The Ministry Of Ungentlemanly Warfare (2024) Review


OPERATION POSTMASTER IS A GO!


 

Director Guy Ritchie definitely has a unique style of his own when directing theatrical feature films; a testament to his ability as a director for adding flavor and presenting each of his movies into a new light. In 1998, Ritchie made his directorial debut film with the release of the crime comedy Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels, which propelled director forward with several other noteworthy releases such as 2000’s crime comedy Snatch, and the crime thrillers Revolver in 2005 and RocknRolla in 2008. Ritchie made the jump from British crime dramas to big-budgeted Hollywood tentpoles with the release of 2009’s period piece mystery / action film Sherlock Holmes and its sequel 2011 Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows as well as 2017’s fantasy adventure King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. Ritchie would then venture outside into other directorial avenues and genres, including the 2015 spy remake of The Man from U.N.C.L.E. and the family film variety with Disney’s live-action remake of Aladdin in 2019, before returning to his more traditional roots of British crime drama with the release of The Gentlemen in 2020 as well as his 2021 action thriller release Wrath of Man. Now, following the release of his two 2023 films (Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre and Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant), director Guy Ritchie and Lionsgate / MGM Studios releases the wartime action-comedy film titled The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. Does this movie find Ritchie’s tones and body of work to be engaging within this WWII setting or is it a messy endeavor that the feature itself can’t make heads or tails of its own narrative?

THE STORY


The year is 1941, England’s prime minister, Winston Churchill (Rory Kinnear), searches for a way shatter Germany’s monopolizing war machine momentum as Hitler’s Nazi regime continues to spill all across Europe. The PM looks for answer from Brigadier Gubbins “M” (Cary Elwes) and Ian Fleming (Freddie Fox) for assistance on such matters, with the pair of men coming up with a secret “off the books” mission involving one Gus March-Philipps (Henry Cavill), a dangerous incarcerated man who knows how to get things done by unconventional ways and means. The task for the mission is the sinking of a Nazi supply ship capable of servicing dangerous U-boats in the Atlantic, giving England a chance to receive shipments undisturbed in the open waters from their allies. Gus accepts the mission, joined by fellow Nazi-haters such as Anders Lassen (Alan Ritchson), Freddy Alvarez (Henry Golding), Henry Hayes (Hero Fiennes Tiffin), and Geoffery Appleyard (Alex Pettyfer) on a fishing boat as they navigate the seas towards their destination of Fernando Po, an island of Equatorial Guinea. Meanwhile, M sends another team head of Gus’s group to make preparations, with Richard Heron Babs Olusanmokum) and Majorie Stewart (Eiza Gonzalez) to gather intel on a Nazi occupied port, which is being overseeing by Nazi SS commander, Heinrich Luhr (Til Schweiger). Trying to outmaneuver enemies at sea and distracting enemies on land, the two groups pursue their endgame goals of mission Operation Postmaster, with the spies trying to remain one step ahead of the Nazis.

THE GOOD / THE BAD


Borrowing my words from my review of Wrath of Man…. Guy Ritchie. While he’s not a household director name like Stephen Spielberg, Christopher Nolan, Clint Eastwood, or Francis Ford Coppola, Ritchie’s work does speak for himself, with a mostly good track record of features to back that up. Of course, his earlier works are perhaps some of his best; providing some a good British crime drama, with some of my favorites being Snatch and RocknRolla. Of course, I absolutely loved the two Sherlock Holmes movies, with Ritchie (along with actors Robert Downey Jr. and Judy Law) bringing their charisma and unique styles to sort of “breathe new life” into Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s works. Additionally, I loved his iteration of The Man from U.N.C.L.E. I know that film faced mixed reviews and wasn’t a huge box office success, but it was very enjoyable and entertaining, especially with Cavill, Hammer, and Vikander in their respective character roles. Sadly, I wasn’t too impressed with Ritchie’s past three endeavors as I found King Arthur: Legend of the Sword to be too haphazardly mess and thin, his live-action remake of Aladdin was fun, but “meh” in a lot of parts and struggle in a few areas, and his return to British crime drama in The Gentlemen was a be too convoluted and underwhelming. Although, I did like the cast in the movie As for Wrath of Man, I really liked it, especially Statham in the lead role as well as the revenge crime drama angle, which all comes together in a brilliant third act conclusion. I did miss out on seeing Ritchie’s two 2023 release (i.e. Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre and Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant), so I don’t have much of an opinion on them. Although, I do want to see them one day. Overall, I think Ritchie definitely has a knack for directing and, while some of his releases can be “hit or miss”, I do look forward to seeing where his several next films will take him.

This brings me back to talking about The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare, a 2024 action-comedy film and the latest film to be release by director Guy Ritchie. As mentioned above, I did miss out seeing Ritchie’s two 2023 films, so I was quite excited to see what the director had in store, especially after last seeing Wrath of Man. I remember hearing a few tidbits here and there about his 2024 film, which would a be set during WWII and was going to be starring actor Henry Cavill in the main lead. Soon enough, the film’s marketing campaign began to ramp up and the film’s movie trailer and TV spots began to appear both online and in theaters. I remember seeing it trailer for the movie, and it did catch my attention. Of course, the cast was immediate thing, especially with the likes of Cavill headlining the feature as well as Alan Ritchson (been a fan of the new Reacher series). I did like how it was going to be (presumably) a more lighthearted tone of the movie that was set within the WWII time period and wasn’t going to overtly gravitas piece, with the feature offering up more comedic bits in the preview. The previews sort of reminded me of Inglorious Basterds, another WWII film that offered more humorous pieces into its drama and action overtones. However, as many know, movie trailers can be deceiving, and the final product could’ve been something completely different. Still, the movie’s marketing campaign got me interested in seeing the movie when it was scheduled to be released on April 19th, 2024. I did see it during its opening weekend, but (alas) this particular movie sort of felt through the cracks of getting my review written up for it. So, after several months and getting my work schedule cleared out, I am finally ready to share what I thought of this film. And what did I think of it? Well, I liked it. Despite some slow pacing and some storytelling and characterizations that could’ve been ironed out further, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare is a fun and engaging wartime action / comedy picture that speaks strongly when it’s sharing its espionage innerworkings, dialogue exchanges, and violent actions. It does have some flaws within its undertaking, which does hold the feature back from reaching greatness, but the overall enjoyment and entertainment value for this movie still remains on good terms….and that’s a good thing.

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare (2024) Review

As stated, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare is directed by Guy Ritchie and certainly brings the right amount of cinematic integrity and classiness towards the proceedings. For starters, Ritchie, despite making a WWII film, doesn’t make the picture feel drab, dreary, and melancholy. Yes, there is sense of danger and urgency of executing Operation Postmaster correctly and in a timely manner, especially with several moving parts to it all, but it’s presented in a way that’s still fun and engaging to watch, with more peppered lighthearted moments. Thus, the comedy angle for the feature comes into play and deserves some recognition, with Ritchie staging such moments of levity in a very well-timed precision and references to both “the sign of the times” and cultural warfare. There is some ramblings that might come off as a bit “drier”, especially with British / European humor thrown into the mix, but it all works for the better and adds that layer of authenticity to the proceedings. Perhaps the most interesting aspect that Ritchie has to offer with Ungentlemanly Warfare is in the actual story being told. Like many out there, I was quite in the dark about what the movie was going to be about or even what the actual story behind Operation Postmaster and the real-world significance that the mission played a part in the allied efforts in WWII. Being a fan of history, I was quite intrigued by this setup premise and enjoyed what the narrative had to offer within its espionage and wartime mission structure planning. Plus, this was somewhat of an unknown tale from WWII and, while I do love hearing (or visually seeing) presentations of stuff battles like D-day, Pearl Harbor, Midway, Bastogne, and Stalingrad, it’s nice (and almost refreshing) to hear of a new operation mission from second world war time period. Of course, I probably do know that Ritchie (and the writers) presumably took some creative liberties when presenting Operation Postmaster in this movie, but still the same message rings true in what these men and women did for allied forces by participating in this mission and the appreciation is felt for these unsung heroes.

The writing for the movie is also pretty good or rather the written dialogue is what I am talking about. The various dialogue exchanges throughout the narrative are spot on and solid, filled with a plethora of quippy lines, plotting espionage maneuverings, and meticulous stratagems that help build upon many of the mission-based structure and interactions between various characters. It’s still very much a wartime feature, with Ritchie always staging plenty to see and do within the movie’s framing as well as many of the main characters feeling “the pressure” of completing this mission and repercussions what it will means for the war if they should fail. Indeed, a sense of urgency of getting their respective parts done (and done right) is certainly felt in the movie as Ritchie positioned events accordingly. In truth, Ritchie does do a good job in managing everything the correct way. I think some are technically better than others in the plot, but there is a clear sign of everything Gentlemanly Warfare has a purpose, and everything is working in tandem towards an ultimate end goal. Thus, the movie does have a focused narrative, and I think that’s a good thing from a director’s point of view.

If I had to describe what Gentlemanly Warfare was like to someone, I would say it’s a cross between Quentin Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds and one of those classic spaghetti westerns that were infamously known throughout the heydays of the western genre. One particular spaghetti western feature comes to mind, but something that is, more or less, a collective sum of those types of films. Yes, in making the comparing to Inglorious Basterds, the illusion are quite real and noticeable, which does sometimes feel like a “double edge sword” in some incidents (more on that below), but, for the positives, this means that the movie showcases a lot of brutal violence in some of its various action sequences. As is the customary thing in these wartime stories, killing Nazis is somewhat enjoyable entertainment, with Ritchie staging such events with such joyful glee that it comes off as a bit comical at times. Of course, that was most likely “by design”, with Ritchie playing up those acts of violence with effective glee and brutal action fun throughout. There isn’t as much as I would’ve liked to see and some of the action is a more “grounded”, but what’s presented definitely works and provides plenty of entertainment of seeing March-Phillips and his team take down various Nazi soldiers in a variety of ways, which is fun unto itself.  The spaghetti western aspect comes from the film’s presentation aspect, which I will go into further detail below, but will say that I greatly enjoyed this. Ritchie gives the picture that cheeky “wild west” feeling and, through the usage of its cinematic nuances, gives the feature the necessary push of feeling like spaghetti western vibe. Again, it’s something that I did not expect, but I do welcome such an idea and flourishes throughout.

In its presentation, Gentlemanly Warfare is certainly look to be a clean and cut period piece wartime drama that certainly “keeps up appearance” from beginning to end. With the movie set within the WWII time period era, the background setting for the feature needs to match such a wartime depiction and certainly does so within its visual imagery, which is mostly displayed with practical effects of sets, decorations, and costume attires. As mentioned above, the movie’s story is somewhat unique and takes place not in the battle ridden areas across Europe, but rather in the tropical climate-like of Africa in the area surrounding Fernando Po as well as the open water seas of Atlantic. Such visual depictions of a locations that is unfamiliar to the WWII landscape of storytelling is quite the cinematic canvas piece to work with, which is grounded in a believable setting. Thus, the movie’s “behind the scenes” main players, including Martyn John (production design), Rebecca Gillies (set decorations), Loulou Bontemps (costume designs), and the entire art direction team, for their efforts in making the film’s background setting come alive with such realism and detail.

Plus, as I mentioned above, Ritchie, alongside cinematographer Ed Wild, gives the movie unique imagery of being a spaghetti-esque western vibe that flows throughout the entire project and works wonders for the presentation. There is a sense of “old school” visuals of a classic western tale felt throughout the movie, yet also has that cheeky and sometimes cheesy (in a good way) that only a spaghetti western was able to achieve. Such various camera angles, positionings of shots, and just such maneuverings of various dynamics help brings this concept to life. Lastly, the film’s score, which was composed by Christopher Benstead, helps build upon that feeling of a spaghetti western, with a musical composition that hits all the right tones and melodies that feels very much so like a western piece. Of course, there are cineamtic levels Benstead’s music that helped upon the dramatics, but the underscore / undertones of his work is what helps create that spaghetti western feeling….and I love it.

Unfortunately, Gentlemanly Warfare does falter in a few areas where the feature could’ve benefited from some beefier substance and some undertaking / execution notions. How so? Well, for starters, the movie itself wasn’t exactly the most action-packed as it was being promoted to be. Yes, I did like the feature’s action (as mentioned above), but it wasn’t a jammed packed “balls to walls” wartime action flick that the film’s trailers and various marketing campaigns promised it to be. In truth, the movie is more in line with being a spy thriller than an action-war piece, which consists of individuals plotting and planning for a mission, gathering intel, and sabotaging and executing said mission rather than all-out fighting and bashing Nazi heads together. For sure, the movie has those moments, but not as much as what I lead on to believe. Further examination, the movie tries sometimes to be a little bit too much like Quentin Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds, which I did highlight above, that, while that movie made the same engagements of storytelling, was still elevated by some gripping narrative pieces and character interactions. Gentlemanly Warfare, however, can’t sustain that type of momentum character-built scenes and narrative engagement in the way that Tarantino’s film was able to achieve. Thus, you get a rather quasi spy thriller / action piece that struggle on what it wants to be. The tone is there, and setup is consistent, but the execution and overall presentation could’ve used some better handling.

Coinciding with this notion is Ritchie’s direction or rather handling of this particular project. As I mentioned previously, Ritchie’s feature films are a bit of “hit or miss”, with the director having a better grip / idea of what his projects want to be on some endeavors than others. In the case of Gentlemanly Warfare, it’s a bit more positive, but also struggling in a few areas. Perhaps the most noticeable one is in the balance of characters, with the roster of players in the main story being a bit too much for the director to properly balance at times. As stated, the movie’s marketing campaign was a bit misleading, with trailers promoting a more ragtag group of unhinged and cunning individuals killing Nazis during WWII. However, such depictions shares screen time with another storyline thread, with the plot being spilt with another group of individuals on more of “behind enemy lines” of data collecting and espionage work. How is this Ritchie’s fault? Well, it’s because such maneuvering of characters and storylines is a bit of a struggle for the director to pull off correctly, with these two groups of characters fighting over screen time in a slightly improper balance. You (the viewer) basically want to see more March-Philipps group of characters rather than Heron / Stewart’s spy agendas, with Ritchie not given either of them the necessary balance of screen time. Thus, both sides sort of lose focus in a few key areas. It is because of this that the movie sometimes dips in its momentum, which results in several pacing issues and (dare I say) boring at times, especially in the middle portion of the feature. It’s not a total “deal breaker” for me, but it’s something worth noting.

This also falls into the features script, which was penned by Ritchie as well as Paul Tamasy, Eric Johnson, and Arash Amel, with Gentlemanly Warfare needed a little bit more substance in its narrative material. What’s presented works, but such additional explanations of story elements and character screen time would’ve been beneficial to the overall picture. The dialogue is snappy and quippy, which I did like, but some better characterization needed more time to develop and / or to be expanded upon in a better way.

What helps elevate such criticisms can be found with in the film’s cast, which, despite their characterizations at times as well as some limited screen time, do making for a fun and unique collective group of acting talents involved on this project. The cast itself is quite likeable, with several recognizable faces, and the acting, for the most part, is rather great. Yet, I do feel that some could have benefited from more substance within their respective characters. Leading the charge in the movie is actor Henry Cavill, who plays the central protagonist of Gus March-Phillips. Known for his roles in Man of Steel, The Witcher, and The Man from U.N.C.L.E., Cavill certain has the screen presence in whatever project he works on, regardless if he is the main lead or just a supporting player. Thus, while he had majority of his large screen time in movies as Superman the past several years in the DCEU as well as playing Geralt de Riva in the Netflix series adaptation Andrzej Sapkowski’s fantasy novels, it’s nice to see him play a character that is a little bit different, with his portrayal of Gus being one of amusement and stoic British motifs. To be sure, Cavill is easily the best character in the feature and it clearly shows that whenever he’s on-screen. He’s fun, charismatic, and just knows the exact type of tone and dialogue delivery to interject with in a project like this. The best moments in the feature is when he’s interacting with his other band of misfits characters and certainly comes alive in those moments. The sad part (as mentioned above) is that the character is sharing the spotlight with other storylines threads and one only wishes that there was more screentime for Cavill to play with Gus. The character himself is quite straightforward and might be a little bit generic at times, yet still is quite interesting to behold from start to finish. Thus, everything goes hand-in-hand with Gus March Phillips, with Cavill playing the role with infectious delight and pure cinematic fun throughout.

Looking beyond Cavill, Gentlemanly Warfare highlights some of the assembled team members that March-Phillips assembles on his mission, with my personal favorite being the character of Anders Lassen, who is played by actor Alan Ritchson (Reacher and Ordinary Angels). Of these merry band of misfits, Lassen is the most unhinged and humorous one when he squares off against Nazis and he does so with goofy yet brutally glee that’s quite amusing to watch. Ritchson plays this part up quite well in the movie and sure does seem to be having fun playing such a character, which is clearly visible playing on screen. The downside, like Cavill, is the Ritchson’s character sort of gets lost in the story as much as he could’ve been, which is a shame. The same can be said about the remaining players of March-Phillips ragtag team of outcasts, which includes actor Alex Pettyfer (Magic Mike and In Time) as Geoffery Appleyard, actor Henry Golding (Crazy Rich Asians and The Gentlemen) as Freddy Alvarez, and actor Hero Fiennes Tiffin (After and The Woman King) as Henry Hayes. These three characters are delegated to being more supporting players in the feature and aren’t quite as defined as they could’ve been, which is disappointing. However, these acting talent involved of these three certainly helps mask that in a few times, which allows Appleyard, Alvarez, and Hayes to make their screen presence known. Again, like Cavill, it goes hand-in-hand with the rest of the film. Yet, at the same time, I just wish that the movie solely focused on this group, and it would’ve been probably more for the better if Gentlemanly Warfare did so.

In the other group of main characters to follow in the movie is found in the pairing of SOE agents Richard Heron and Marjorie Stewart, who are played by actor Babs Olusanmokun (Wrath of Man and Dune) and actress Eiza Gonzalez (Baby Driver and Godzilla vs. Kong). Both acting talents are terrific in their respective roles, with Olusanmokun playing it cool and suave in Heron’s personality and action, while Gonzalez’s Stewart acts as an alluring temptress to get close to the enemy. Perhaps the only problem is that there story is more missioned base of collecting data and plotting and not as exciting as March-Phillps group of characters. Yes, there are some good dialogue driven moments, but I felt that these scenes that involved the storylines in Fernando Po to be rather slow and where the film’s pacing issues come into play. Still, I did like both Olusanmokun and Gonzalez in their respective characters.

While those two groups of characters act as the main protagonist characters in Gentlemanly Warfare, the film offers a sturdy antagonist in challenge them in the movie in the form of character Heinrich Luhr, the Nazi SS Commanding Officer who is in charge of the German garrison occupying Fernando Po, who is played by actor Til Schweiger (Inglorious Basterds and King Arthur). Personally, I did like Schweiger as Luhr as he has the right type of bravado and demeanor as well as the physical look of a Nazi SS officer. Plus, he certainly knows how to deliver his lines with great ease. The character of Luhr is rather generic at times, with the being the standard German Nazi officer that the main character to outmaneuver, with very little creative writing ingenuity thrown into the mix. It definitely works for what the movie wants to him to be, especially since most of his interactions are centered around Gonzalez’s Stewart and  Olusanmokun’s Heron, but don’t expect him to be something like Christoph Waltz’s Hans Landa from Inglorious Basterds. As a funny side note, it’s amusing that Gentlemanly Warfare got Schweiger to play a part in the movie, especially since he starred in Inglorious Basterds and the obvious cheeky / violence that the film is trying draw similarities from.

Filling out the rest of the cast, includes actor Rory Kinnear (The Diplomat and No Time to Die) as Britan’s prime minister Winston Churchill, actor Cary Elwes (The Princess Bride and Robin Hood: Men in Tights) as Brigadier Colin Gubbins ‘M’, actor Freddie Fox (House of the Dragon and Victor Frankenstein) as Ian Fleming, actor Henrique Zaga (The New Mutants and 13 Reasons Why) as Captain Binea, actor James Wilby (Gosford Park and Howards End) as Viscount Algernon, actor Danny Sapani (The Oxford Murders and Trance) as Kambili Kalu, actor Matthew Hawksley (Floodlights and Murder on the Orient Express) as Sir Percy, actor Simon Paisley Day (Born a King and This England) as Admiral Pound, actor Victor Oshin (I May Destroy You and The Great Escaper) as Olufemi, and actor Alessandro Babalola (Wrath of Man and Top Boy) as Adedayo, which are delegated to supporting character roles throughout the movie. Of course, some of these players have more screen time than others, but all of the acting talent in this grouping do give some great character performances within their limited screen time. Yes, some could’ve been easily expanded upon for some beefier substance within their respective character and / or the story being told.

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare

FINAL THOUGHTS


To help the allied forces, a secretive black op mission (codenamed Operation Postmaster) is undertaking as two teams make their way to collect data and sabotage a Nazi occupied port and vast oil tanker in the movie The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. Director Guy Ritchie’s latest film takes a stab at the wartime efforts of a secretive black ops mission and the vital role it played in WWII. Yet, while telling war drama narrative, still interjects his own personal style of storytelling, with a more action and comedy angle throughout the proceedings, which gives the feature unique identity and personality from start to finish. It does stumble its narrative undertaking a few times, with its spilt story angle feeling disjointed and sluggish at times, and certain areas of the film could’ve added more substance to it, but the feature does find some cinematic province thanks to Ritchie’s direction, some classy and great dialogue, an intriguing plot, fun action, a solid presentation, and a likable cast. Personally, I did like this movie. I definitely agree with many that the movie was sluggish in a few parts and some of the story and characters could’ve been easily expanded upon for a more engaging story to tell, but, as a whole, the movie told a very interesting mission based narrative that many, including myself, didn’t know about and the significance it had on the larger events of WWII. I still think that the movie was promoted / marketing campaign was a bit misleading, but I did enjoy the film’s story, action, and the cast from what they were able to convey in this cinematic presentation of Operation Postmaster. It’s not the best film the Ritchie as produced, but it’s definitely not his worst and resides somewhere in the middle of those two extremes, which might be a good thing. Thus, my recommendation for this movie would be a favorable “rent it” as it does give a good and solid movie to view and engage with its viewers, but maybe as a “one and done” type endeavor. In the end, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare does catch some allured and intrigued within its cheeky characters and brutal action that, while may not be the most revolutionary and mesmerizing as it could’ve been, still manages to give cinematic credence to the tale of what these individuals who played a part in Operation Postmaster.

3.8 Out of 5 (Rent It)

 

The Official Website for The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare Link: HERE

Released On: April 19th, 2024
Reviewed On: January 28th, 2025

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare  is 122 minutes long and is rated R for strong violence throughout and some language



Blog