MovieChat Forums > When the Wind Blows (1988) Discussion > too concieted

too concieted

posted 15 years ago by mariomaniac2
19 replies | jump to latest

Having just watched the film I must admit to being fairly disappointed. The overall concept is great, but there was a general patronising tone throughout that just became irritating and made it difficult to sympathise with the main characters. Jim mistaking the Russians for Germans, for example, was a hugely overstated point, which I think encourages a rather condescending view of the elderly as totally clueless. The plodding music during flashbacks etc seemed to be begging the audience to think of the couple as "sweet"/"quaint" in the same way we were meant to feel for Forest Gump for being a total idiot. Unfortunately I don't see pure ignorance as a sufficient reason to like a character.

The mention of arty types that their son met at university giving him "funny ideas" (a smug self-reference by the film makers) added another layer of superiority that I really think the film could have done without.

"He who laughs last thinks slowest."

[–] highpriestess32 14 years ago

Yes I agree although Raymond loosely based Jim and Hilda on his own parents who he deemed as very loving and devoted but also "simple".

Jim and Hilda lived a fairly secluded and simple life but yes, Jim did seem to have a keen eye on the newspapers at his local library and liked listening to Radio 4 for the news which rather begs the question regarding his ignorance on some issues.

He'd already lived through one war, albeit as a child, but why he would, even then, mistake the Ruskies for the Germans is a moot point.

I often drink to make people seem more interesting

[–] hallogallo 14 years ago

--- "He'd already lived through one war, albeit as a child, but why he would, even then, mistake the Ruskies for the Germans is a moot point." ---

1: The film is set in the 1980's.
2: Say it was set in 1985 that would be 40 years after the end of World War 2.
3: Jim has been retired for at least a year.
4: In 1985 the compulsory retirement age for men in the UK was 65.
5: If Jim had been retired for one year he would be 66.
6: Depending on the exact date he was born this means he would have been 25 or 26 on VE day (which almost certainly would have meant the end of his World War 2)
7: There is an exchange of dialog that goes along these lines:

Hilda "At least you won't be called up, James. You're far too old."
Jim "Thank you, my belove. I'm still two years younger than you."

That means Hilda is 68 years old.

This all means that Jim could only be aged between 19 and 26 during World War 2. Hilda 21 and 28.

Thus they could not have been children during World War 2.

"I think you're a load of old crap too, Mr Mulligan."

[–] highpriestess32 14 years ago

Excellent observation! I hadn't considered exactly when the film was supposed to be set but you're right. Jim and Hilda would have been adults during the war not the children they spoke of being in their respective Morrison and Anderson shelters!

Good points, thanks!

I often drink to make people seem more interesting

[–] TheGraveLittleToaster 14 years ago

Doesn't he mention fighting in North Africa at one point?

They who give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

[–] ShanksLFC 14 years ago

I don't remember... but I'm finding it hard to believe that the plot was so loose to contain such inconsistencies as them referring to both being children at the time of the war AND fighting in the war. I mean, that would be a fairly amateurish slip to confuse the simple history of the main characters, no? Maybe they did mess up on the dates (or figure on noone doing the maths) but contradicting their history I'm inclined to think someone is mistaken. Maybe somebody will check!

As to the simple-mindedness of Jim, I always took it as just a caricaturisation of both the elderly, or rather, of how the elderly are generally perceived, and Britishness in general. I thought it was fairly representative and quite well done in that respect tbh without being too overtly cliched. TBH, when I watched it I was thinking, yep, that's my nan (or some other elderly person I knew), including the cluelessness.

Also, there's a certain comic irony in play as to the characters total cluelessness of their actual situation and the complete ridiculousness (cluelessness) of the, at-the-time, real government survival instructions such as... "painting your house white" in order to survive a nuclear blast.

[–] j-c-s-f-akkerman 13 years ago

My parents kept a leaflet from the mid '50's that cheerfully announced that if a hydrogen bomb was dropped on your house you probably won't survive. That word: "probably".

Fact is of course that if a bombed dropped you'd be better of directly under it, as you wouldn't have to suffer a slow and lingering death from radiation sickness.

As for the idiocy of the characters, today there are still loads of people who have next to no clue as to why there was a war in Iraq, who are the "coalition of the willing" or can even point out Iraq on the map.

[–] skipton345 13 years ago

Who cares, this isn't a moot court. The characters are incidental to the theme, that of nuclear war, a possiblility that felt very real in the early 80s. Dissecting the characters naivete and plot holes is to miss the point entirely and I'd venture a guess that Briggs never intended them to be entirely realistic portrayals.

[–] arkayenether 7 years ago

1: The film is set in the 1980's.

I doubt I'm going to get an answer to a seven year old post, but does anyone know if this is true or not? Does the movie actually give a concrete time setting? It could've just as easily been the near future. People didn't think the Soviet Union wouldn't be present in the 2000s during the Cold War.

I thought I could paint it red, but I couldn't find enough goats.

[–] hallogallo 7 years ago

Doesn't need to give a concrete date as simple maths regarding historical dates, UK male retirement age and apparent age of the couple place the movie and book during the early to mid 80's. If we're being generous, especially considering their physical appearance in flashbacks we could say 1992 at the very latest.

Who's driving this plane? Stan Butler?

[–] arkayenether 7 years ago

I went back and watched it again (I don't think I can do that again). There's no time given from what I saw.

On a side note, I also ran into another equally depressing movie The Plague Dogs in the related videos section -_- ugh...

I thought I could paint it red, but I couldn't find enough goats.

[–] hallogallo 7 years ago

Yes but you have to take into account the fact Jim served in World War 2 and was also retired. These facts place it in the early to mid 80's, at an absolute stretch 1992 at the very latest.

Who's driving this plane? Stan Butler?

[–] inforetalia 14 years ago

Fair comment. But keep in mind that Jim only began confusing Russians for Germans after the attack, as his mind becomes more addled by shock and radiation sickness.

[–] CorpseCandle 14 years ago

Hilda was he only one who confussed Russians for Germans before the bomb dropped and Jim corrected her. His mind was falling apart after the bomb was dropped,I always took the phone with their son as chilling because it seemed he was hysterical rather than not believing a nuclear war would happen.

[–] vampiremeep 14 years ago

The Protect and Survive leaflet mentioned in the film wasn't published until mid-1980 - I remember being scared witless by it as a nine-year-old. So the film must have been set after that time.

I haven't seen WTWB for a long time, so I can't say whether anything else in the film dates it more specifically.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rosarypliers 12 years ago

The movie came out in the mid 80s, but maybe it is set in the then-future? This would explain how Hilda and Jim could have been children during WWII.

[–] lastword42 11 years ago

Let's not forget, this movie is based on a graphic novel that was published in 1982. I do, however, agree with your assertion that it could have been set in the near future. This would help with the age discrepancy, at least.

I am the One, True Brian. All other Brians are false. Kneel before Brian.

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]