Während des Zweiten Weltkriegs benutzen zwei Geheimdienstler eine Leiche und falsche Papiere, um die deutschen Truppen zu überlisten.Während des Zweiten Weltkriegs benutzen zwei Geheimdienstler eine Leiche und falsche Papiere, um die deutschen Truppen zu überlisten.Während des Zweiten Weltkriegs benutzen zwei Geheimdienstler eine Leiche und falsche Papiere, um die deutschen Truppen zu überlisten.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 2 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
There is a better film here but some unnecessary side plots - oh well, that romantic thing took the focus so many times - are really distracting.
Some very good moments, great acting, very tense on its third act, but the first was confusing and full of exposition. Good enough but I was expecting better.
Some very good moments, great acting, very tense on its third act, but the first was confusing and full of exposition. Good enough but I was expecting better.
I was really looking forward to this film because it's based on the book of the same name by Ben Macintyre, which was brilliant.
It starts off very strong, setting the scene, as in wartime Britain and at what point of the war it is, and highlighting the importance of the mission that the main characters will do.
Unfortunately as other reviewers have said the main plot of the movie is not the focus at times and instead it focuses on, frankly, irritating sub-plots. The strength of the film is the intelligence work that the characters do and that should have been the focus.
The acting was great. I particularly liked, Jason Isaacs as John Godfrey a naval commander and Simon Russel Beale as Winston Churchill.
Overall, worth watching, especially if you normally like World War Two dramas or spy stories, but potentially could have been better I think.
It starts off very strong, setting the scene, as in wartime Britain and at what point of the war it is, and highlighting the importance of the mission that the main characters will do.
Unfortunately as other reviewers have said the main plot of the movie is not the focus at times and instead it focuses on, frankly, irritating sub-plots. The strength of the film is the intelligence work that the characters do and that should have been the focus.
The acting was great. I particularly liked, Jason Isaacs as John Godfrey a naval commander and Simon Russel Beale as Winston Churchill.
Overall, worth watching, especially if you normally like World War Two dramas or spy stories, but potentially could have been better I think.
Just watched Operation Mincemeat. Having recently read Ben McIntyre's book of Operation Mincemeat.
I hope the filmmakers read all the reviews, which basically say the same thing about ridiculous subplots If I want to watch a romantic movie, I will follow Bridget Jones. I prefer war movies.
Will filmmakers STOP mixing the two together, it does NOT appeal to a larger audience Equally, STOP trying to re invent the wheel, first we had the Jerky camera period, which no one liked, now we have the fad for showing the almost ending, then going back to...6 months earlier..etc The man who never was is a better film because of not including romantic fictional subplots I suggest filmmakers watch movies from the 1950s to see well crafted film making, Eg The Cockleshell Heroes or One of our planes is missing, both told in chronological time order.
On another note, if you want a massive box office hit, read The Black Ship, by Dudley Pope. A meticulously researched book about the "Bloodiest" Mutiny in the history of the Royal Navy But please make sure you observe correct military protocols, you do not salute improperly dressed officers, ie when not wearing their hat !
I hope the filmmakers read all the reviews, which basically say the same thing about ridiculous subplots If I want to watch a romantic movie, I will follow Bridget Jones. I prefer war movies.
Will filmmakers STOP mixing the two together, it does NOT appeal to a larger audience Equally, STOP trying to re invent the wheel, first we had the Jerky camera period, which no one liked, now we have the fad for showing the almost ending, then going back to...6 months earlier..etc The man who never was is a better film because of not including romantic fictional subplots I suggest filmmakers watch movies from the 1950s to see well crafted film making, Eg The Cockleshell Heroes or One of our planes is missing, both told in chronological time order.
On another note, if you want a massive box office hit, read The Black Ship, by Dudley Pope. A meticulously researched book about the "Bloodiest" Mutiny in the history of the Royal Navy But please make sure you observe correct military protocols, you do not salute improperly dressed officers, ie when not wearing their hat !
It was enjoyable enough but I really wanted to enjoy this more than I did.
It seemed to unnecessarily labour several male characters fancying Kelly Macdonald's character. All the time taken up on this tiresome sub-plot would have been better spent on some of the main story. Also, a triple-agent character giving a hand job to someone just seemed unlikely and out of place.
One of several nods to James Bond was an unfeasibly high-powered buzzsaw watch as a throwaway gag (because of Ian Fleming being a character) was corny and distracting.
I somehow expected it would be more engaging, gritty and revealing than the 1956 film, but it seemed pretty typical and formulaic like many modern British WWII themed films with foiled wartime romances crow-barred in.
There are some great actors in the film but some of them seem to be overused in other similar roles the same era. It even seemed a little like a mini "Death of Stalin" reunion for Jason Isaacs and Simon Russell Beale.
Perhaps I'm being too unkind to the film, but I was looking forward to it and fell a little short of expectations.
It seemed to unnecessarily labour several male characters fancying Kelly Macdonald's character. All the time taken up on this tiresome sub-plot would have been better spent on some of the main story. Also, a triple-agent character giving a hand job to someone just seemed unlikely and out of place.
One of several nods to James Bond was an unfeasibly high-powered buzzsaw watch as a throwaway gag (because of Ian Fleming being a character) was corny and distracting.
I somehow expected it would be more engaging, gritty and revealing than the 1956 film, but it seemed pretty typical and formulaic like many modern British WWII themed films with foiled wartime romances crow-barred in.
There are some great actors in the film but some of them seem to be overused in other similar roles the same era. It even seemed a little like a mini "Death of Stalin" reunion for Jason Isaacs and Simon Russell Beale.
Perhaps I'm being too unkind to the film, but I was looking forward to it and fell a little short of expectations.
Operation Mincemeat is a film with very few bells and whistles.
It has an interesting story to tell, and it tells it well enough, however unnecessary romantic subplots make the whole thing 20 minutes too long.
I think the pacing is a little off as they place the focus too much on the establishment of the plan and not enough on how it pans out.
The performances are all fine. Nothing overly flashy. There is a good feel to the film, capturing the period well.
Overall a perfectly decent film, worth watching to learn about a remarkable and crucial military operation, but there's nothing particularly remarkable about the filmmaking.
It has an interesting story to tell, and it tells it well enough, however unnecessary romantic subplots make the whole thing 20 minutes too long.
I think the pacing is a little off as they place the focus too much on the establishment of the plan and not enough on how it pans out.
The performances are all fine. Nothing overly flashy. There is a good feel to the film, capturing the period well.
Overall a perfectly decent film, worth watching to learn about a remarkable and crucial military operation, but there's nothing particularly remarkable about the filmmaking.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesOperation Mincemeat was a massive gamble by British naval intelligence, even long after it was known the German spy network had fallen for it. A high ranking Nazi officer, thought to be Heinrich Himmler, supposedly told Adolf Hitler he had a feeling it was a deception, but his concerns were dismissed.
- PatzerWhen the three British officers arrive at the submarine base, the two Royal Navy officers salute palm down, while the RAF officer salutes palm out. This is correct; the form of a hand salute is different between the two services.
- Zitate
Ewen Montagu: But the real tribute tonight goes to Iris, my brilliant wife, who in the morning sails to less troubled shores with our nestlings in tow. Iris is wiser than Solomon, stronger than Samson, and more patient than Job. But she has to be. She's married to me.
- VerbindungenFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 Historically Accurate Spy Movies (2023)
- SoundtracksFallen Soldier
Written by James Morgan and Juliette Pochin
Performed by James Morgan
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsländer
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- El arma del engaño
- Drehorte
- Saunton Sands, Devon, England, Vereinigtes Königreich(Sicily invasion)
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 6.300.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 15.621.194 $
- Laufzeit2 Stunden 8 Minuten
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.39 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen