Dunkirk (forthcoming in 2017)

Well made movie that tries hard to cover a monumental moment in history by focusing on three aspects of Dunkirk.

Not a character study like SPR at all. Doesn't try to be.

Lots of dramatic tension without a lot of dialogue, which may puzzle some viewers.

It's also helpful to be aware of some of the historical background to appreciate some of the film's nuances.

I really liked the aerial sequences and the fact that the director chose to be true to some historical details (flight of Spitfires flying in vic formation instead of finger-four, which they used later in the war.) Also the scene where they show the French soldiers holding the line so the Brits can be evacuated.

Enjoyed listening to Michael Caine as the radio fighter controller. He played a young Spitfire pilot in the 1970-era film Battle of Britain.

The actors are great, especially Mark Rylance.

Definitely worth seeing, but not a date movie!

 

Harry Styles ?
He may draw the youngsters in.
A bygone era it would have been Half A Sixpence ~Tommy Steele.

 

Watched it in 70mm (Apparently only 70mm theater showing it in Southern AZ). Unfortunately not IMAX 70mm but that's ok. I'm still digesting it, but I think it's Christopher Nolan's masterpiece for sure, and probably the best film of the year. The narrative approach of the film is brilliantly reflective of the event. Expression and emotion drive the plot rather than dialogue.

I love it and it's sure to take a place on the mantle of best war films.

 

I agree what the WSJ said: How can you tell the story of Dunkirk without really having Winston Churchill in the film.....I think he's a big part of the story
The Dumbing Down of ‘Dunkirk’

BTW I wouldn't call it dumbing down. The films tries to be existential.

 

Dunkirk is a metaphor for the life of Churchill. Those who dare lose, blunder, downfall, persist, struggle, and redeem; for he who dares wins. Repeat. This film is a metaphor for Churchill's entire private and public life since his pre WW1 colonial days to his Elizabethan era political career.

How can any of the survivors tell the story of Dunkirk, since none of them concurrently saw Mr. Churchill on the beach? Why does the audience need to see Churchill and not just hear his words the same way that the returning troops did? That criticism makes no sense. It's a film about the triumph of the will. It's as effective as a propaganda piece as Triumph of the Will.

The director goes to great lengths not to centralize any character beside the old man civilian volunteer, and he is centralized only because he connects the "War to end all wars" with the battle to begin THE War. The character acts as a conduit through time (this war is really only a continuation of the last) but also a conduit through space as he intersects every point of physical geography. It is not a film about the political drama of organizing the rescue. It speaks to the universal will to persevere; centralizing Churchill at the expense of the mass of humanity on the beach would conflict with the central idea of the film.

 

Saw Dunkirk yesterday at Mall of Georgia 70mm IMAX theater. (Massive screen and auditorium, I always forget how big the real IMAX screens really were!) I avoided looking at any reviews or comments about the film before seeing it. A few thoughts...

Beautiful cinematography and location shooting. My jaw dropped with the opening sequence and many of the sequences involving the Spitfires. Acting and overall plot were nothing too unique, although I did not find the acting bad or distracting. I did not feel any emotional connection to the characters, unfortunately.

My biggest criticism would be the soundtrack. I realize this was an IMAX experience and sound should bring you in but the score and droning low frequency "noise / rattle / clock ticking" was just too much and took away from the drama and impact of what was being conveyed on screen. Sometimes silence speaks loudly. In my estimation more than 30-45 minutes of Dunkirk are just overblown with this drone-style emotionally manipulating score. Are we supposed to feel exhausted from the score? Is this to try to replicate what the men felt? If so, it did not work for me - I just wanted a few moments of silence. I plugged my ears at a few points because it was just too loud. Louder than a lot of the explosions and gunshots in the film. Or maybe I'm just getting old, hahaha.

It would be very interesting to see the film again with a different score or even no score at all. I would feel a lot differently about it!

 

How did all of the people with boats know to go rescue them? Because of a radio speech Churchill gave that inspired them to do it. It would have taken about 1 minute of screentime to do that.
And the whole point of Dunkirk is that Churchill inspired his countrymen.....that is what saved the Island from the Nazis.

 

OK, sure. As a career officer he could be in his early 30s when WWI broke out. Aren't most combat soldiers 18-21?

 

It's not a plot driven film by design. If the audience goes into the film lacking the historical background to know this, they are going to have an awful lot of more pertinent unanswered questions and confusion throughout the entire film. How did the entire British Expeditionary Force end up trapped on a single beach? How is the perimeter of the beach protected? What's going on with the rest of France anyway? If the panzers aren't sent to sweep up the troops, why aren't they shelled or bombed as they are clustered in dense groups on the beachhead? One line of dialogue is devoted to "the infantry is in no rush to attack as they can just bomb us at their leisure" or something to that effect yet we see about 4 German dive-bombers in the entire film at a time in the war when the Luftwaffe was at its peak strength and the German military was almost entirely concentrated in eastern France.

The point of the Spirit of Dunkirk is not that Churchill's silver tongue launched ten thousand ships to save the British Army, it's the solidarity of the British people in times of adversity. The film reinforces the motif of solidarity by placing very little emphasis on characterization. Attributing the rescue (fairly or unfairly) to Churchill wouldn't fit thematically with Churchill's most famous speech that was read at the end of the film, attributing the origin of the fighting spirit of Dunkirk to one individual rather than something inherit in the British peoples.

 

Very interesting article in The Hollywood Reporter about Nolan's use of Imax:
How 'Dunkirk' Took Imax Cameras Where They'd Never Gone Before

 

Churchill's speech came at the end of the evacuation, so it would have been kind of difficult for it to spur the event. As I understand it, the boats were requisitioned by the Admiralty, with the process starting a couple of weeks in advance. The Admiralty then initiated the Go command on the 26th/27th. Rylance's character references this when he sees the Admiralty people on the dock. (Yet another subtle character trait: rather then let someone else be responsible, he takes matters into his own hands.) In fact, very few vessels were piloted by their owners; most were under the command of navy personnel.

John K.

 

Box Office: ‘Dunkirk’ Conquers Weekend With $50.5 Million, ‘Valerian’ Flops

From Variety:
But let’s start with the good. Christopher Nolan’s World War II film from Warner Bros. is flying past earlier projections to a $50.5 million opening weekend from 3,720 locations. $11.7 million of that total came from Imax screens alone — that’s 23% of the total market share from 402 locations. That $50.5 million number is a good one considering it is expected to have a large multiple, and continue to play well through August. The movie’s production budget was reportedly just under $100 million, although earlier reports speculated that it was much higher.

 

Great read, thanks for sharing!

 

I just returned from an IMAX 70 screening in King of Prussia. Whew. My 14 year old son said It was an entire movie of impending dread.

To me it was an extended version of the wave planet from Interstellar. The sound was amazing.

I counted 16 surround speakers plus two additional IMAX arrays in the rear corners. I don't know what was behind the screen. I'm not sure what Atmos could add.

The print had a few flaws, but that's film.

 

Just got back from seeing it. It's in my top three movies of the year and easily my favorite Nolan film. (As I said before, I was not a Nolan fan before this.)

Addressing some of the complaints I've read here and elsewhere: (1) The sound didn't bother me and I didn't find it too loud (I didn't see it in IMAX); (2) while we don't get to know the main characters in the traditional style, we learn all we need to care about them-- or at least I did; and (3) the story would have made more sense told chronologically, but then...

Spoiler

...the "air" portion wouldn't have started until, what, the last 20 minutes of the movie? I'd rather have it this way, with all participants getting equal time throughout.

All in all, a powerhouse cinematic experience -- and man it went by fast!

 

We're most of the individual events/characters fictional?
It seems a bit implausible that Hardy's character would do what he did at the end?
I suppose every film needs a hero.

 

I saw it at a morning matinee today in a Dolby ATMOS Superscreen theater. There were only five other people in the theater and I sat right in the middle. The sound was good; it never got so loud that I felt the urge to stick my fingers in my ears. It's a superbly constructed film with stunning cinematography. I'm going to have to see it again before I decide if it's a four or five-star film.

Spoiler

The tension that became immediately palpable and continued throughout the film was survival vs. duty (to fight and sacrifice), on an individual scale and large scale, both selfish and noble.

 

As a critic I read put it, it's "a fictional story set amid real events."

 

Yeah I guess I got it mixed up.

 

My sound experience must have been an individual preference thing... I really had no complaints about the levels of the actual effects, (it was as close to levels of real gunfire as I've heard in any theater experience) - just the soundtrack / droning bass "noise". It overwhelmed portions of the viewing for me! I've been going to loud concerts since 14 or 15 and started using earplugs recently... maybe I'll adapt them to movies, too, haha.

 

The score being used to that effect was most certainly noticeable. I think it generally achieves the desired goal.

 

I noted the same thing earlier in the thread--the continuous drone seemed as if the theater had the sound mix turned up incorrectly, but as more people comment it appears this is the intent.

John K.

 

I am thinking that is correct. For me it just overwhelmed the content, dialogue, and scenery.

 

Yikes- that sounds awful.