Christopher Nolan's "Dunkirk" (July 21, 2017) - Part 2

[terry78]

Tick tick tick is the new bwong.

 

[ObiWanCon]

Dunkirk is brilliant I am speechless 9.5 out of 10.

 

[Mysteryman]

It was a very good, taught, audio-visual ride. Nolan's patented ramping tension through intercutting narrative momentum. This works very well for the first half of the film. The second half tries to keep that sense of suspended tension, but ends up feeling like it's treading water somewhat.

I certainly appreciate that it feels like a very different kind of war film. I've seen a lot of people compare it to a bunch of films I don't agree with.

If anything, the film this most reminds me of is Cuaron's Gravity. That constant sense of moving forward and forward and forward like a theatrical ride that takes precedence over character or story.

The film isn't a masterpiece by any means, but it is a very impressive piece of filmmaking that feels different enough from Nolan's recent work (due to its structural approach) that it feels like something fresh from Nolan.

Oh, and the sound design of those diving planes is excellent.

Dunkirk is a great theater experience (after watching it you'll understand why Nolan is against straight to Netflix movies), but similar to Gravity I probably won't be watching this at home or ever again.

I literally just heard a critic on the radio compare Dunkirk to Gravity.

 

[moviedoors]

God you're right. I never questioned it untill you mentioned that Hardy probably wasn't actually flying. Holy crap.

Right? It's so well done, you LITERALLY forget that there even might be special effects on screen.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Tick tick tick is the new bwong.

We're gonna start seeing that in the marketing for a bunch of movies now. Nolan and Zimmer did it again.

 

[BatSpider]

After the hype built up this past week, I give it a 7.5/10

Solid film, would not put it in Nolan's top 3 or maybe not even 5, good theater experience.

 

[jmc]

Interesting to read everyone's thought. I'm probably going to see this again during the week to make my final verdict on the film and where it stands in Nolan's filmography.

 

[terry78]

I think the really wide shots are what make it much more of an actual throwback to those epic flicks of yesteryear. You don't see that **** anymore, everybody's direction has to always be tight as hell.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

I think the really wide shots are what make it much more of an actual throwback to those epic flicks of yesteryear. You don't see that **** anymore, everybody's direction has to always be tight as hell.

That's great to hear because I've grown to hate tight direction.

 

[BatLobster]

Ugh, 21 more hours for me. Starting to get jealous of all of you who've seen it.

 

[Schlosser85]

Hmm maybe it looks better in the giant screen.

There're many wide shoots that look epic.

Oh and do pay attention to the score. There're times that my heart beat faster because of the score.

Epic wide shots. So like Patton, or Lawrence of Arabia?

 

[moviedoors]

Epic wide shots. So like Patton, or Lawrence of Arabia?

Yes. It lets the characters take up a smaller fraction of the screen than usual in present day cinema. It's unapologetically shot for a theater-sized screen. There's a reason everyone is saying see it on the biggest screen you possibly can.

 

[writer0327]

Solid film. Wouldn't say it's my favorite Nolan movie, but it's definitely good. I'd put it between Inception and TDKR.

 

[Kreem Pi]

Yes. It lets the characters take up a smaller fraction of the screen than usual in present day cinema. It's unapologetically shot for a theater-sized screen. There's a reason everyone is saying see it on the biggest screen you possibly can.

Except for the shots where the camera is lodged right in the cockpit and Hardy's face takes up the whole screen.

 

[NotNickFury]

Just got out of an IMAX screening- ended up talking with a man who was really into tanks and whose dad served in World War II- and yeah, IMAX is definitely the way to go here. Makes the whole experience feel very grandiose and Nolan definitely has a great sense of scale here, but he also creates that very claustrophobic feeling. Rarely does the tension let up here and so much emotion is conveyed just through facial expressions, never mind dialogue.

Though I'm left wondering, and I guess I'll ask it in spoiler tags since the film is fresh, but...

Spoiler

Why didn't Tom Hardy just eject at the end? Was he just content with what he'd done and accept that he'll probably just be a POW for a few years?He would've easily been saved or helped by any of the soldiers he saved and unlike his comrade, his cockpit wasn't jammed.

 

[moviedoors]

Except for the shots where the camera is lodged right in the cockpit and Hardy's face takes up the whole screen.

True. One foot in the present, the other in tradition.

 

[weezerspider]

Just got out of an IMAX screening- ended up talking with a man who was really into tanks and whose dad served in World War II- and yeah, IMAX is definitely the way to go here. Makes the whole experience feel very grandiose and Nolan definitely has a great sense of scale here, but he also creates that very claustrophobic feeling. Rarely does the tension let up here and so much emotion is conveyed just through facial expressions, never mind dialogue.

Though I'm left wondering, and I guess I'll ask it in spoiler tags since the film is fresh, but...

Spoiler

Why didn't Tom Hardy just eject at the end? Was he just content with what he'd done and accept that he'll probably just be a POW for a few years?He would've easily been saved or helped by any of the soldiers he saved and unlike his comrade, his cockpit wasn't jammed.

I thought it was kind of a metaphor for "seeing things through until the end", "not giving up", "finishing on your own terms", all common themes when dealing with impending doom like those at Dunkirk supposedly were dealing with. I mean they were, but they overcame it, so I guess it wasn't actually impending doom.

 

[terry78]

A lot of those guys during that era would've rather died than been captured because they knew what they'd be in for.

 

[redhawk23]

https://amp.businessinsider.com/christopher-nolan-dunkirk-sunken-footage-2017-7
Footage from the sinking cockpit was nearly lost when the whole plane sank too rapidly.

 

[BatLobster]

http://www.mtv.com/news/podcasts/happy-sad-confused/christopher-nolan/

This is probably one of the coolest and most relaxed interviews I've ever heard Nolan give. His Bane impersonation at 24:40.

 

[Kreem Pi]

You should listen to his interview of Edgar Wright. Great English banter there.

 

[BatLobster]

Already have. Horowitz is a good interviewer, I must say. He asked a lot of good questions in the Nolan podcast that got him to loosen up a bit and not just go through the usual PR motions.

 

[rashad]

http://www.mtv.com/news/podcasts/happy-sad-confused/christopher-nolan/

This is probably one of the coolest and most relaxed interviews I've ever heard Nolan give. His Bane impersonation at 24:40.

That was awesome. t:

 

[Gee]

Though I'm left wondering, and I guess I'll ask it in spoiler tags since the film is fresh, but...

Spoiler

Why didn't Tom Hardy just eject at the end? Was he just content with what he'd done and accept that he'll probably just be a POW for a few years?He would've easily been saved or helped by any of the soldiers he saved and unlike his comrade, his cockpit wasn't jammed.

Because [BLACKOUT]getting caught was part of his plan[/BLACKOUT].

 

[jmc]

http://www.mtv.com/news/podcasts/happy-sad-confused/christopher-nolan/

This is probably one of the coolest and most relaxed interviews I've ever heard Nolan give. His Bane impersonation at 24:40.

Indeed, sounds really chill here. Nice to see a different side to him.