Gibme a quick rundown on Dunkike

Gibme a quick rundown on Dunkike

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=cN3yrJP24-I
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dunkirk
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Overrated.

Well i think really says it all

youtube.com/watch?v=cN3yrJP24-I
nolan's best film tied with memento

Best movie of the year

If there's a 70mm IMAX screening near you it's worth a watch, otherwise I'd skip it desu

Needs more transgender lgbq

tfw wanted to like this more than I did.

I enjoyed it don't get me wrong, but I don't think it's some bonafide masterpiece.

Pretty good. People are complaining about the lack of plot, action and character development. But I think it told the events of the evacuation pretty well without making the Nazis look completely evil. Manly because you don't see any.

Pure trash for easily entertained fedoras.

it was a silly film, i didnt really get what it was about

Kino.

It's not a war movie. Its a film that takes place during a war.

its shit, its starts amazing and just gets worse and worse, like a plane nosediving.

The first 20 minutes are really good but the forced as fuck tension just makes everything so leveled that you never feel the climatic moments. And the ending is full of bad moments, straight up retarded.

I dont mind the emptyness of the film but it would have worked better as a short movie.

The sound is great and its the best part about the movie.

Its a lot of wasted opportunity since plenty of it is interesting and works well (like barely seeing the enemy and lack of dialog) but the forced situations to keep you at the edge of your seat just feel fabricated and some are even dumb.

If you ever watched the first 15 minutes of Pearl Harbor and thought to yourself "I wonder if they could stretch this out into a full length film" then this is the movie for you.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dunkirk

An art film cleverly disguised as a blockbuster. Nolan is force-feeding kino the the plebeian masses without them even realizing it.

Yeah this, for what Nolan was doing it didn't really seem necessary to base it on Dunkirk.

Good film, not a good movie.

It's expertly crafted but sterile. Don't expect Private Ryan or Band of Brothers. Nolan generally seems to have contempt for the common man and his struggles. This shows in the film, where all characters are props for him to show how great he is at making movies.

It's a two hour action sequence. Mostly just chase scenes, shootouts, retreats, and explosions. No characters or dialogue, some hamfisted dramatisization like the kid that hits his head and dies or the dude that refuses to parachute out of the plane so he gets captured for no reason. Great production, some awesome moments like the torpedo, really great cinematography, but ultimately shallow. Hans Zimmer is incredibly overrated too, I get that he was going for a ticking watch effect for this one, but every fucking score is just DADADADADAADADADADADA with tom fills and some fake orchestra swells. Every time I get hyped for a CN movie I end up feeling let down, this is no exception.

It's closer to a blockbuster told with an attempt at an artful structure. The time jumping was literally useless. Added nothing to the tension or coherence, merely detracted from it.

Absolutely amazing, Nolan's best. The movie tried to show the dehumanizing effects of war, defeat and certain death and it does excel in that regard. The plane parts are the weakest link but they are ok too. Lacking dialogue or much characterization outside Rylance and buddies is the best part of the movie. The narrative structure is like nothing we've seen in a big budget movie, with the week, day and hour parts converging towards the end.

Objective rating 8.5/10, should win the oscar instead of the generic biopic or SJW bait it's going to

without the time skipping I would imagine there would have been a shitton more unnecessary filler exposition - with that in mind I don't think it detracted from the movie at all

Who got dehumanised?

I was honestly happily surprised to see how little dialogue was actually in this movie -- honestly, it would have been better with a few less scenes of the Colonel and the Admiral talking with one another but I understand it's kinda needed to help explain some things like what their plan was after the first ship is sunk by the torpedo so that most of the viewers dont get lost...

Exposition is a good thing. Showing the same action sequences over and over was the filler. How many of the same dogfighting sequences, or abandon ship sequences did we see? Not to mention, there were only like two or three parts where the time skips actually interacted with eachother, for the most part it was already in chronological order except for the week leading up to the boat rescue.

Most of the soldiers, honestly. It was pretty clear that there was an underlying message of "we're gonna do whatever it takes to get off this beach/survive". Think about that scene in the boat and how the scottish soldiers were trying get Gibson off of the boat.

>Exposition is a good thing.
I personally disagree - I didn't have any problem with watching any of the air battle(s). I guess in a way it made it easier for me to turn off my brain and cum to the impressive sights and sounds in those scenes. I understand your point though, the time skips were a little confusing at the beginning and kinda took me out of it but I didn't really have to/need to understand it just because the movie never gives you time to stop and think again, by the middle of the movie I had caught on. And then directly after watching the movie I felt that it was the right decision.

The prioritising of the stretchers, the drafting of civilian ships, the relentless cups of tea... I didn't find it dehumanising in the slightest. Maybe the treatment of the frenchie in the tug.

Speaking of which how did it go from being bullet ridden to off the coast? I was half asleep

This isn't a movie. This is art.

>for what Nolan was doing


I didn't get the feeling he had the idea to tell a story over 3 stretches of time that intertwine. It felt more like he wanted to tell the story of Dunkirk and realized this was an interesting and feasible way of doing it.

Either way, it worked and made for a more unique viewing experience that it could have been if just told front to back like most other films.

>Don't expect Private Ryan or Band of Brothers

I didn't want to see it until I read that. Thanks user. About time someone makes a WWII film that isn't trying to be Ryan.

Tom Hardy saves everyone but himself.

But he rises the fire so it's all worth it.

Of courshe

at least he only suffers in a POW camp

what a gay, pointless """review"""

It's meh, just guys waiting on a beach for hours with scenes in chronological disorder to appears "arty". There's is absolutely no character development so you don't give a shit when something happens to them.

The beach is so clean and there are almost no planes involved it's ridiculous.

Sound design and music was pretty good though.

> the time skips were a little confusing at the beginning and kinda took me out of it but I didn't really have to/need to understand it just because the movie never gives you time to stop and think again, by the middle of the movie I had caught on.

This is the type of person who praises this film.
It was a very beautiful movie that was as engaging as cardboard, which was very odd given how many scenes were strewn throughout it that would have had audiences eyes water a bit if they didn't feel totally out of place. Paying for a ticket just to enjoy the sound of planes roaring overhead is not worth it, nor is the 30min or so of tom hardy dog fighting in silence regardless of how beautiful how beautiful the scenes were of his out of gas plane gliding around. This movie truly is a filter for something but not the something people are claiming on here lately.

Also to piggyback on this. Rescuing the soldiers was actually relatively pointless as the RAF won the battle of britain near single handedly with the majority of soldiers rescued doing dick all except wasting supplies until they were sent to die on nazi clay roughly 4 years later. This entire event was a shining example of churchills worst military blight followed by one of his better speeches. But hey, I guess a relatively useless retreat which happened solely because hitler stopped his tank units from pushing forward against his general's constant prodding and wishes is somehow heroic. But ya, it ends with the speech basically saying "hey america, we aren't giving up, pliz halp"

congratulations. you are an absolute moron. there's no point even debating with you over the film seeing as how you seem mentally retarded.

Hollow as fuck, wasted my time. Pick your favorite action sequence in a movie, stretch it out so it lasts 2 hours, congratulations you've just watched Dunkerque.

Plus Valerian had better cgi, a better plot, better characters, and even more tension to it.

Boring and full of Nolan hipster trash
It's the same dumb color filter and music everytime, fuck Nolan.

Good Kino, not a good flick

Did anyone notice the smiling extra was altered to look sad? I swear they did something to his face in post-production.

Don't go in thinking it's a war movie. It's more about survival IN war, instead of actual war.

Other than that, it was preddy gud tbqh, 9/10 from me.

HOME

I think they had different takes to use

Coming out of the cinema, I discussed with my girlfriend that it's less a war movie, but more a documentary shot in film style with dramatised events. This way the entire project makes sense and I can accept it as a good viewing. Otherwise, the lack of plot severely limits this film to anything but an overview of the whole situation.

...

Is there any noticeable difference between analog and digital if the theater showing it is still 1570?

I thought the movie was flawless until the last five minutes where a convoluted scenario plays out where a blind guy doesn't look the soldiers in the eye, and then the guy gets sad, only for people to cheer them later

That was classic Nolan, not in a good way

A shitty propaganda movie.