and they are just perfect to turn there this documentary.
7/10.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesThe release of the movie was postponed for two years. First due to the 2019 Corona virus, and later on due to the war in Ukraine in 2022. The Covid pandemic delayed filming. And the producers didn't want to release a war movie, just as the war broke out in Ukraine. The filming of the movie was finished in 2021.
- PatzerThroughout the movie, the sound from explosions can be heard instantaneously, even when they occur a long distance away. Bangs would be delayed in such cases, as sound travels at roughly 340 meters per second.
However, there is no evidence to support this claim. There are very few times in the film when 'distant' explosions happen. These seem appropriately timed with the sound. Examples of times when this allegedly happens is needed to support the claim.
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Narvik: Hitler's First Defeat?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box Office
- Budget
- 80.200.000 NOK (geschätzt)
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 6.657.347 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 48 Min.(108 min)
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.00 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen