ChikPapa Very disappointed :(

Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

YouHeart I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

shakercoola A morale boosting wartime film and an epitome of the British stiff upper lip. The British destroyer might well have been a rival to its seamans' wartime sweethearts, but it also puts it plainly that they do it all for what lies back in Blighty. It's stagey, jaunty heroism of Coward, and sentimentality, and old fashioned outlook doesn't diminish the satisying drama. But for some key sequences, the overall direction credit goes to film editor and debut director David Lean.

Prismark10 Noel Coward was a toff, one of those elitists who believed they were born to rule and lord it over the lower classes.In his biography Coward was rather upset with the Labour landslide of 1945, not a surprise. It would had hurt him to see the working classes get a taste of power but it also shows how he fundamentally failed to understand the attitude of the British people after all they had endured through the second world war.This is a flag waving propaganda film that Coward co-directed with David Lean. Coward's portrayal of Captain Kinross, commander of the destroyer HMS Torrin is based on the experiences of Lord Mountbatten on the HMS Kelly. Mountbatten was another elitist toff who after the war, royally messed up as the last viceroy of India.In Which We Serve tells the story of several crew members of the Torrin's personal lives in flashback after it has been sunk in the Mediterranean. It is meant to show steely resolve, the stiff upper lip from both the crew and their families. Only Richard Attenborough's cowardly sailor lets the side down.It is a stiff and starch film but rather unsentimental. The film was critically lauded and regarded as a classic but now looks aged and of its era. The story is too thin and Coward, who always loved a sailor was a stiff actor.

MattyGibbs I wasn't expecting much from this film and the slow start didn't heighten my expectations. However I stuck with it and am glad I did. It builds gradually and eventually becomes incredibly absorbing. It follows the survivors of a sunken warship as they float in the sea waiting to be rescued. Using flashbacks it shows their lives back home and on the ship before it sank. The stories are often mundane but show how life must have been at this tumultuous time in history. It boasts a strong cast featuring John Mills, Noel Coward and Celia Johnson who all bring life to the script. There are a number of very moving scenes as the true horror of the war is bought alive. As this was filmed whilst the war was still in full flow I can only imagine how the audience at the time, many of whom would have had family fighting abroad, must have felt. This is an unusual war film in that it shows little fighting but the stories of courage and determination more than make up for this. One of the best war films I have seen, Highly recommended.

secondtake In Which We Serve (1942)A curiously different and really moving film about World War II, directed by two top British talents, Noel Coward and David Lean. It's filmed in the thick of the actual naval war and so might be unofficially called a propaganda film. (Though not made by the government, there was a lot of influence and assistance.). It clearly has a sense of presenting the British war effort at its best. But it's also complicated, filled with sadness alongside heroism and, perhaps most of all, selflessness. Both by soldiers and by their women left behind. The war in 1942 was not looking great for the Brits.Coward co-directs but also is the leading man, and he's an established actor from both film and stage at this point. Lean, whose huge career as a director is all ahead of him, is in charge of the action sequences and this is his first attempt at directing--for which he won awards. If there is a sentimental side to some of the Coward directed scenes it's partly because of when it was shot. Try to imagine the audience suffering from bombings and having their loved ones in battle. We see it now with very different eyes.In fact, it is hard to imagine how a wife or mother could watch this at all. The basic structure is that the ship goes out to sea with a bunch of men and then disaster strikes, and the rest of the movie is a series of flashbacks to the home lives of the men, and to the women who are dreading seeing their men go off to sea. It's actually about the very sadness of the people sitting in the audience.The filming is rather different between the two directors. Coward understands a traditional kind of culture well, with conversation and interpersonal nuance. Lean captures a more direct emotional energy, and lots of vivid action. Normally two directors means problems, but here it's divided naturally.Eventually the movie wears its formula, back and forth with flashbacks, pretty hard. But it's so well done you don't much mind. An emotional, finely seen movie, and surprisingly valid even now.