Narvik

A small form of World War 2 movie from Norway that has a different story from the real history of the battlefield where Hitler was first defeated. It focuses on the story of innocent civilians in Narvik who suffer the karma of the German-British war. Whereas Germany did its best to protect its citizens in times of war. While the British continued to attack the city until there were many victims. Which is different from the image of other movies in the past, and although we know at the end that Germany has lost But this isn't the real ending. There are more profound stories and great tragedies after that. Which the film ends with the facts very perfectly and is at the heart of this whole story.

Yes, it could have done so much more and gone way beyond. But I don't know if that would mean "better". There were plenty of spaces for more facts, arcs, narratives and things to be explored. But I think the fact that they weren't there was by design. Actually the movie made me cry and care about the characters in the end. So I think this is "mission accomplished" isn't it. It has that straightforward cold hearted but yet gentle and beautiful touch of morality and love that Nordic war movies always seem to have. The last 30 minutes are really worth it. And pay attention to the kid, the protagonist couple's kid.

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.

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.

So it is only logical that one needs to make difficult decisions with such a budget. And the first thing that needs to be realized, is that expensive battle scenes are very much out of the question. So I am pretty impressed that "Narvik" still contained some pretty good action scenes! A good example are the ground battle scenes that start at 50 minutes into the movie.

I think it was pretty clever to base the storyline on a family relationship between a husband, wife and her kid that live in Narvik. The husband - whom is a soldier that fights for the Norwegian Army - gives us thereby a good idea of the situation that the defending army was facing. And the wife - whom has to translate for the germans - provides us with a view on the considerations on the german side.

I have to say that the storyline could have been more focussed on at least the consequences that the battle had on citizens and the village of Narvik. At least they could have involved more families or people. I think it is indeed a bit to focussed on just the husband and wife.

What is very well done is to make the movie period authentic. The vehicles, uniforms, weapons and other props look all period-true. Combined with filming locations that provide us with excellent scenery, it really gave me the idea that it was World War 2 that I was looking at. And the CGI - where it was used - was also good. Large fires, bombed out areas, planes, ships... for me they all looked genuine. With regards to the planes and ships, it surely helped that they didn't give the viewer a close-up view. The large fires and bombed buildings - whom we could see way clearer - all looked very real.

Combined with some pretty decent acting, I therefore have to disagree with the users that give this movie an IMDb rating of 4 stars or lower. Taking into account all the above - and emphasizing that at no moment I was bored whilst watching the movie - I think that this movie deserves a score of 6.6/10. Just barely making a 7-star IMDb rating.

Seeing what is already possible on the meagre budget it had to work work with, I personally wonder what Narvik would have looked like with a budget of 3 to 4 times more. If I read that the initial idea was to make a mini-series, I think that we have here a big missed opportunity. Because all elements are available to create a mini-series that not only portrays events that are important to Norway and WW2, but that are also a must-see in any persons life...

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.