Got to say I really didn’t like this. Has nothing to do with any historical inaccuracies or not, but rather with the jumping back and forth in time. Made it really, really confusing trying to follow what was going on, and then showing the same scene again from a different perspective, but 20 minutes later and after lots of other stuff has happened in between. Reminded me of Flags of Our Fathers in that regard, and like that movie, I really thought the theater had somehow gotten things out of order. And there was no reason to do this. Could have used the exact same shots and just assembled them in chronological order and the movie would have been better, imo.
I liked the effect of the time-jumping. It’s an experimental mode though and not everyone is going to like it. Playing the scenes in chronological order would be a bit like playing Memento in chronological order. The pacing would be off. I think the script is written to be displayed as it is. It would interesting to see the chronological version and check. Probably an option on the blu-ray?
Saw this at the Music Box in Chicago on Friday night. Got absolutely soaked meeting friends for drinks beforehand, and I spent the movie - which was 100% sold out - damp and cold, which may have added to the verisimilitude.
I have mixed feelings about the film. On the one hand, I think it does a lot of stuff very well - it’s visceral, tense, and to my mind captures adequately (if not always 100% accurately) the terrors and triumphs of that particular moment in time. It’s weird to see Kenneth Brannaugh in the Major Exposition role, but I appreciated that they touched on the terrible decisions of the moment - risk more ships to save more troops vs. preserving the ships against an anticipated future invasion.
I thought the whole bit of the soldiers in the abandoned boat was the weakest part of the film, simply because the whole venture seemed so predetermined. “We need to lighten the boat by exactly 170 lbs, which is the weight of an exhausted soldier in what’s left of his gear. No more, no less.” It all felt so contrived. I loved that thread up to that point, though.
The noise of the dive bombers (Stukas, right?) coming in, the massed men on the mole, the cockpit view of WWII dogfighting were all amazing. it’s a good move - like a Saving Private Ryan with even less of the story-telling bits baked in - but not as flawless as I’d hoped.
Yup. The Jericho Trumpet (the noisemaker/airbrake responsible for the distinctive wail) is an underused device in modern war films.
I have similar feelings to the thread—interestingly told but not Nolan’s best work, fast and loose with the details, but evocative of the real situation.
I think that’s normal. I didn’t notice either. It’s because by the time you start caring about this pilot, he’s got the mask on. And by the end you really care about him. And then he takes off the mask and you feel like you’re really seeing him for the first time, even though that might not technically be true.
I’ll second this. The pacing of the story arcs in Dunkirk is dependent upon the chronological structure. Otherwise, for example, Tom Hardy’s Spitfire pilot would only show up in the final minutes of the film, and the pacing of the other threads would be really thrown off as well.
It was a bit tricky to follow the first time through, but on a second viewing, everything fit together nicely. I’m looking forward to a third time this weekend to see what little bits I missed–apparently Cillian Murphey shows up before he was rescued from the stern of the sunken ship? (one of the most striking images I’ve seen in a film recently, by the way…)
Yeah, he does. He’s the one who tells harry styles and friends that they can’t get on the lifeboat because they’ll swamp it. That pretty much confirmed the timelines for me. Although I was 90% sure at that point, as the editing didn’t make sense at all for a linear plot.
I’m not as enamored with the movie as most of you. And it left me wondering just how much damn ammo does a spitfire carry?
And i instantly recognized Tom Hardy, but for the longest time I thought the wingman was Ewan McGregor. Dude sounded exactly like him.
Finally, my eye for anachronisms really bugged out at this movie. Suppose it’s far too much to CG all the post-WW2 architecture out of the French coast. Also, that was a nifty modern train they were on at the end. What upholstery.
The movie purposely uses very little cg (I think to good effect) and most shot they could shoot without cg they did. They used big scale rc planes, for example, and cardboard cutouts instead of cg composting for soldiers on the beaches. Also, shooting on the real location. I think that’s the reason those shots were left as is. The movie feels more interested in a sense of real “presence” rather than real time.
This is an stylistic choice I really appreciated and I can forgive the random creeping anachronism that it introduced.
The lack of CG kind made the scale felt off. Like I guess he only had three Spitfires, so we only saw three Spitfires, even though air battles would have been full of way more planes.
This scene from Atonement really feels like the numbers match the historical record:
Cillian Murphy elbowed Georgie and sent him flying down the stairs. Right across the base of the stairs there’s a gigantic floor to ceiling pipe along the partition there. At the base of the pipe is a closed valve with a giant hex bolt. His head hit that and the bolt punched a hole in his skull.
Saw it Sunday. Thought it was pretty good, mostly in a cinematic/aesthetic sort of way. I noticed the anachronisms too but they didn’t bother me too much, as the film is quite stylized anyhow. My wife, who is not a history buff, knew next to nothing about the context and the film certainly doesn’t tell you much either, though I suppose it’s not terribly important given its micro scale of focus.
All in all, a film I’m glad I saw but which I have zero desire to see again. Pretty much got all I wanted out of it the first time, and don’t think I’d get much out of repeated viewings.
My thoughts on the film were if I knew nothing about Dunkirk going in, I knew pretty much the same amount coming out.
The scale was way off as well, by distance, number of men stranded, and the boats to the rescue. And they got me at the beginning, when they guy escapes withering fire…defensive positions come under attack…he walks approx. one hundred yards, and there is the beach. They never would of had time to embark.
I think you enjoyed the man in the yacht because a story actually developed with him. The rest was bits of people sinking again…and again. It was as if no ships made it out.
The “He’s a German Spy” scene in the boat was ludicrous.
Kenneth Branagh’s performance was surprisingly stale.
There is a story to be told in this event, it is a logistical feat like no other. No one in the film mentioned the weather was unusually perfect for channel crossing and I can see the French unhappy with their defense not being mentioned.
Typical Nolan, a competent piece of film making that should’ve been better. And yet another example of Nolan’s artificial crisis moment. That German plane is coming around, it’s COMING AROUND! This scene was preceded by dozens of moments of German planes firing on and bombing the Brits, but this particular moment was uber tense according to the music.
Very flat movie. The aerial shots were the best thing about it.
This was a really good film although I found it grim which at times made it a bit difficult to watch.
No nearby Imax but I saw it on a very large normal screen with Dolby Atmos sound. Sometimes spoken dialog got drowned out. Even so I may go back for a second viewing; the big screen experience is worth it.
