User Reviews

Solid historical drama. Dialogue driven, yet the weight of the situation is felt. The weather has never been more interesting. Good, not great.

Complete crap for a "modern audience." A total disgrace to **** (Eisenhower), as portrayed by Brendan Fraser, is the ultimate miscast of the decade. Countless books have been written about Eisenhower, universally describing him as an absolutely steely, charismatic leader with extraordinary endurance. But in the best traditions of the corporate scum catering to the "modern audience," this film is entirely busy destroying those historical images. Here, Ike is reduced to an emotionally unstable jerk, tormented by fear. Modern Hollywood is simply physically incapable of portraying a strong, competent male figure anymore. A leader must necessarily be written as an emotionally vulnerable snot on the verge of hysteria, an inferiority complex, and a panic attack. And yes, he literally CRIES. It's an absolute joke.

I'm sorry, this is an anecdote, at best, for a WWII story and not capable of sustaining a feature film. D-Day was delayed 1 day, wowowowow.

Pressure is good movie. The story focus on a very specific event. The acting is just superb. The 3-4 mains actors are amazing. The period recreation is quite good, although you can see some CGI with cities destruction. Just to be clear the movie focus on the meteorologist, not on the General (only in some parts). Good music and sounds. I give it 80%. It's worth at least the watch for the actors and the kinds of pressure that comes with life/death decisions.

There are not many good WWII movies anymore. However, every couple of years, someone has a story to tell about an important historical event from WWII. This year, the story is "Pressure." A well-made film about the weather conditions potentially affecting the D-Day landing. "Pressure" isn't going to win a lot of awards, but for war buffs like me who love good war films, it will do. 8 out of 10.

Pressure might be the best film ever made about a weather report, which also happened to be the most crucial one in history. Andrew Scott further solidifies his case as a leading man with another intriguing performance that highlights his soft-spoken, introspective qualities. Recommended. detroitcineaste

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This film is based on true events that shaped the Allied Forces invasion on D-Day. Just 72 hours before that event, General Dwight D. Eisenhower (Brendan Fraser) called in a noted British meteorologist (Andrew Scott) the determine the best day for the invasion. If he’s wrong, they’ll potentially lose World War II to the ****. Now that’s pressure! Scott turns in a deeply nuanced performance, as he grapples with the facts and conflicting opinions, while Fraser comes across gruff and demanding. The writing and direction play out in the traditional mode with solid dialogue, short scenes and predictable interactions. While there’s never much tension, the film is an interesting drama about a little known factor that influenced the future of the world.

This movie is wonderfully acted. Great historical importance and so nice to see a character driven movie which seems to be rare these days GREAT performance by Brendan Fraser Everyone involved in this movie should be proud how turned out

Weather is something that affects us all, though it’s also something to which most of us pay little attention unless there are potential or actual consequences at stake; then they often take on paramount importance. The impact can be somewhat ameliorated with an accurate forecast, but that’s often problematic, even with today’s advanced technology. So it can be hard to fathom what it might have been like to predict the weather without it, as was the case in the 1940s, when meteorology was just beginning to come into its own as an accepted science. Such was the case in June 1944, when Allied Forces in Europe were planning the D-Day invasion of France’s Normandy coast, the largest contingent of air, ground and water forces ever assembled, and the subject of the latest offering from writer-director Andrew Maras. Given the complexity of the operation, the lead organizer of the attack, Gen. Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower (Brendan Fraser), wanted an accurate weather forecast – one that provided “certainty” – for the time frame of its implementation (weather in Europe in late spring could be highly unpredictable, with a mix of both pleasant and exceedingly stormy patterns). If contending with that weren’t enough, Allied Forces also had to deal with the intricate logistics of the campaign and keeping it under wraps from German forces that might be more than ready for its launch. The pressure for success was great, too, in the wake of a disastrous dress rehearsal that took place several months earlier. So, to get the result he wanted, Ike recruited soft-spoken British meteorologist Capt. James Stagg (Andrew Scott), regarded as the best in the business. However, Stagg’s cautionary approach to forecasting did not sit well with Eisenhower, especially since it ran counter to the work of resident, long-trusted weatherman Irving Krick (Chris Messina), whose views often clashed with his more conservative British counterpart. Thus began the battle for whose forecast would ultimately prevail, with both the Supreme Commander and his British colleague, Gen. Bernard “Monty” Montgomery (Damian Lewis), breathing down their necks. Who would prove correct (and how)? More importantly, though, would D-Day take place on its scheduled date of June 5, or would it have to wait until the next projected favorable window of opportunity, June 18? Much was thus riding on this go/no go decision, and it all appeared to come down to what was regarded as a seemingly inconsequential consideration. To be sure, this aspect of the D-Day story was undoubtedly important and not particularly well known until recently, yet its role was positively undeniable, given its turning point nature to the outcome of World War II. And that’s made abundantly clear through this war film with a twist. The film presents a clear chronicle of the scenario, with fine period piece production values, well-staged battle sequences, and capable performances across the board, including those already noted, along with Kerry Condon as Eisenhower’s chief aide. However, the picture tends to become repetitive in explaining how events unfolded. What’s more, it has an aura of somewhat inflated self-importance about its story, attempting to lead viewers to believe that its narrative is more epic than it actually is (no disrespect intended). I essentially see this as a well-made TV movie that doesn’t quite have the degree of impact that a theatrical release should have. Admittedly, this offering is probably best seen on the big screen, though don’t be disappointed if it doesn’t quite live up to grander expectations. In light of that, then, unless one has a sense of urgency to see “Pressure,” waiting for it to come to streaming may ultimately be the best option.