If the 300,000 people who were massacred in Nanjing had a bicycle...

Filiberto 2022-03-06 08:02:05

1

German troops invaded Denmark in 1940, only to encounter the worst of the worst equipped - a bicycle company.

Of course we wonder, is this a joke?

Although it was boring after a minute and a half of assembling the bike, he also engaged in a German fake attack and killed him. Everyone thought the attack had stopped, but in fact the Danish government had surrendered a few hours ago, and they didn't know that they had carried out a senseless resistance.

But in the end, the noble hand was raised, and this shot cannot be forgotten.

The Germans calmly told them that this sacrifice was pointless. In the final interview, the seniors also recalled the feeling of loneliness, without a loved one by your side.

So this movie is not useless.

2

If the 300,000 people who were massacred in Nanjing had a bicycle.

I don't think it would be so ugly to die.

, more than 100,000 professional soldiers were slaughtered by the river, and it was a mass slaughter, which is really shameful.

A man would rather die standing than live on his knees. As long as the Chinese are a little bit bloody, you will definitely not suffer that kind of pain. The Chinese in those days were really pathetic.

The Chinese are still bloodless.

When the knife rests on the neck, even chickens and ducks have to struggle.

View more about April 9th reviews

Extended Reading
  • Ayla 2022-04-19 09:03:06

    It's embarrassing to make a movie on this subject. The story didn't have much ups and downs, and it really didn't have to. After all, the actual fighting time was not as long as the filming time of this movie. Germany and Denmark have the same text and the same species, and did not see much reflection on the war. It can be regarded as a gift film to comfort himself. After all, it is considered to have fired two shots. As a movie, only the part where the captain led his team to surrender at the end is a bit interesting.

  • Ashleigh 2022-04-22 07:01:54

    So against aggression? . . . .