AWFUL ACTING

I watched the film on telly again today.

I enjoyed it for what it was and is. The actors are largely experienced and highly competent practitioners of the era.

We are used to the slickly polished, massive budget, computer-effects blockbusters of today and must remember that Went The Day Well? is from an era that makes it look like a home movie to the modern generation.

It is far from that. I never tire of seeing it. It captures something of the atmosphere of the English countryside of that time. I was born in a West Country village a year after this film was made and the layers of society that existed well into the 1950s as I grew up come through solidly in the film.

It was obviously a propaganda film, all WW II British films featuring the military were, but it is a rattling good story, replete with red herrings as to who is is one who's side for a fair way into the story.

I liked the idea of a film made in 1942 starting and finishing with a villager (the excellent Mervyn Johns, a jewel of a character actor) narrating the story as if the war had aleady ended and reminding us that we "all know what happened to Hitler."

very bad acting indeed but for the most part its a good movie


I give it a 7

I Worship The Goddess Amber Tamblyn

While it's not an acting problem, a weird thing is why does the German commander suddenly starts to speak with a German accent to the townspeople in the church? Prior to that, he has spoken with a British accent, and can be later seen giving his men orders with the same British accent.

Mrs Collins and Daisy are the worst offenders, then you have a bunch of wisecracking 11-13 year old boys who grow tiresome over the course of the film.

My vote for Mrs. Collins though for the single, awful actor award.

Those of you who say the acting was bad have lost all of your credibility, and I mean completely. I've been in acting, and I have to compliment this group, particularly the actor who so convincingly transformed from kindly officer to evil commandant.

As one poster states, these actors really acted, and aren't modern day zombies just reciting lines for beavis and butthead.

The citizens who take up arms and shoot are depicted as frightened. Yes, sorry to disappoint the modern day beavis and buttheads who have led such sheltered lives, but real life horror makes for real life horrified reactions.

We're used to seeing so called actors get into shooting contests and not show a bit of fear. And most actors who do this actually cringe at the idea that they have to behave this way, because they know it isn't acting, but they also know that if they don't do it, they'll never get another juicy role.

And for that we can blame the producers, casting companies, agents, and directors who only reward dead pan acting. I don't fault the modern day actors.

But one has to admit that people who think these stoic reactions to violence we see in movies since 1965 or so, is "acting", are people who've lived safely in cubicles all their lives, and I'd hate to have to rely on one of them in a disaster.

This film had fine acting. Period.


Lets not bicker about who killed whom...

"This film is on BBC1 later today so I will look forward to seeing the worst bit of acting in the history of cinema (IMHO).

It's the bit in the post office where the german (dressed as a Brit) says something to the old lady. Can't remember what he says but always cringe when this scene occurs (just as I do in Dambusters when that so-called special effect at the end makes me look away from the screen!) "

You sir are a dick! It's not bad acting, it's rather realistic to be honest. I have seen this film countless times and just gets better year after year.
Tom Cruise and Steven Segal that is bad acting my friend.
If you want more proof read the wiki page on it. Actually best not since I doubt you are a person of great taste...stick to your big budget efforts and leave real films to girls like us.


“You’re not the tooth faerie are you?”
“No, she’s real. Don’t be a plank!”

Amusing to see this movie described as having awful acting when in fact it contains some very good and deservedly respected British actors of the period. Yes, the style of acting is not as relaxed as American performers of the time, but they get the message across in an ordinary, low key manner, which is how people in a small English village of the time would have behaved. The scene referred to in the post office, when the jovial and kindly post mistress takes an axe to a German soldier in order to send a phone call to the outside world that the village is under seige is horrifying in its unexpected violence and is a knockout in terms of cinematic skill. (One scene which this viewer has played over and over again to see the unexpected turn the scene takes, from friendly casual banter to the sudden seizing of the axe and the slaughter of the unsuspecting soldier.) This is a great movie of its time and belongs in the canon of respected and worthwhile British movies designed to unite a nation under war, uncertain at the time it was made that it would survive. Anybody who knocks it should be ashamed.

[deleted]