Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by townsend, Aug 6, 2016.
I think from a young persons perspective, under 25 .,there will be some empathy for the film.
Watched a blu-ray last night. Yes, there probably should have had a drone-style sweep of the beach and channel to give a sense of the scale of the event. And I usually hate drone sweeps!
My biggest complaint was that it was a relatively bloodless account. A bomb would drop on the beach and soldiers would be killed or left unharmed, when it would seem there would be plenty of wounded afterwards.
Easily the best film I've seen all year!
I think people misunderstood what the film was, or took their preconceptions of what they wanted it to be, into cinemas with them.
I, almost literally, spent the entire length of the film holding my breath, and my wife said the same thing, with no prompting from me whatsoever.
There were at least 6 people throughout the film's narrative that I 'cared' about, and that's with virtually no character development or a reason to care, other than basic human nature.
I thought it was a great film. My favorite since Hell or High Water
i probably read and heard too much about 'dunkirk' and thus my expectations were through the roof.
i found it to be a very good film, but not the majestic blockbuster that it has been made out to be.
I missed the cinema viewing and only viewed it the other day at home. I thought it was exceptional from start to finish. Overall, a wonderful gripping, multi faceted, intense experience.
My only gripe, albeit a serious gripe, was that the storytelling was too rushed. All of sudden the queues had disappeared and the film was over, a fat man singing about "never surrender" thrown in for a good measure of finality. I could easy have watched this epic for another hour, I felt shortchanged. 'twas but a mini epic
I can't take any war film seriously when all the actors are clean-shaven w/neat sideburn and no stubble in every scene.
But that's "Hollywood!"
I feel the same way, but sometimes one just has to (try) look the other way about details that don't make sense so you can enjoy a good film.
But, I understand that sometimes strong inaccuracies can ruin an otherwise great movie, like crappy endings!
Search for historic images of troops at Dunkirk and you see plenty of clean shaven soldiers. I imagine it's because many are so young that they'd barely started growing bumfluff, but also because shaving regularly in even difficult circumstances was a matter of discipline. Look at the young lads in these images from the Dunkirk rescue:
More at this link: Dunkirk evacuation: Photos of 1940 rescue of Allied troops from beaches of northern France
I watched it a couple of days ago with my family and we all thought it was a fine movie. I must admit I was a little puzzled at first with the lack of planes, ships, and men on the beaches, but it came to me that the movie wasn't supposed to be some grand scale epic war movie. Instead, it went for more of a scaled down version and, in a sense, was served better by that because the storyline was easier to follow and not as confusing as some larger than life movies with multi-faceted plot lines, cuts, and whatever else. Even so, my wife and daughter had trouble keeping track of what was going on with the pilots, the boats, and who was who so I had to keep explaining things to them even though, myself, had not seen it before.
I thought it was quite well done and captured the spirit of the battle even if it didn't represent it in full scale. It was still a gripping, intense movie that accurately (I assume) depicted the evacuation and the sacrifice that was made by the English citizens to help get their soldiers back home. Dunkirk has always been a fascinating topic for me as I love reading about World War II. I think Nolan did an excellent job.
Separate names with a comma.