Why did Germany let them go?

>>134547250
Because even Krauts have respect, and know honour on the battlefield.

>>134547250
Because the Allies were the good guys, and good guys always find a way to win in the end.

>>134547250
should i go see this film?
i havent been to the movies in many years, but a good war film would def be nice to see

am i wasting my time & money? also wot's 70mm

>>134547250
Because germans are fucking retarded.

File: 1394849212001.png (120KB, 273x281px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 273x281px

>>134548950
Yes. It's not really a traditional war film since you don't get to see Germans.

Also watch it in IMAX

German land forces were exhausted and would have suffered large losses attacking a fortified position that had no ability to immediately route.

Whenever you surround a large group of soldiers, the wise decision is to engage in siege warfare, especially if they can escape by the time you break through the line

File: CANADIAN-NAVY-FIRST-KISS-facebook.jpg (183KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 2000x1000px

>>134548525
What happens to a country that spells honor with a "u"

>>134547250
Because the British empire was more powerful than five Germany's and one army's defeat or destruction would mean nothing in the long term.

>>134547250
Hitler considered anglo-saxon/nordic Britain to be Aryan and a sister country. He had no desire for war against England and sought peace with them several times. Hitler gave the order to let them go; his generals wanted to capture them all.

Because Gernans had outran their supplylines and destroyers provided cover for the well fortified brits

>>134548950
70mm is a size of film, you Mongol.

File: 1466141319253.png (374KB, 919x407px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 919x407px

The movie was obviously very well made, as should be expected from Nolan, but did anyone else find it extremely boring? It's only 1h46m but it felt like 3h. It did however show the brutality of war really well, I think if it was a short film it would be the best of its kind.

Anyways because the british were better fortified than the movie portrays.

>>134549839
This is what I've been told by military and historical professors. They had gone too far too fast.

>>134550480
>>134549839
>what is blitzkrieg

>>134548826
Lel if only that were true

File: ruh-roh.jpg (59KB, 1920x800px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 1920x800px

>>134547250
a) Hitler didn't want to massacre brits because he respected other whites and hoped the gesture would help move everyone towards a peace deal so soviets would be the only war front. Britain got its troops back then jews offered them american entry into war in exchange for Israel. Brits agree.
b) Hitler listened to generals who assured him luftwaffles could do the job and tanks weren't needed (tanks stopped per orders OR stopped per over-extension, weather and supply line issues). luftwaffles weren't enough. Hitler would have said he let Brits go as a gesture of good faith to save face and maybe leverage some kind of deal. No way, jose.

It's one of those. No one knows for sure. No one.