Dunkirk - Tell me I'm not crazy

I just watched Dunkirk and it was incredibly boring, hard to follow and somewhat irrelevant too? None of the characters are set up, so it's hard to care what happens to them. It was well-shot, visually put together, sound design, etc. but that's not really why we watch movies is it? The story and plot is key. And I feel like this was really lacking. Worst Nolan film, easily.

Another thing: I know Nolan films are generally PG-13 and keep violence subtle, but you can't make a war film without showing a drop of blood. That was ridiculous.

>The story and plot is key.
Then read a book you absolute mong.

>Worst Nolan film
Wouldn’t go that far but it definitely hasn’t earned the over-the-top praise it’s getting. There was nothing particularly memorable about it, it was just a well-done re-enactment. I’d hesitate to call it a movie in the purest sense.

>hard to follow
Are you a bit slow in the head?

It could be cut into thirty minutes and no value would be lost

Which ones do you think are worse? Just curious. I've seen all of them except Violet.

It's better if you watch it in conjunction with The Darkest Hour, as they're almost companion pieces.

this

>The story and plot is key
not always

>a movie about Dunkirk, the evacuation of the Free French Army in the face of the FoF

>About British achievements

You couldn't pay me to watch this bs "eternal anglo" propaganda, and I am an eternal anglo.

I couldnt finish the movie, it was boring as shit.

Felt the same way OP. I liked everything about it from a technical point of view, but I didn't care about anything that happened. The film doesn't really have characters or character arcs and none of the plot threads really get time to develop. Fuck, I watched it 3 nights ago and I can't recall much of anything that happened.

that's what soyboy actually thinks.

a movie is story telled with moving image, it's a succension of scene well acted, well directed and perfectly put together to tell a compelling story.

nolan is good at zero of those things, it just look beautyfull because he is a good craftment in the pure no brain sense, he likes good looking cinema.


like the scene where the french men cant escape the boat and drown, is like the most agressively stupid metaphor you could think of, it's so over the top it's fucking ridiculous, it's hilarious to think
a praised grown man as him would think it's clever, and the fanbase is even worse for buying this and convincing themselves it's good.


the whole thing felt like three zolpidem pills
same for blade runner btw

not the guy you were talking to, but his worst have to be the dark knight rise, it was shilled by literaly every fucking person, and it turned out so bad i think he wouldnt work ever again.

maybe one day he'll stop being so up his ass and make actual descent cinema.

Dunkirk was not very good. Saw it in 70mm. Wasn't impressed in the slightest. This isn't a film that will be remembered 50 years from now, let alone 10 years from now.

>he watches for plot
oiamlaffin

>worst Nolan film
Didn't watch interstellar obviously.

Guess there aren't any history people in this thread. It was interesting in that way. Are you all just young or something, it wasn't that long ago

There are millions of more interesting events in WWII than the evacuation at Dunkirk they could have chosen.

Why are they not making proper war movies anymore?

Because
>muh British

I like history. It was still a painfully mediocre film.

Last week I saw Detroit and it was fantastic. Dark as shit, but fantastic. I have no problem with historical films when they're selling something other than history.

How is The Darkest Hour