TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Acensbart Excellent but underrated film

Juana what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Robert J. Maxwell This isn't the one with Sean Connery, Donald Sutherland, and the inimitable Leslie-Anne Down. It's the story of a gang of thieves who robbed a train in the early 1960s and made of with about 2.3 million pounds, worth about 11 million in today's money. It was made for television by the Brits, who do this sort of thing very well, while nobody in the US bothers to try -- with the possible exception of HBO.I won't go into detail about the plot. When it comes to stopping a train, moving it again, uncoupling cars, and changing green lights to amber, the dozen or so gang members are a lot of nudniks. During a practice run, and having read a child's book on driving a train, they manage to start the locomotive and actually get it moving forward. But they don't know how to slow it down, let alone stop it, and they bail out while the mammoth diesel sails off into the night.It gets more serious and far more tense later, when they execute the elaborate plan. Luke Evans, sporting a tremendous development of latissimus dorsi, struts around giving orders. It's a risky business, of course, but one million pounds is a lot of money. A few bungles here and there, and the Bobbies are closing in on them. They separate and begin to hightail it out of London. End of Part One. Part Two gives us the police side of things.If you like the musical score, buy two Miles Davis albums -- "Kind of Blue" and "Porgy and Bess."

l_rawjalaurence Broadcast in two parts - "The Robber's Tale" and "The Copper's Tale" - THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY retells the famous events of August 1963 when over £2m. was stolen from a mail train traveling from Glasgow to London. The events have been extensively retold elsewhere, notably in Peter Yates' fictionalized version ROBBERY (1967) with Stanley Baker, or BUSTER (1988) a comedy-drama with Phil Collins as robber Buster Edwards. "The Robber's Tale" (dir. Julian Jarrold) focuses specifically on Bruce Reynolds (Luke Evans) as the brains behind the whole operation; the more celebrated crook Ronald Biggs (Jack Gordon) - who passed away the night the program received its first broadcast - receives scant attention. "The Copper's Tale" looks at the painstaking ways in which Tommy Butler (Jim Broadbent) went about investigating the case and bringing the criminals to justice. Stylistically speaking the production is very much in keeping with current British television costume dramas, with low-key, almost washed-out lighting, lots of period detail (for example, the obligatory London bus from the mid-Sixties) passing across the back of the frame, or a couple of young mothers pushing their prams round the park) and plenty of focus on character through shot/reverse shot sequences. The style is diffuse, with the emphasis placed on ambiance as much as plot. "The Robber's Tale" actually proves something of a disappointment; not a lot happens in terms of action, while some of the (predominantly youthful) cast simply do not seem convincing as mid- Sixties London hoodlums. Perhaps they might have done more research into the behavior, mannerisms and (most significantly) the argot of that period. "The Copper's Tale" is a lot better, not least because of the interplay - or should that be rivalry - between Butler and his immediate subordinate Frank Williams (Robert Glenister). Although ostensibly on the same side, they seem unable to form a united front, at least professionally. Butler might be a good cop, but he certainly lacks any management abilities.

Paul Grant Firstly I will state that I enjoyed both parts of this and thought it was a good way of covering a story that has become somewhat of a folk legend. It didn't make heroes out of either the robbers or the cops, which makes a pleasant change. It did show the violence they used against driver Jack Mills and why Butler of the Yard hung doggedly on till he got his men. So after all that good stuff why do they still make silly errors that distract the viewer? One that really jarred with me (OK I'm a geeky engineer) was the UHF TV aerial on the farmhouse. UHF didn't start in UK till 1964/5. The frame less glass doors in the police station are also horribly out of era for 1963! The wrong series Land Rover (wing mounted lights came in 1969). The white Jaguar police car with a sunroof! And the railway scenes were very poor, wrong loco, wrong location, wrong track(s) (Did anyone else notice how the West Coast mainline was variously single and double track with no overhead electrification? And also with extremely sharp bends!) Obviously it had to be filmed on a preserved railway line, but it would have helped if they had used CGI and/or some scenic realism. That bridge location is an iconic 20th century image and to use a bridge that was so different is poor, perhaps the BBC should pay more attention to detail and less to senior execs!

Alan Baker The dramatic elements of this production were not to bad but it was spoilt by the lack of attention to period detail right from the start. We are shown a robbery in November 1962 at a fairly unconvincing London Airport (complete with CGI piston engined airliner taking off, most airlines were using jets by that time). Unfortunately, both getaway cars have "A" suffix registration plates, not introduced until January 1963. Scenes in London show Ford Zephyrs being used as police cars whereas the Met used Wolseley 6/110s almost exclusively. A senior Detecive Chief Superintendent would not be driven around in an old Mk.1 Jaguar, more likely to have had a Humber Super Snipe. When Reynolds is arrested at the end of part 2, he is taken away in a white Jaguar Mk.2 which has a Webasto sun roof, hardly likely on a police car! The railway aspects of the production are particularly poor. For a start, the locomotive used is a Class 37, not a class 40 (painting the correct number on the side does not make it a convincing stand in). The production was clearly using a preserved railway which obviously could not provide the correct four track main line (let alone electrification masts and catenary which had been installed but were not yet in use in 1963). The train is shown on what appears to be a two track railway, but is running on the wrong track, in Britain trains run on the left hand line. The ground level signal shown is a shunting signal and would not be found out on the main line. The station sign at "Glasgow" should read Glasgow Central as there were at the time three other Glasgow Termini (St. Enoch, Buchanan Street and Queen Street).No doubt others might be able to add to the list.