Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk - July 2017 (Shot in 70mm) (1 Viewer)

[Bob Cashill]

Yup. 78. I used to like his reviews when I was younger...mostly because like me he LOVED Superman (probably because he was in it).
Then he just got mean.

He's 78. He was laid off by the Observer in May but I guess he's still freelancing. I see him at screenings.

 

[DavidJ]

I agree completely and for all the reasons you listed. I read a recent interview with Nolan and he essentially said the same thing - that he's wanted to make this movie for a very long time but that he needed to hone his skills before he was ready to make it.

I'm now rewatching all of his films chronologically - watched Following, Memento and Insomnia so far - and there's a clear evolution visible. Watching this progression from nearly the beginning has been very rewarding to me as a fan. It's like when you find a great young unknown band that's still rough around the edges, and then watch them grow and evolve into a major act.

I love that idea of rewatching his films chronologically. I'd love to do that, but I'm not sure with our limited time that I'll be able to get the wife on board. Still...

 

[Edwin-S]

I thought the film had characters to care about even thought the film was about the overall event.

I cared about Mark Rylance and his son and friend. I also cared about Tom Hardy's pilot. The film doesn't spend its time on big character development. But there was enough there to keep me involved.

And I agree the film's music is essential to help build suspense. But I also believe the film would be almost as powerful without music and far from empty if that were the case (I have the soundtrack coming today btw). But it is integral to the film similar to the effectiveness of other films like Jaws, Gravity and others.

I don't know what it was about this film, but, while I found it watchable, I just didn't find it powerful. It wasn't moving to me on any level. Maybe it was due to Nolan's choice to focus on just depicting the event without focusing on any real character development. Maybe it was due to his decision to follow an unadmirable "rat-trying-to-leave-a-sinking-ship' as his main observer of ground events; although, to give credit to his thinking, it gave Nolan the freedom to move around the battlefield on the ground while simplifying the number of viewpoints needed to capture the ground war.

Possibly, it was due to Nolan depicting much of what was occurring on the ground as not heroic, even though it was most likely accurate. Then he inserts a scene near the end describing

Spoiler

a kid that never even reached Dunkirk as a hero . For what? Being pushed down a gangway and dying from a fractured skull, while men who were really at Dunkirk were being depicted as turning on each other and concerned about saving only themselves?

Is the bombast real or overstated? I was going to encourage my mom to see this, but she has tinnitus and I'm not wanting to risk exacerbating that.

I cannot speak for IMAX showings, but the standard wide-screen release I saw was loud, but not unbearably so.

 

[Malcolm R]

I could understand very little of the dialog because of the music and sound effects being turned up so much.

That seems to be a common complaint with Nolan's films. I recall similar statements about Interstellar and the Dark Knight films. I'm not sure why he does that, as it must be purposeful.

 

[Sam Posten]

I thought the film was simply perfection. The trailer was more intense due to time squeeze, but this held me the entire time. It did it's job too: I want to go read more on the real story.

 

[Angelo Colombus]

Saw it last night and it's a good film but not a masterpiece or a great film. The sound was very loud and I did not care for the film score. I thought the scenes with the pilots were the best thing in the film.

 

[Edwin-S]

That seems to be a common complaint with Nolan's films. I recall similar statements about Interstellar and the Dark Knight films. I'm not sure why he does that, as it must be purposeful.

The dialog in the standard version of the film seemed pretty understandable to me. I don't recall finding it hard to make out what was being said, considering how little dialog the film had, it might be different for the IMAX version.

 

[George_W_K]

I didn't have any problem making out the dialogue.

 

[George_W_K]

(Disclosure - Some spoilers included)

One part though that I was confused about was when the soldiers were on the beach in the trawler I didn't understand (because of the volume issues) was why some of the men were so mad about the one fellow. Was he French in an English uniform? It seemed that some of them were implying he was a German spy because he wouldn't talk.

Yes, some thought he was German because he didn't speak. When he finally did, he was found out to be French. They needed to drop the weight so they could float out to sea and since no one wanted to volunteer, they said he should be the one to go.

When he was first introduced, we saw him burying a body in the sand and that's how he got the English uniform.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Not like he hasn't had experience:

And I mean a LOT of experience!

 

[TravisR]

I didn't have any problem making out the dialogue.

The two or three times I did, I attributed it to their accents than the mix.

 

[YanMan]

Interesting interview with Nolan in this week's Time magazine:

http://time.com/4864049/dunkirk-christopher-nolan-interview/

 

[Tino]

I hope they can hit their target $$. I predict lower 20's.

As good as this one looks, I sure haven't seen it pushed much on TV or similar outlets. I fear this will have a more limited fanbase, but who knows, it could be a sleeper hit. It's got tough competition for sure. Even with the older movies from earlier in the summer....Apes, Spidey,

I think you should give up a on box office predictions Alf. After Arrival and Dunkirk you're 0 for 2.

From Deadline.

Dunkirk is excelling with a $19.7 million opening day, bound for a $51M opening weekend at 3,720 venues.

 

[DavidJ]

I'm going to read the full article later, but I agree with his statement that it's his most experimental film since Memento. It has a different feel than most narrative feature films. It actually feels more like a short film in style and tone (this is a comment that might be somewhat strange to some) that's been stretched to almost two hours.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Well, we've seen this complaint beforehand, but usually it's against how the Americans have disrespected other countries role in films about historical events like Objective Burma, Saving Private Ryan and Argo just to name a few.

http://nypost.com/2017/07/22/the-french-are-pissed-about-their-minor-role-in-dunkirk/

 

[Wayne_j]

$50,500,000 according to Box Office Mojo.

 

[Tino]

$50,500,000 according to Box Office Mojo.

That's a great opening for this type of film. I predict long legs. Should end up domestically with about $175 million.

 

[Edwin-S]

Well, we've seen this complaint beforehand, but usually it's against how the Americans have disrespected other countries role in films about historical events like Objective Burma, Saving Private Ryan and Argo just to name a few.

http://nypost.com/2017/07/22/the-french-are-pissed-about-their-minor-role-in-dunkirk/

The French have a legitimate beef, but it could always be worse. At least they were mentioned in the film. The story could have been appropriated and turned entirely into another country's history with no mention of whose story it actually was, like Gold did.

 

[Robert Crawford]

The French have a legitimate beef, but it could always be worse. At least they were mentioned in the film. The story could have been appropriated and turned entirely into another country's history with no mention of whose story it actually was, like Gold did.

I was expecting your input. By the way, I have zero problem with Gold as it was about individuals so the screenwriters made it about Americans to appeal to American audiences. It was a business decision, not to disrespect a country. This type of change happens all the time in films and has been going on since the Silent Film days.

 

[Brandon Conway]

An often intense ticking-clock tale of despair and heroism. It's a spare film, which works in its favor, but it also experiments in its timeframe in a manner that's a bit over-complicated. Solid performances all around in a film that uses actors' eyes and line of sight far more than their voices. 8/10