10.8 C
Saturday, June 15, 2024

D-Day depictions in movie and TV: One of the best and worst ranked by historians | Ents & Arts Information

Must read

- Advertisement -

D-Day has been re-created in literature, TV, movie – and even video video games – throughout the final eight a long time.

The largest amphibious invasion in history – when Allied forces landed on the coast in northern France on 6 June 1944 – was an occasion that modified the course of historical past. So, it is no shock it is made an impression on the large display screen.

We’re revisiting 13 of the best-known display screen variations – and with the assistance of three high historians – serving to you decide the very best of the bunch to mark D-Day’s eightieth anniversary.

Paul Woodadge: British D-Day historian, YouTuber, writer of two Second World War books together with Angels Of Mercy and self-described “D-Day nerd”
Dr Peter Caddick-Adams: British navy historian and writer of books together with Sand & Metal: A New Historical past Of D-Day
Joseph Balkoski: American navy historian and writer of eight Second World Struggle books together with Omaha Seashore: D-Day

Pic: 20thCentFox/Everett/Shutterstock

FILM: D-Day The Sixth Of June, 1956
WHAT IT IS: Romance starring Robert Taylor, Richard Todd and Dana Wynter
PLOT: A traditional love triangle, the place a British lieutenant and an American paratrooper battle for the love of 1 lady.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: The D-Day scenes have been shot in California utilizing solely 80 extras, cleverly utilizing the projection of one other take of the identical scene within the background to provide the impression there have been twice as many troopers on the seashore.
TRIVIA: Todd, who participated within the Normandy landings in actual life, wore his unique beret within the film. He additionally wore it within the subsequent movie we take a look at, The Longest Day.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “Traditionally it is terrible. Taylor – who was the dreamboat all the ladies needed to be with – is clunky and really theatrical. I do not suppose it was excellent within the Nineteen Fifties, and it is simply dreadful now… The movie has only a few redeeming options. It is best watched after which instantly forgotten. I give it one out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – PETER: “It is a film we have seen one million occasions earlier than, dressed up as being on D-Day. When it was made in 1956, we nonetheless had nationwide service and lots of the individuals who noticed it had lived by the conflict. So, the characters carrying a uniform in the best approach, carrying the best weapons, and doing the best issues after they have been climbing cliffs for instance was vital. The precise craft, the setting and the costumes carry it by… however the screenplay actually cheats, and that is why it is largely been forgotten. I give it 5 out of 10.”

- Advertisement -

D-Day latest: World leaders join veterans in Normandy to remember

Pic: Moviestore/Shutterstock

 (1645672a).The Longest Day,  John Wayne.Film and Television
Pic: Moviestore/Shutterstock

FILM: The Longest Day, 1962
WHAT IT IS: Motion starring John Wayne, Sean Connery, Henry Fonda, Robert Mitchum, Richard Todd and Richard Burton
PLOT: D-Day advised from each the Allied and German viewpoint. The film had 4 administrators, with German scenes directed by a German director, the British by a British director, American by an American director and French by a French director – and all spoken in their very own language too.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: Some of the costly movies ever made, it was billed as that includes a whopping “48 worldwide stars”. Sean Connery wasn’t an enormous title when he filmed it, however Physician No got here out between filming and enhancing, and they also whacked him up the billing for launch.
TRIVIA: Regardless of the starry forged, the man enjoying Dwight Eisenhower was really an Oscar-winning set decorator known as Henry Grace who was portray within the studios that day and occurred to look lots like the previous president. Not the very best actor on the earth, his voice was dubbed over to enhance the efficiency.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “It nonetheless holds up. In the event you have been desirous to try to clarify D-Day to somebody and also you had three hours, it might be an excellent approach of explaining it. A younger viewers may discover it a bit slow-paced nevertheless it’s not overly heroic and is pretty primarily based in actuality. I give it eight out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW JOSEPH: “I feel it is and away the very best D-Day movie that folks can watch, and I urge them to make it their go-to D-Day movie. It captures the aura and the immensity of the day and does it in a comparatively correct approach. My father, who served in World Struggle Two, was very moved by the movie. If he was a fight veteran and he noticed one thing in that film that claims one thing proper there. I give it 10 out of 10.”

Pic: Mgm/Kobal/Shutterstock 

5874348f).Julie Andrews, James Garner.The Americanization Of Emily - 1964.Director: Arthur Hiller.MGM.USA.Scene Still.Comedy.Les Jeux de l'amour et de la guerre
Pic: Mgm/Kobal/Shutterstock

FILM: The Americanization Of Emily, 1964
Comedy starring Julie Andrews and James Garner
PLOT: A cynical US Navy commander turns into an unintended conflict hero and finds love within the course of.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: At a time when conflict movies have been all about heroes, this film places a coward at its centre, and explored the surprising penalties of a media-misunderstanding propelling a reluctant man to the standing of nationwide hero.
TRIVIA: Actress Sharon Tate seems as an uncredited additional within the movie, as a visitor at a celebration. The scene itself was filmed on 22 November 1963, the identical day as President John F Kennedy was assassinated.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “This isn’t dangerous. Made within the Sixties, numerous the unique viewers would have been World Struggle Two veterans and Korea veterans. Julie Andrews is simply attractive in it. I’d advocate watching it – however its old style humour means you will not discover it humorous. It is actually not a laugh-a-minute. I give it eight out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – JOSEPH: “It was considerably risqué for its time… It did type of seize the chaos and the violence of the second in a comedic approach, if such a factor is feasible. I used to be dragged to that film as a teen as a result of my sister was an absolute devoted fan of Julie Andrews. However I did get pleasure from it. I give it six out of 10.”

Learn extra:
Legacy of Mad Piper who played bagpipes on the beaches
Tearful D-Day veterans describe ‘mixed feelings’

Pic: Mgm/Kobal/Shutterstock
Pic: Mgm/Kobal/Shutterstock

FILM: 36 Hours, 1964
WHAT IT IS: Thriller starring James Garner, Rod Taylor and Eva Marie Saint
PLOT: An American main is captured by Nazis who attempt to persuade him he is misplaced his reminiscence and 6 years have handed, in a bid to get him to disclose particulars in regards to the Allied invasion.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: It is primarily based on brief story, Beware Of The Canine, written by writer Roald Dahl in 1944, and first printed in Harper’s journal.
TRIVIA: The film encompasses a very intelligent MacGuffin (a time period made widespread by Alfred Hitchcock describing a tool that’s important to plot ahead, however which has no significance in itself). Attempt to spot it in case you’re watching it for the primary time.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “That is considered one of my favorite movies about World Struggle Two. It begins off as a thriller, then turns into an escape film. It’s kind of Mission Unimaginable, with one of the creative little MacGuffins in a film ever. I give it 10 out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – PETER: “That is science fiction meets D-Day. The premise of shifting time is attention-grabbing, and I feel the theme of extracting secrets and techniques from one another was given additional significance by the Chilly Struggle. In fact, when the movie was being made, your opponent would have been a communist slightly than a German. The 36-hour construction is a good suggestion as a result of it means time is ticking down all of the whereas. It is an bold ask and jogs my memory of Mission Unimaginable. I give it 5 out of 10.”

Pic: Everett/Shutterstock
Pic: Everett/Shutterstock

FILM: The Soiled Dozen, 1967
WHAT IT IS: Motion starring Lee Marvin, Donald Sutherland, Charles Bronson, Telly Savalas and Ernest Borgnine
PLOT: A dozen American convicted murderers are despatched to assassinate Nazis in northern France forward of D-Day.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: A comic book guide model of World Struggle Two, the plot of the film is alleged to be very loosely primarily based on an actual group of paratroopers known as the “Filthy 13” who have been a part of the a hundred and first Airborne Division, and whereas not convicts, have been recognized to get pleasure from their share of ingesting and preventing.
TRIVIA: A remake of the film was introduced in 2019, with The Quick And The Livid screenwriter David Ayers on the helm. 4 years later it is nonetheless in growth, with Ayers describing a “nerve-wracking” technique of making an attempt to “modernise one thing and construct it out for a contemporary viewers, whereas on the identical time protecting that DNA”. Watch this house.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “It is very macho – your testosterone ranges improve simply watching it. Nevertheless it’s an excellent forged and truly fairly complicated as a personality research, taking an hour and a half to get anyplace close to the motion. A traditional, and a little bit of a “blokes’ film,” it is the type of movie they do not make anymore. I give it eight out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – PETER: “There isn’t any try at nice filmmaking right here, that is Hollywood merely making an attempt to coin some huge cash out of numerous bangs. There may be an try at characterisation, however solely on the Allied facet, the Germans do not have names. Alongside the best way there is a Hollywood funds of an unlimited variety of explosions to be triggered, tons of of rounds of ammunition to be fired, and plenty of smoke to be thrown round. It is a macho flick, making an attempt to reinvent the western in Second World Struggle phrases. Nevertheless it’s actually lasted the course. I give it six out of 10.”

Pic: 20th Century Fox/Kobal/Shutterstock
Pic: twentieth Century Fox/Kobal/Shutterstock

FILM: Patton, 1970
WHAT IT IS: A biography starring George C Scott and Karl Malden, with a screenplay by Francis Ford Coppola (who went on to direct The Godfather)
PLOT: Controversial American Basic George S Patton’s profession is examined by the lens of World Struggle Two (he wasn’t in command of an precise invading drive on the day however led a deception drive in a bid to idiot the Germans).
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: The film’s well-known opening scene is Patton giving a motivational speech to troops in entrance of an unlimited US flag. Whereas the lead star George C Scott had a gravelly, authoritative voice, the real-life Basic Patton had squeaky, nasal tones, and so would revert to utilizing expletives in vital speeches to inject authority. The film needed to tone down swearing to keep away from an R ranking.
TRIVIA: Scott received an Oscar for his efficiency (the film additionally received greatest image,) however turned it down as he disliked the idea of performing competitions.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “It is a intelligent film, written in a approach that appeals to 2 audiences. In the event you have been a serving American navy officer, you watched it as a warring biography of considered one of America’s biggest heroes. In the event you have been a Woodstock-going hippie, you thought it was a scathing biopic of the idiocy of males at conflict. And each audiences thought it was for them. It says lots about why individuals go to conflict and what management does. I give it seven out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – JOSEPH: “This movie is nicely made with great performing. Once you look again, it does have some historic flaws – the film beginning with the dying of Patton’s support, the storyline skipping over Patton’s philandering and a tinge of cynicism over the British contribution to World Struggle Two, which may be very typical in American movies. However I feel total the film stands as much as scrutiny, I used to be moved by it. I give it 9 out of 10.”

Learn extra on D-Day:
How a framed photo of veteran’s wife saved his life
The 21-year-old’s weather report that changed the course of history

Pic: Moviestore/Shutterstock
Pic: Moviestore/Shutterstock

FILM: Overlord, 1975
WHAT IT IS: Motion starring Brian Stirner and Davyd Harries
PLOT: A younger British soldier prepares to hitch the fray of World Struggle Two.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: A whopping 27% of the movie is made up of Imperial Struggle Museum archive footage, really shot in World Struggle Two.
TRIVIA: A labour of affection for director Stuart Cooper – who appeared as an actor in The Soiled Dozen enjoying Personal Roscoe Lever – the vast majority of the newly shot scenes which make up the narrative story of the film have been filmed in simply 10 days.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “That is two movies in a single – considered one of which is good and considered one of which isn’t. The archive stuff is nice, however the narrative was shot on the equal of £2.50 and a packet of crisps. The lead actor, Brian Steiner, has the charisma of a moist haddock, and it is all shut pictures as a result of they have not obtained sufficient individuals to fill out the parade floor for coaching scenes. In relation to the end result of D-Day, you narrow from actual footage the place there are thousands and thousands of ships and males, to [a scene] filmed in a swimming pool. Two individuals soar out of a cardboard touchdown craft. I am exaggerating, however not a lot. It is a worthy effort however finally fails. I give it 5 out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – PETER: “It is a creature of its time, popping out when anti-militarism was at its peak each within the UK and US. It is rebellious, younger filmmaking questioning authority and asking what the worth of a person’s life is. Actually, a First World Struggle anti-war film set in D-Day. All through you’re given the notion that [the lead character’s] going to die and you are not disenchanted. You possibly can see it coming a mile off. An anthem for doomed youth, Wilfred Owen may have written this screenplay. On the plus facet, there aren’t many motion pictures that take you thru the coaching for a significant navy motion, and it is frantically well-researched when it comes to visuals and accuracy. I give it six out of 10.”

Pic: Lorimar/Kobal/Shutterstock
Pic: Lorimar/Kobal/Shutterstock

FILM: The Large Pink One, 1980
WHAT IT IS: Motion starring Mark Hamill and Lee Marvin
PLOT: A US sergeant and 4 of his troopers battle throughout Europe, in direction of the tip of World Struggle Two.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: Director Sam Fuller fought on Omaha Seashore on D-Day, and the film is about his expertise as a World Struggle Two soldier.
TRIVIA: Beset with growth points because the concept for the film was first floated within the late Nineteen Fifties, the movie noticed its funds minimize midway by manufacturing and was closely minimize on launch. In 2004 (seven years after Fuller’s dying) a brand new minimize was launched including 47 minutes to the working time, bringing it extra carefully according to the director’s unique imaginative and prescient.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “This movie may be very Marmite. Sure, Lee Marvin was approach too {old} for the function of sergeant. Nevertheless it’s very intelligent with its language, and solely makes use of the type of factor troopers would say on the time. However to say a much bigger factor, I feel it is one of the worthy makes an attempt to try to present what males who undergo fight really expertise. It got here out the identical yr as The Empire Strikes Again, which additionally starred Mark Hamill, however didn’t hit the field workplace in the identical approach. It is a disgrace. I give it 9 out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – JOSEPH: “I discovered this film to be ludicrous. It has a little bit of a cult standing in America, however for me, the inaccuracies crossed the road of being so grotesque it was annoying. With such a low funds it was ridiculous to aim to depict D-Day and is an insult to the historic skilled. The scripting was simply absurd, and utterly implausible, as was the speculation for the entire plot. I watched it as soon as and haven’t any need ever to see it once more. I give it three out of 10.”

Pic: Everett/Shutterstock
Pic: Everett/Shutterstock

FILM: Saving Personal Ryan, 1998
WHAT IT IS: Motion starring Tom Hanks, Matt Damon, Tom Sizemore and Edward Burns, directed by Steven Spielberg
PLOT: A bunch of American troopers go on a mission to find considered one of their males – Personal Ryan – and convey him dwelling safely.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: The film’s opening scene depicts Allied troopers storming Omaha Seashore and took round 1,500 individuals and a month to movie. Capturing the true horror or conflict, the viewer – just like the lead characters – spends 24 minutes experiencing the chaos, the bloodshed and the blind terror of fight.
TRIVIA: Unable to movie in Normandy, because of the built-up nature of the realm, the D-Day touchdown was filmed in Eire, on Ballinesker Seashore. Milk of Magnesia was used to create the phantasm of troopers vomiting from boats and {dead} fish have been put within the water and throughout the shore. Regardless of pretend blood and sand getting caught on the hand-held cameras used to movie the motion, the pictures have been nonetheless used as Spielberg believed it made the footage look all of the extra genuine.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “I’ve a love/hate relationship with this film. It broke the mould of how conflict movies have been made. Sure, there are incorrect particulars – German obstacles being the fallacious approach round and bunkers of the fallacious type- nevertheless it grips you. It places blood and dying in your face. The scene the place the medic dies, on the check screening, everybody stated, ‘Oh God, that scene was so uncomfortable’. So, Spielberg made it longer. It modified World Struggle movie moviemaking and had a world impression which is all credit score to Spielberg. I give it eight out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – JOSEPH: “Whereas I did not actually get pleasure from it, it is a very pivotal movie within the growth of the general public’s curiosity in World Struggle Two. The plot is absurd and presents a remarkably American-centric view of the conflict. And it made some historic whoppers, triggering outrage amongst British veterans – significantly Royal Navy veterans – when the movie was launched after Spielberg stated British fighters weren’t concerned within the Omaha Seashore touchdown. He made an enormous mistake and it was a significant flaw within the film. They blew it on the important analysis. I give it six out of 10.”

Pic: David James/Hbo/20th Century Fox/Dream Works/Kobal/Shutterstock 

Editorial use only. No book cover usage.
Mandatory Credit: Photo by David James/Hbo/20th Century Fox/Dream Works/Kobal/Shutterstock (5883529m)
Damian Lewis
Band Of Brothers - 2001
Hbo / 20th Century Fox / Dream Works
Pic: David James/HBO/twentieth Century Fox/Dream Works/Kobal/Shutterstock

TV SHOW: Band Of Brothers, 2001
WHAT IT IS: Miniseries starring Damian Lewis, Kirk Acevedo, Scott Grimes, Donnie Wahlberg, Ron Livingstone, David Schwimmer and Dexter Fletcher, with Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks as government producers
PLOT: The present follows Straightforward Firm of the US Military a hundred and first Airborne Division and their missions in Europe throughout World Struggle Two.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: In a bid to be as traditionally correct as doable, most actors spoke with actual veterans forward of filming, and a few veterans got here to the set. Lots of the actors who starred within the present have gone on to play a component in memorial occasions within the years following, and even have an lively WhatsApp group to remain in contact with each other – such was the impression the present had on their lives.
TRIVIA: On the time of filming, this was the costliest miniseries ever made, costing round $125m (£98m) for 10 episodes. A further $15m (£12m) was spent on supporting occasions, together with particular screenings for Straightforward Firm veterans, with one held on Utah Seashore in Normandy.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “That is the very best World Struggle Two manufacturing ever made and has by no means been surpassed. Lightning struck after they made this. The Why We Combat episode in regards to the Holocaust is taught in Holocaust research all world wide and has introduced the Holocaust to a brand new era. It defined obligation and sacrifice. Each actor nails it, and the cinematography and music is spot-on. It is phenomenal, timeless and excellent. I give it a tough ten if not an 11.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – JOSEPH: “That is far and away the very best Phrase Struggle Two sequence ever made. It exceeds the portrayal of D-Day in The Longest Day when it comes to accuracy and pressure and was primarily based on a well-written historical past guide, whereas Saving Personal Ryan was a made-up story. It actually captured precise occasions, and was devoid of that American-centric stuff, despite the fact that it was about an American unit. It was very reasonable to different nations that participated. I can not consider a unfavourable. I give it 10 out of 10.”

Pic:  © 2024 Sony Pictures Television Inc. All Rights Reserved
Pic: © 2024 Sony Footage Tv Inc. All Rights Reserved

TV: Ike: Countdown To D-Day, 2004
WHAT IT IS: TV film starring Tom Selleck
PLOT: A portrait of Basic Dwight Eisenhower making ready the Allied troops for D-Day.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: Many individuals rank this amongst Selleck’s greatest display screen performances, however the reality it was a made-for-TV film means it has largely gone below the radar. Followers of Selleck might nicely really feel cheated this film did not get higher recognition.
TRIVIA: A little bit of a continuity nit-picking right here – We see a snatch of Laurence Olivier’s film Henry V being proven within the movie, which was set within the spring of 1944. However the Shakespearean film was not launched till the autumn of 1944.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “That is fairly rattling good – as soon as you’ve got obtained over the truth that Tom Selleck is not enjoying Magnum, or Monica’s boyfriend from Mates. Selleck humanised Eisenhower and is surprisingly good. I additionally admire that it did not exploit the truth that Eisenhower might or might not have had an affair along with his British driver, Kay Summersby. It had good historic advisers behind it and was genuine. It did not get the plaudits it deserved. I give it eight out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – JOSEPH: “Selleck captured Eisenhower very nicely. It is truthful to say the movie options numerous males sitting round in rooms speaking, nevertheless it was very nicely executed. It captures how Eisenhower needed to cope with very troublesome personalities like Montgomery and to some extent Churchill and the way [Eisenhower] was such an agreeable individual that he took all these various individuals and introduced them collectively for a unified objective. I loved the movie. I give it eight out of 10.”

Pic: Moviestore/Shutterstock

Editorial use only. No book cover usage.
Mandatory Credit: Photo by Moviestore/Shutterstock (8852518h)
Brian Cox
Churchill - 2017
Pic: Moviestore/Shutterstock

FILM: Churchill, 2017
WHAT IT IS: Historic conflict drama starring Brian Cox and Miranda Richardson
PLOT: We comply with former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill within the days main as much as D-Day.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: The movie obtained combined opinions on launch however was largely derided for enjoying it quick and free with the information. Famous Churchill biographer Andrew Roberts was significantly scathing, saying it rendered the previous British PM virtually unrecognisable.
TRIVIA: Gary Oldman was initially provided the a part of Churchill however turned it down. He’d go on to win an Oscar for his portrayal of Churchill in Darkest Hour only a yr later.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “When historians come out of their truckloads to lambast a movie you realize it is executed badly. Whereas it is true that Churchill had a phobia of amphibious landings, this presents him as a pacifist or hippie, which he was not. It is a dreadful movie – do not inflict it on your self. I give it one out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – JOSEPH: “The portrayal of Churchill vis-a-vis the D-Day operation was extremely inaccurate. Churchill was portrayed within the movie as being violently against the operation and it was an unlimited exaggeration of his precise place. I do not keep in mind a lot in regards to the film as a result of I used to be so appalled by it. I give it three out of 10.”

Pic: Pathe Films/Everett/Shutterstock

No Merchandising. Editorial Use Only. No Book Cover Usage..Mandatory Credit: Photo by Pathe Films/Everett/Shutterstock (14209340cg).THE GREAT ESCAPER, British poster, from left: Glenda Jackson, Michael Caine, 2023. .. Pathe Pictures International / Courtesy Everett Collection.Everett Collection - 2023
Pic: Pathe Movies/Everett/Shutterstock

FILM: The Nice Escaper, 2023
WHAT IT IS: Biographical drama starring Michael Caine and Glenda Jackson
PLOT: An 89-year-old British World Struggle Two Navy veteran breaks out of his nursing dwelling to go to the seventieth anniversary D-Day commemorations in France. It is primarily based on the true story of D-Day veteran Bernard Jordan.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: That is swansong for each its lead stars. Sir Michael Caine, who’s now 91, has stated it is his last movie, whereas Glenda Jackson, CBE, died just some weeks after watching a screening of the completed movie in the summertime of 2023, aged 87.
TRIVIA: Caine and Jackson had starred reverse one another within the drama The Romantic Englishwoman 48 years earlier, once more enjoying husband and spouse.
HISTORIAN VIEW – PAUL: “This movie is excellent. On account of COVID restrictions, they could not movie in Normandy, so it is shot fully in UK, recreating the Arromanches in East Sussex at Camber Sands and Hastings. It offers with reconciliation and coping with trauma that you have been bottling away for a very long time. Michael Caine – who was an Military veteran in Korea in actual life – is so tied up with the style of conflict movies, that him coming again as an aged actor, virtually revisiting the characters he performed as a younger man, works nicely. It is a fantastically charming movie and I give it 9 out of 10.”
HISTORIAN VIEW – PETER: “This movie is totally attractive. You will want a bucket and an industrial-sized pack of handkerchiefs that can assist you get by it. It is the expertise of each {old} soldier going again to their battlefield and in regards to the fading of warriors and the way they fade. Everyone has a relative or grandparent who would have been the Jackson or Caine character, who got here by that interval, and sat us on their knee and stated, ‘Let me inform you in regards to the Blitz, or let me inform you about rationing, or let me inform you about these People who came to visit with their chewing gum and their jiving’. It is fantastically acted and comes throughout as deep and real. I give it 10 out of 10.”

Source link

More articles

- Advertisement -

Latest article