El ejército británico recluta a un pequeño grupo de soldados altamente calificados para atacar a las fuerzas nazis detrás de las líneas enemigas durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial.El ejército británico recluta a un pequeño grupo de soldados altamente calificados para atacar a las fuerzas nazis detrás de las líneas enemigas durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial.El ejército británico recluta a un pequeño grupo de soldados altamente calificados para atacar a las fuerzas nazis detrás de las líneas enemigas durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 1 premio ganado y 2 nominaciones en total
Resumen
Reviewers say 'The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare' offers dynamic action and charismatic performances, especially from Henry Cavill, but suffers from historical inaccuracies and lack of depth. Ritchie's signature style entertains, yet the film's blend of fact and fiction, along with its comedic take on serious events, divides opinions. Some praise its fast pace and ungentlemanly antics, while others criticize its predictability and emotional disconnect.
Opiniones destacadas
This movie was kind of what I expected it to be. As of recently guy Ritchie has had a habit of frequently pumping out mediocore action films. But this one takes the cake. There were good elements. Henry Cavill was really good and without a doubt carried this movie.
And he worked really well with his co-actors, most of who were extremely unremarkable. This movie also gives us what is probably the worst Churchill preformance ever. It was kinda predictable but at the same time its "based" on a true story. But my god it was horribly written. When Churchill said "what are you, some sort of ministry of ungentlemanly warfare" I felt my last brain cells die. 6.3/10.
And he worked really well with his co-actors, most of who were extremely unremarkable. This movie also gives us what is probably the worst Churchill preformance ever. It was kinda predictable but at the same time its "based" on a true story. But my god it was horribly written. When Churchill said "what are you, some sort of ministry of ungentlemanly warfare" I felt my last brain cells die. 6.3/10.
Guy Ritchie's "Ungentlemanly Warfare" is based, kinda, on the true exploits of Britain's Special Operations Executive (SOE) during World War II. Unsurprisingly, given Ritchie's involvement, liberties have been taken with the story.
The SOE existed to operate behind enemy lines, committing sabotage and various other acts considered ungentlemanly by the upper crust officers who ran the conventional army. In 1942, England was starving and its army could not be resupplied because German U-boats owned the seas. With the blessing of Winston Churchill, the commander of the SOE sent a team to destroy the Duchessa d'Aosta, a supply ship that supplied all the carbon dioxide filters for the U-boats. These filters permitted these submarines to remain submerged for prolonged periods. By disabling the supply ship, the U-boat fleet would be effectively sidelined. The mission was labelled Operation Postmaster. It took place in January, 1942. This story centers on the real characters - Gus March-Phillips (Henry Cavill), Anders Larssen (Alan Ritchson) and Geoffrey Appleyard (Alex Pettyfer) - who were sent to complete this mission. In this film, some totally fictitious characters and other amalgamations of real-life participants also tagged along.
"Ungentlemanly Warfare" contains all the satisfying flourishes of a film by Guy Ritchie ("Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels," "Sherlock Holmes," "The Gentlemen"). This film is cool and stylish. It's filled with swaggering characters spouting cheeky dialogue. There are flashbacks to keep the moviegoer off-balance. There are first-rate set pieces/action scenes. Oh, and there's violence - lots and lots of violence, most of it gratuitous. Did I mention the violence? The entire package is delivered with a manic gleefulness that's contagious.
While the story is "based on true events," reality is just a jumping off point. This film suggests that a major role of the operation was to persuade an officially neutral US to enter the war and begin helping Britain. Pearl Harbor occurred the month before, so the US was already fully engaged. The film also suggests that by disabling the supply ship, the SOE's mission could change the course of the war. While the events depicted in "Ungentlemanly Warfare" were not unimportant, a bigger factor was the development of RDX, an explosive powerful enough to sink the U-boats in the open sea.
The film offers an interesting side note. One of the staffers for the SOE depicted in the film is a young officer named Ian Fleming (Freddie Fox). Yep, that Ian Fleming. His boss was known as M. In his James Bond novels, Fleming incorporates the character of M. Fleming has noted several times that the character of James Bond was based on Gus March-Phillips.
To summarize, the cast here is charming and appealing, in no small part because they appear to be reveling in their madcap roles. Some of the location shots (much of the movie was filmed in Antalya, Turkey) make the film as worthwhile as a NatGeo documentary. The "true story" is a muddled mess. And there's the violence, lots and lots of violence. (Historical note: no one was actually killed during Operation Postmaster, although one Nazi soldier fainted at the sight of the intruders.) Guy Ritchie's energy and enthusiasm, which permeate this piece, will win over a lot of the folks in the seats.
The SOE existed to operate behind enemy lines, committing sabotage and various other acts considered ungentlemanly by the upper crust officers who ran the conventional army. In 1942, England was starving and its army could not be resupplied because German U-boats owned the seas. With the blessing of Winston Churchill, the commander of the SOE sent a team to destroy the Duchessa d'Aosta, a supply ship that supplied all the carbon dioxide filters for the U-boats. These filters permitted these submarines to remain submerged for prolonged periods. By disabling the supply ship, the U-boat fleet would be effectively sidelined. The mission was labelled Operation Postmaster. It took place in January, 1942. This story centers on the real characters - Gus March-Phillips (Henry Cavill), Anders Larssen (Alan Ritchson) and Geoffrey Appleyard (Alex Pettyfer) - who were sent to complete this mission. In this film, some totally fictitious characters and other amalgamations of real-life participants also tagged along.
"Ungentlemanly Warfare" contains all the satisfying flourishes of a film by Guy Ritchie ("Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels," "Sherlock Holmes," "The Gentlemen"). This film is cool and stylish. It's filled with swaggering characters spouting cheeky dialogue. There are flashbacks to keep the moviegoer off-balance. There are first-rate set pieces/action scenes. Oh, and there's violence - lots and lots of violence, most of it gratuitous. Did I mention the violence? The entire package is delivered with a manic gleefulness that's contagious.
While the story is "based on true events," reality is just a jumping off point. This film suggests that a major role of the operation was to persuade an officially neutral US to enter the war and begin helping Britain. Pearl Harbor occurred the month before, so the US was already fully engaged. The film also suggests that by disabling the supply ship, the SOE's mission could change the course of the war. While the events depicted in "Ungentlemanly Warfare" were not unimportant, a bigger factor was the development of RDX, an explosive powerful enough to sink the U-boats in the open sea.
The film offers an interesting side note. One of the staffers for the SOE depicted in the film is a young officer named Ian Fleming (Freddie Fox). Yep, that Ian Fleming. His boss was known as M. In his James Bond novels, Fleming incorporates the character of M. Fleming has noted several times that the character of James Bond was based on Gus March-Phillips.
To summarize, the cast here is charming and appealing, in no small part because they appear to be reveling in their madcap roles. Some of the location shots (much of the movie was filmed in Antalya, Turkey) make the film as worthwhile as a NatGeo documentary. The "true story" is a muddled mess. And there's the violence, lots and lots of violence. (Historical note: no one was actually killed during Operation Postmaster, although one Nazi soldier fainted at the sight of the intruders.) Guy Ritchie's energy and enthusiasm, which permeate this piece, will win over a lot of the folks in the seats.
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare is directed by Guy Ritchie and stars Henry Cavil. It is (very) loosely based on a true story of a British WW2 covert operation called 'Operation Postmaster'. And the film is advertised as a 'Spy Action Comedy'....
I have to admit I'm not a huge Guy Ritchie fan (except for the Sherlock Holmes movies, which Robert Downey Jr. Really brought alive). And the fact that they messed around with what was already a totally remarkable TRUE story, I find strange. Personally, I would have much preferred a straight up historical action / drama / thriller than what is essentially an over the top gorefest. This is as much a WW2 movie as 'Overlord' (think zombies on D-Day). Stranger is that they show the true actual heroes at the end of the movie, goodness knows what their families think of being linked to this fantasy.
It's really not awful, it's a mindless action romp with a huge body count. As some have noted, the dialogue is smug and annoying in equal measure. The shots of sets and extras are all done well though and as you can see from the extremes of the reviews it is the kind of film to polarise opinion.
I enjoyed it, but was just disappointed it veered so far away from what is actually a truly remarkable historical event. But the fashion at the moment seems to be away from this type of movie making.
6/10.
I have to admit I'm not a huge Guy Ritchie fan (except for the Sherlock Holmes movies, which Robert Downey Jr. Really brought alive). And the fact that they messed around with what was already a totally remarkable TRUE story, I find strange. Personally, I would have much preferred a straight up historical action / drama / thriller than what is essentially an over the top gorefest. This is as much a WW2 movie as 'Overlord' (think zombies on D-Day). Stranger is that they show the true actual heroes at the end of the movie, goodness knows what their families think of being linked to this fantasy.
It's really not awful, it's a mindless action romp with a huge body count. As some have noted, the dialogue is smug and annoying in equal measure. The shots of sets and extras are all done well though and as you can see from the extremes of the reviews it is the kind of film to polarise opinion.
I enjoyed it, but was just disappointed it veered so far away from what is actually a truly remarkable historical event. But the fashion at the moment seems to be away from this type of movie making.
6/10.
It has been awhile since I have seen something so predicable.
It felt like the script had been copied from the standard WW2 movie then all the quality suspense, excitement and character development which is normally in these movies replaced with vague attempts at humour and actors which feel like they are all running on idle.
There are so many good actors in this which could carry almost any movie but they have such a bad script to work.
The whole production feels like it is missing 95% of a good script to the point I am not sure they even had one and didn't just wing it and hope to put something together in editing, though as the actors deliver so poorly I assume they must be following a script.
It felt like the script had been copied from the standard WW2 movie then all the quality suspense, excitement and character development which is normally in these movies replaced with vague attempts at humour and actors which feel like they are all running on idle.
There are so many good actors in this which could carry almost any movie but they have such a bad script to work.
The whole production feels like it is missing 95% of a good script to the point I am not sure they even had one and didn't just wing it and hope to put something together in editing, though as the actors deliver so poorly I assume they must be following a script.
Some good performances and a good story but it's let down by poor pacing and an almost complete lack of flair. It's feels like an 'action movie by numbers'. It doesn't have the charm of Kelly's Heroes, the dignity of The Guns of Navarone, the credibility of The Longest Day or the sheer star power and likeability of The Great Escape. If you're bored and want to watch Alan Ritchson play a Scandinavian Jack Reacher going on a nazi killing spree with the help of some friends then you might enjoy it. The fact that it's based on true events doesn't make it feel any more believable than any number of b-movie war films. It *could* have been great but it's a misfire. Perhaps a director who approached the subject more seriously would have had more success. Guy Ritchie seemed torn between doing a 'proper' war movie and doing his usual stylish blokey silliness, and the result is that this is neither.
The absolute worst thing about it is Rory Kinear who is horribly miscast as Winston Churchill. He's shocking. He looks nothing like him, despite mountains of prosthetics and he sounds like a northern comic doing a bad impression.
The absolute worst thing about it is Rory Kinear who is horribly miscast as Winston Churchill. He's shocking. He looks nothing like him, despite mountains of prosthetics and he sounds like a northern comic doing a bad impression.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaIn real life, one of the lesser-known members of the Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare was Sir Christopher Lee. Lee was a step-cousin of Ian Fleming, and Fleming first suggested him for the title role in El satánico Dr. No (1962) while golfing together. The part went to Joseph Wiseman instead, but Lee ended up playing another Bond villain - Francisco Scaramanga in 007 y el hombre con el revólver de oro (1974). Also, Lee famously used his experience in the Ministry operations to educate Sir Peter Jackson, when filming the Lord of the Rings trilogy, on the "sound a man makes when he is stabbed in the back."
- ErroresAll the radio messages that are sent to England are portrayed as being sent and received in plain text. However, radio operators receiving wireless messages would have recorded what they received and passed the message on for decoding. Decoding was carried out by other personnel. This protocol was essential for security so that only a few people knew what messages were being received, from where, and from whom.
- Bandas sonorasThe School Bus
From Harry el sucio (1971)
Written and Music by Lalo Schifrin
Courtesy of Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
Published by Universal/MCA Music Ltd.
On behalf of Warner-Barham Music
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Guerra sin reglas
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 60,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 20,535,053
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 8,913,698
- 21 abr 2024
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 29,768,915
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 2h 2min(122 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta