IMDb रेटिंग
6.6/10
20 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अप्रैल 1940. दुनिया की निगाहें उत्तरी नॉर्वे के एक छोटे से शहर नारविक पर टिकी हैं, जो हिटर की युद्ध मशीनरी के लिए आवश्यक लौह अयस्क का स्रोत है. दो महीने के भयंकर युद्ध के बाद, हिटलर को अपनी ... सभी पढ़ेंअप्रैल 1940. दुनिया की निगाहें उत्तरी नॉर्वे के एक छोटे से शहर नारविक पर टिकी हैं, जो हिटर की युद्ध मशीनरी के लिए आवश्यक लौह अयस्क का स्रोत है. दो महीने के भयंकर युद्ध के बाद, हिटलर को अपनी पहली हार का सामना करना पड़ता है.अप्रैल 1940. दुनिया की निगाहें उत्तरी नॉर्वे के एक छोटे से शहर नारविक पर टिकी हैं, जो हिटर की युद्ध मशीनरी के लिए आवश्यक लौह अयस्क का स्रोत है. दो महीने के भयंकर युद्ध के बाद, हिटलर को अपनी पहली हार का सामना करना पड़ता है.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- पुरस्कार
- 3 जीत और कुल 3 नामांकन
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)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
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.
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.
8OJT
"Kampen om Narvik - Hitler's første nederlag" (in English: The Battle of Narvik - Hitler's first defeat") directed by Erik Skjoldbjærg had a hard time reaching the cinemas, two years after first planned premiere,due to covid and then the eruption of the Ukraine war, but when it finally did it does to full houses across Norway.
The plot follows a soldier, Gunnar, and his family during the outbreak of the war, and the freeing of Narvik, a battle which kept going for 40 days, and we can feel the difficulties of war, with his wife obliged to help as a German translator.
The film is superbly filmed in locations Narvik, Drammen and Rjukan, and the sound is awesome.. the story manages to grip on several levels, and I found it both interesting and good, telling me history I didn't know about from before.
Another good Norwegian war movie, well worth a view.
The plot follows a soldier, Gunnar, and his family during the outbreak of the war, and the freeing of Narvik, a battle which kept going for 40 days, and we can feel the difficulties of war, with his wife obliged to help as a German translator.
The film is superbly filmed in locations Narvik, Drammen and Rjukan, and the sound is awesome.. the story manages to grip on several levels, and I found it both interesting and good, telling me history I didn't know about from before.
Another good Norwegian war movie, well worth a view.
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...
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...
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe 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.
- गूफ़Throughout 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.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Narvik: Hitler's First Defeat?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- NOK 8,02,00,000(अनुमानित)
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $66,57,347
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 48 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.00 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें