The movie is told by the excellence in editing, photography, score (by Hans Zimmer) and visual/practical effects.
From the moment which the viewer notices that it is a non-linear narrative told in 3 (or more) points of view, the film becomes visceral, thrilling and captivating. It gives the sense of failure and weight on those soldiers' shoulders during the many days that they suffered from German's soldiers (which only appeared 2 seconds in the whole movie) . You feel the human sacrifice, courage and fear that was on that beach, with all of the people waiting to their death or salvation. You experience and live the patriotism of the civilians which adventure themselves to the sea to rescue their own.
Dunkirk is a singular masterpiece that recreates one of the miraculous periods of World War II.
Fantastic film, but I'm noticing a trend with Nolan's movies where you can't hear a word anyone is saying. This movie has very little dialog but so much of it is almost unintelligible. Characters are shouting lines in thick accents with loud background audio.
I also feel like the plot got muddled at some points - What's happening in this scene? Who got shot down? What side are they? Who is this person? Was it the same person as before? I don't know, almost all of the British soldiers look alike. I went with many friends who also said they had these two issues.
That being said: the cinematography is stunning. There's some truly tense scenes in this film. It's well written, the multiple storylines fit together well and it seems pretty historically accurate, as much as it can be at least. The non-dialogue audio is absolutely spot-on, you must watch this in a theater with great surround sound. Interesting choices were made regarding the constant background of music/sound and I think it works incredibly well to set the mood of each scene. Overall it's a solid film but not my favorite.
To each their own, but this movie felt like beating a dead horse. The directing and the characters are nice, but the story itself felt a little bit too shallow. I can see where the positive reviewers are coming from, but to me personally it was an O.K. movie, but no more.
Watched Dunkirk at a movie theater and was disappointed: without knowing anything about the movie besides that Christopher Nolan has produced it and that it was a WWII movie, I hoped to see something with a brilliant story like "The Dark Knight" or "Memento". That is not the case here, there is not match to be had here storywiese (however, it is accurate historically according to: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/07/20/what_s_fact_and_what_s_fiction_in_dunkirk.html).
From a technical point of view, Dunkirk is a good if not even great flick: good acting, minimalistic but great / creepy soundtrack and bombastic sound effects. You have to be at a cinema to feel those bullets fly, the motors of the Spitfires howl or the torpedo hit in your guts! Wow!!! Additionally it manages to make you really fear for the life of the soldiers from the get go to and there is this certain claustrophobic feeling about it throughout the whole time.
While Dunkirk reminded me again of the cruelty of war and how happy and thankful all of us, who live in western Europe, should be that there is currently now open war raging here, I still found the movie lacking and wished for a much better plot.
[7.4/10] There’s an old cliché that goes something along the lines of “One death is a tragedy. Ten-thousand deaths is a statistic.” Generals, strategists, and even prime ministers have to think in statistics. They have to peel back and look at the bigger picture, to not only win today’s fight, but tomorrow’s fight, and the fighter after that, in the hopes of winning the war, even if it means sacrificing the few so that the many can go on.
Dunkirk is uniquely focused on those moral calculations, and the differences they make as checkmarks on a ledger versus boots on the ground. It contrasts the 10,000 view of the British and French soldiers stranded at Dunkirk in need of rescue, where Churchill and his brain trust aim to bring home only 30,000 out of 300,000 men lined up on those beaches, in the name of the greater goods, with the view from those in and around those perilous environs, doing everything to can, up to and including giving their own lives, in order that more may see home again.
To accomplish this, writer-director Christopher Nolan divides his story up into three different, interwoven parts. One concerns a group of pilots in the Royal Air Force, there to take out the German warplanes taking out British soldiers standing on the beaches of Dunkirks like sitting ducks while they wait to evacuate. A second concerns a trio of civilians – a father and son, and a young friend who joins them – in their endeavor to heed the call for help and head to Dunkirk to help save their countrymen. And the third and meatiest story centers on a young soldier, doing everything in his power to escape that hostile environment, and enduring setback after setback along the way.
In addition to that overall moral dilemma – the question of expending the resources to save enough soldiers to fight the war at home vs. to rescue all souls at Dunkirk and risk losing the resources and manpower to stave off Hitler’s advance – Nolan bakes in other smaller, but no less potent ethical questions throughout the film.
The main airman balances his dwindling fuel supply and with it, his ability to go back home, with his sense of duty to taking out the Luftwaffe that are terrorizing his countrymen on those beaches and giving his fellow soldiers a chance to make it home. The assisting civilians have to consider how to deal with a shell-shocked, dangerous soldier they rescue on the way, how to handle getting as many evacuees into the boat as possible without endangering more, and how to respond when they too are forced to face the dangers, expected and avoidable, that come with entering a war zone. And the escaping soldier has to contend with the morality of pretending to be part of a medical evac crew in order to leave, of how what flag a person is flying affects how they’re treated and valued, and who’s chosen to face the bullet fire and death that lays outside a safe hiding place in order that more may live. These moral choices are in the bones of Dunkirk, in ways big and small, and force the film’s characters and its audience to confront the way that ethical calculus changes and is brought to the fore at a time of war.
Despite that, Dunkirk is, in many ways, a surprisingly conventional film. A creative like Christopher Nolan, whose bread and butter has been reimagining and reinterpreting everything from genre films to superhero flicks, defies expectation by largely playing this one straight. There’s some of the usual “war is hell” beats, the complexity of decent and desperate men getting by in a hopeless situation, and a sense of ultimate triumph from our heroes coupled with some measured, if important, sacrifices. There are few twists or reveals in Dunkirk, a notable departure from a director who’s deployed some version of the mystery box, or the unexpected turn, in almost all of his prior films. This is a modern war film, but one that follows in the footsteps of its predecessors rather than charting a novel or truly inventive path.
It also leans into a presentation steeped in realism, with a style that is polished, but unglamorous. Dunkirk does anything but glorify war, or the people who fight it (save for a conspicuously noble Kenneth Branagh). Instead, it doesn’t revel in, but also doesn’t shy away from, people dying without fanfare, without mercy, and without kindness, in that sort of detached, unblinking way that war fosters. If you squint hard, you can see the seams and the way Nolan telegraphs how these disparate events will tie into his overall theme and each other, but you could be forgiven for viewing much of the film as a survey, jumping from place to place and person to person, and merely glancing at them as an observer, a compiler of moments, without judgment or approval.
In that, Dunkirk can occasionally be opaque or hard to follow. It’s laudable that, outside of a few noteworthy exceptions, the film’s characters don’t speak in the grand oratories or perfect patter that other prestige pictures present. Instead, they mumble and fumfer and mutter under their breaths, which adds to the realism of the film, while often making the dialogue hard to discern. At the same time, the movie includes scores of young men who all have roughly the same clothes, the same look, and even the same haircut. That too feels true-to-life, but also makes it hard to pick out who Nolan’s camera is focusing on or whose story we’re following at the moment.
But that appearance of undifferentiated hordes of men helps create the sense that the conflict at Dunkirk, viewed from such a wide perspective, is a clash between two grand organisms rather than individuals. In the film, the antagonists are not the Germans, and to a lesser extent, the heroes are not the British, or at least, the British are not the heroes. Instead, the antagonist is Dunkirk itself, a treacherous place where however man-made the threats may be, the challenges and obstacles feel more like parts of the same big natural disaster than a conflict of man-against-man. And yet, Nolan is committed to showing those lives in miniature, the individual people caught up in that larger-than-life struggles, chewed up in the machine that views them as numbers on a casualty report rather than human beings to be saved.
Nolan accomplishes this visually by framing his lead characters in relation to the unpredictable events around them, juxtaposing the near individuals with the distant war machines and locales before flipping that perspective. Civilian ships see dogfighters in the sky. Airmen see their fellow soldiers stranded on the Dunkirk sands. And young combatants gaze out at the horizon hoping to see ships to come in rescue them. With dusky grays and greens and other dark hues, Nolan unites them as cells within the same organism, shifting and moving and reaction to one another, pulled by the same invisible strings, however far apart they may seem.
And when his film ties these various threads together, Nolan creates a sense of glory, of triumph, in the way that those civilians fill in the missing fractions of those moral equations. Dunkirk is never more laudatory, nor more straightforwardly celebratory, than when it show that ramshackle fleet of civilian ships breaching the horizon and emerging to save their fellow men. Alongside numerous other individuals, including those with uniforms and those without them, Dunkirk champions the triumph of empathy and bravery that results in everyday people risking their lives to save yet more souls, while those who have to look larger maps and troop movements cannot countenance such individual calculations. As much as the film embraces the horrors of war, it also embraces the sense of altruism and courage that allows warriors and regular folk alike to overcome it.
Which is why Dunkirk’s most stirring passage is its final one where, breaking from the faux verite approach that served the film through most of its runtime, Nolan embraces narrative collision and montage. The music swells; heroes are bathed in amber light, and the most famous lines to emerge from that conflict are spoken with the voice of one who saw its hardships and horrors firsthand.
It’s hard to say that Dunkirk is meant to inspire. It’s too committed to making the audience hold its breath and wince at the realities of the harsh and indifferent deaths that awaited so many on those beaches. But it is, at least, meant to comfort, meant to instill gratitude and appreciation, for those individuals who see the moral dilemmas that men in war rooms don’t have time for, and aims to stop tragedies, rather than compare statistics.
This film wasn’t for me....directing, editing, visiual effects were amazing but just wasn’t for me.....i was bored and wanted it to end
Superb sound effects and cinematography, but lacks a real plot. You have to watch it just for the experience, not for the storyline.
Nice pictures from time to time.
But storytelling and story itself were pretty mediocre...
Eh. If you have zero knowledge on what Dunkirk actually is and etc, you'll spend the entire movie confused. I went with my younger cousins and since we never really studied anything related to this war, we had no idea what was going on. I had to google the synopsis of this movie midway just to get a sense of what was going on. I wish there was more dialogue, and maybe a little more clarification. You get lost midway not knowing who's who or who got shot down and etc... Cinematography and everything else was pretty good, but pretty poor storytelling since it doesn't really educate anyone on the matter.
I have put off viewing this film for quite a while. The main reason for this is that I am somewhat reluctant watching a movie where the story is pretty well known before you sit down to watch it. However a few days ago I finally did and, given all the hype, I have to say that I expected more, a lot more.
Sure the movie is a cinematically very well down movie. Acting, camera and all that is excellent. Unfortunately that is all there is.
First of all, where the hell did the over-inflated budget go? Dunkirk was a major undertaking with almost 400 000 soldiers involved and hundreds and hundreds of boats. We get to see what? A few columns of soldiers, a handful of boats and three pitiful spitfires against a bomber and two Fock Wulfes. To add to this insult we pretty much get to see the same bloody event over and over from different angles. This is an insult to all the brave men that made this rescue possible.
There are a few likable people in the movie. Like the Navy commander and the elderly guy on the pleasure boat steaming to rescue. The rest are either psychotic or morons.
Realism? Not so much. Like the scene where a bunch of soldiers are trapped in a boat being shot to pieces. Would any one in their right mind really have thought they could plug dozens and dozens of holes with their hands and then sail across the channel?
Then we have the spitfire which runs out of fuel and glides around forever over the beach so the director can get some scenic shots done. Other times fairly large boats gets damaged and flips over in seconds.
I would also have expected some pre-story. Some build up. But no, the story starts right away with these measly handful of boats and planes taking for bloody ever to drag themselves over to where they are supposed to go.
Quite a disappointment indeed.
I am not sure Nolan did himself a favor by making the movie like this. He might have been thinking "I'll do what I want and if you don't get it I don't care" and I can appreciate that. Or he was more concerned with getting cool IMAX shots - unfortunately I only had a BluRay at HD resolution so I may have been focusing more on story. But the mixing of different timelines is very confusing. You never stay long enough in one place. I can't make a connection with the characters which is essential because how to feel for them and their situation ?
I have a pretty good understanding what happened at Dunkirk because I am very much interested in the WWII history and this never felt like it. I couldn't grasp the scale at all. It was more like some localalized skirmishes put together. On the plus side there is the visuals and the sound which are both great.
Taking everything into account, and that includes maybe totally missing the point, I can only say I am dissapointed.
I'm glad I saw this in the theater on the biggest screen possible. It's an entirely visual film with minimal characterization, which in this case made the viewing experience fascinating. I can't think of a movie I've seen where I've felt more in the middle of the action. Christopher Nolan's direction here is truly unique.
Many people aren't going to like the fact that there is little to no background on the characters. I've wailed about this many times before but the majority of TV and Movie watchers want season after season of shows or sequel upon prequel of movies. They get comfortable with characters and they feel they need to know everything about them. Well, that isn't going to happen during "Dunkirk", and I guarantee there won't be a sequel.
What made "Dunkirk" so enjoyable for me was the moment by moment struggle. The mixing of three different timelines wasn't something I was conciously noticing. Everything melded together almost seamlessly.
Nolan is certainly the type of director that should be one of my favorites. I was disappointed in "Inception" and "Interstellar" for a variety of reasons, none of which had anything to do with characterization or visuals. "Dunkirk" is such a unique movie that it raises my Nolan-o-meter up a notch.
Three stories. Very fast switching between intense scenes.
I like Nolan. I really do. But i don't get the reason to make this movie. You have seen this A LOT.
Maybe this movie kicks in IMAX. But for me it was just disappointing.
Well i'm in between thoughts about the movie. It was visually stunning, the sound affects were beyond superb i was at my edge of my seat with dolby atmos but for me i felt that something was missing. Very few dialogues, the story was a bit rush so i don't believe that it was Nolan best work, for me Interstellar is. I felt that it was out of Nola's scope and directional approach like something didn't fit on the whole movie. The acting was not good either
Pros:
+ Dunkirk depicts and reveals the scale of the event on all levels: Land, air, and sea
+ Glorious cinematography (by Hoyte Van Hoytema) and editing (by Lee Smith) adding significantly to the experience
+ Electrifying soundtrack by Hans Zimmer
+ Loud and fulfilling sound effects from the diving Stukas to the distant machine gun shots
+ Your heart will keep pounding due to the blend of senses emitted by the visuals and audio
+ Great cast and chemistry through actions (Dialog is limited)
+ Nolan throws the audience right in the middle of WAR.
+ The whole movie focusses on the event itself instead of on a couple of soldiers. Hence, the lack of strong character development which I thought was awesome and a wise choice by Nolan
Cons:
- Music at times might feel too loud thus covering the dialog
Dunkirk must be experienced in IMAX!
Plot Complexity:
Easy
Best Movie Quote:
Men my age dictate this war. Why should we be allowed to send our children to fight it?
I was very excited to see it, but it turns out it's just a very expensive HD stock footage, nothing more...
It looks good and sounds good, sure. And I guess it's easy to appreciate for someone who is into war movies. It's also nice that it brings a little light on a not really known but interesting aspect of the war. That being said, most of the characters are uninteresting, and the story itself is meh.
While it represents pretty well some of the personal horror of what's happening from a character point of view, it totally fails to show the gravity of the situation. Basically enemy forces are 4 planes and 1 submarine (that only take one action then is forgotten). And wow, how the bombers are badly used... The situation is presented as extremely serious, one really wonders how these soldiers could survive a few hours. That is, if they were really attacked. Then you spend the whole movie waiting for these attacks that mostly do not come.
The weird timeframe doesn't help with that. For the whole movie it's "will the civilian float (well, one boat for most of it) make it to the beach ?", but they're never really in danger. And when they reach the beach, it's done. Nothing about returning, or probably making several back and forth for several days. The next minute 600 000 soldiers have been evacuated. This makes you wonder if there were any difficulty at all in the end.
The movie is a Christopher Nolan masterpiece. No doubt. Regardless of which side's perspective the story was told.
I said perspective because, back in the day, I would have rooted for the so called "Allies". Now that I'm older and know that the history we were taught as children was nothing but an account fabricated by the victors, and also witnessed what the "Allies" have been doing since WW2, I increasingly find myself rooting for the Germans while watching any kind of World War 1 & 2 movie.
The good guys lost. The "Allies" defeated the wrong enemy!
"Home."
You can love, hate or call him overrated all you want, but you've got to give respect to Christopher Nolan for going this old school. Nothing like cardboard props for background soldiers, inspired by the silence films era with little dialogue, and going full practical. The attention to details with scope and intensity making the overall experience harsh, but masterfully well made. Nolan has made something extraordinary and proven why he's the best living film maker working today. All of his movies have this grand scale to it, but never feels hollow.
Watching "Dunkirk" on the IMAX screen was such a overwhelming and frightening experience, but perfectly captures the terror of war those men faced. It got me pretty emotional towards the end. Gunshots sound like actual gunshots and the sound of bomber planes are like something out of a horror film. Every bullet that whizzed by made everyone in the cinema flinch (including me). It's one of the best movies I've seen so far this year. I would go as far to say it's the best war film in recent years & Nolan filmography.
My ears are still ringing from it, as I couldn't hear all that well after it ended.
The cinematography, the sound, writing, and direction are on so many levels of amazing. With Han Zimmer score being his best work yet. Being both phenomenal and hunting, leaving me cold at times. It's no surprise all the tense parts are through Hans score who puts weight to these difficult moments in the movie. And it's only the sound of a ticking watch.
I've found new respect for Harry Styles after this. Because he actually delivered a pretty good performance. Very impressive since it's he's first role and had a lot of screen time than I expected. Same thing with Fionn Whitehead, who's plays another young solider was also fantastic. The rest of the cast like: Tom Hardy, Mark Rylance, Kenneth Branagh, and Cillian Murphy were all terrific. Not a weak performance in the movie.
Now people have been complaining about the lack of information with these characters or no real main character to feel for them. I really don't think these people understand that isn't the point of the film. You understand these characters just by actions and decisions. All of this is based on how they act in a situation. No corny or cliché dialogue. It's visual story telling at it's finest. No has time talk about their back story or how they need to get back home to their wife and kids. The time is ticking, the enemy is getting closer, and your stuck with complete strangers on foreign land. The film doesn't have protagonist and antagonist.
You never see the Germans in person, just bomber planes. It makes they presence more scary and tense every time another attack happens.
I’ve only just got around to watching this and nothing different to any other war film but I did find it great and a good watch and some decent action and acting.
I had never liked a war so much. Do not misunderstand my words, this movie is a work of art. "Bravo!". The actors indicated for the role, Styles and Tom were fantastic. Thanks Nolan, you never disappoint
movie with a correct development but that transmits absolutely nothing
A technical tour de force, propelled by a beating soundtrack and intense drama. In many ways a great film, but an old-fashioned feel (like something from the 40's) muted the impact for me. Seeing it on the bigger screen may have also elevated my score.
Hans Zimmer fucking KILLED IT
After seeing so much outdoors during the cinemas sell's in my town, i was expecting something good, big.
Last night, Jan 11, 2018 decided to give it a try
Well... for me it's lacks in everything, non-existent narrative, weak dialogues, time of history widely dispersed
For me not even the sundays afternoon movies belong here.
Sad because normally world war movies are good, sometimes.
Loved it. Christopher Nolan confirms himself as a great director once again. The movie is visually stunning, with great direction and photography.
Not only that, but it is able to tell 3-4 stories with a minimal amount of exposition and dialogue. All that is left is the agony and terror for the incoming threat. The viewer can feel connected to the main characters, even though so little of them is said. That, to me at least, is great cinema.
And let's not forget Hans Zimmer's soundtrack. As always, it is on point, adding anguish and panic when it needs to. Great sound design overall in this movie.
While the viewer could be excused for not knowing the event surroundings the evacuation of Dunkirk, Nolan took the approach of denying anything else than his idealized version of those events, with obvious inaccuracies that makes the film cringe-worthy at time, almost as bad as U-571. The rest of the time, the little action and almost non existent dialogues do very little to fill what could otherwise be a perfect setup for a contemplative film (see the Thin Red Line from Terrence Malick for an example). This is a big let down and I would rather watch another couple of Clint Eastwood or Mel Gibson war movie than this, which, although isn't intrinsically bad, isn't very good either.
really excited for this :D
In one word: AMAZING
Watched this last night on IMAX. Really unique. The dogfights in the air were incredible. And that sound... i almost shaked off my seat :)
Terrible movie with very little depth or any sense of the true scale of this disaster (and subsequent rescue effort).
I'm afraid I don't understand Nolan's movies more and more. To me this movie is more like a documentary than movie. This is not a war movie like the others, there isn't much war. Instead it's a story of a few men trying to get home. You can see them desperately trying to get home over and over but that's all. I was still waiting for something to happen but nothing special happened. The movie is still the same. I saw high rating so I went to the cinema. I can't still understand why this movie has so high rating, what is so special about it. I was expecting something like Saving private Ryan but this movie is completely something else. If you are like me and expect something like Ryan, Hacksaw Ridge or similar style then you shouldn't go for this movie otherwise you will be disappointed.
Dunkirk gets top marks all around. An outstanding 10/10 are the only numbers I've calculated.
Christopher Nolan has now solidified his name forever when it comes to naming who had the Midas touch in film making for the last decade+.
Behold the assault on your senses...all of them.
Dunkirk, from the very start straps you in, forces you to take a deep breath and then grabs those senses and never let them go for the better part of an hour and 35 mins.
The sense of urgency you get begins immediately. The visuals are breathtaking. The audio effects immensely impressive. It chases you left and right, from the bottom and from above. You'll tilt your head during some of the flying scenes. That's a rather a neat trick without 3D/VR. 65mm really shines here, filming at its finest I'd say (the whole movie is shot entirely in 65mm and boy does it look fantastic, a true work of art). To get that feeling and the 'I was in awe' cinematography and sound experience you should...no, need to watch this film in a 4K/Dolby Atmos equipped theater or if available in your area, IMAX 70mm. Nothing else will cut it and nothing else will immerse your senses, nothing. Dunkirk will for sure be the showcase Demo Disc for home theater retailers and those wanting to test their Atmos or DTS:X setups. It needs to be said again, this film has some of the most incredible sounds and cinematography ever captured thus far. Making it a sure contender for an Oscar win or 2. Best Picture of the year so far for me. It could very well sweep the Academy Awards in 2018 in at least 3 categories.
Hans Zimmer, make way for another Oscar on that shelf. With the masterful crescendo scoring, no one else in the business could have brought my senses to the climax that I experienced. Take a bow and know your legacy and film contributions can never be questioned and hardly replicated today by others, period.
From the start, I felt as if I was being pursued by Jaws! I felt like I was drowning at one point. I felt like I was flying and in an aerial dogfight the next. Incredible combination all around, gentlemen. Incredible.
The acting is certainly beyond reproach, no question. Skilled directing and producing are a must, but the efforts Nolan and Co put into this film could have been lost if the actors didn't bring their full potential, to convey the desperate situation these men and women found themselves in, waiting to be rescued, all hope just about lost, spirits broken and home yearning. The assembled cast must share in any and all accolades bestowed upon Dunkirk.
This my friends, is film making at its Pinnacle!
This movie is a form of art I haven't seen in quite a while. I was on the edge of my seat with a pumping heart from the beginning of the movie till the very end. Christopher Nolan and his whole entire team did nothing but an absolutely amazing job on Dunkirk. It was impressive and it was powerful.
I haven't watched many "war movies", mainly because I usually don't really enjoy them. But this one is worth the watch. It's not only amazing cinematography, directing and acting, this movie is a whole experience on its own. I don't think I've ever felt more a part of a movie as I did with Dunkirk. (I watched it in IMAX so there's a lot of screen. It might have something to do with that, but still.) The camera work was exquisite, it brought drama as well as stability when there needed to be. Hans Zimmer has truly outdone himself. My pumping heart was mainly because of his amazing music. Don't get me started on the actors. Showing us all that you don't need a script filled with many lines to make a brilliant movie or to show how good an actor can act. Heck, I think if you can play a movie like this one, you for sure are a great actor. I know people are giving Harry Styles a lot of praise for this movie (seeing that it's his first proper role) and I with them, he was amazing. But I don't want to forget about all the other actors. Fionn Whitehead, Jack Lowden, Cillian Murphy, Kenneth Branagh all artists in what they do, no doubt. Mark Rylance was a rock in the ocean for everyone, giving us all hope and showing that not all people are as bad. His character was a beautiful person. Aneurin Barnard and Tom Glynn-Carney really stood out for me as well. They were both strong individuals with their own minds who did what they could for survival, not only for themselves but for the people around them as well. Before I stop my (once again) too long actor praise I just want to say: Tom Hardy. What a legend.
I'd like to end this review with the same words I started it. This movie is a piece of art, something you truly experience and not just watch, something you're a part of. I really, really recommend you to go watch it. It will be worth your while.
Dunkirk is by far the best war movie I have seen. The way Nolan tells the story is very engaging and thrilling. There are very few dialogues in this but it doesn't need to. Nolan presented the movie in ways that I could never imagined. The term "all killer, no filler" perfectly summarizes the entire movie. There are very few dialogues in thjs, but it doesn't even need to. Personally, I like movies that makes me think. Movies that makes me connect the dots instead of presenting the pieces of the puzzle and it's final product.
Dunkirk is probably up there with the Dark Knight as Nolan's masterpieces. This movie will hook you from the first frame to the last. And Christopher Nolan continues to prove that he is one of the greatest filmmaker this generation has ever seen. He's one master storyteller.
please dont rate movies before you watch them! this is an actual 10/10. Beautiful, Excellent, Cristopher Nolan's Masterpiece, emotional, full of great action, thrilling, PERFECT
I saw so much hype for this movie, is good but, most of the time is so boring.
This was an intense movie.
I liked the way the show the time line between the scenes.
There were so many situations. A lot of heros where made on that time.
felt like a dramatized documentary
It's beautifully shot, and has an important story and message to share, but I don't know... it was kinda dull to me. Not in a while have I been soo bored by such a loud movie, with such intense action. Maybe I'm just growing tired of Nolan's schtick, or maybe I just have to give it another viewing, now that my expectations are in check.
Tom Hardy is fuckin stud
That few minute one shot scene in Atonement is 100% better and more interesting than this entire movie. The whole time it felt like it was building to something, but after a very long and slow pacing I was hoping for a rewarding moment for sticking with it till the end, but I was disappointed. It was over and you're left without a single memorable thing about it.
Christopher Nolan teams again, after "Interstellar", with Hans Zimmer (composer), Hoyte van Hoytema (cinematographer) and Lee Smith (editor), to make "Dunkirk", the most crafted war movie of this century.
The movie flows without needing drama, twists or even a big protagonist. Instead, we are presented with the courage and boldness of every soldier involved in this evacuation. It's a simple and linear storyline, fact-based, told in less than two hours wich creates a gut-wrenching suspense during the whole movie.
"Dunkirk" is stunning in every technical aspect and a unique IMAX experience.
Nolan is easly becoming one of the best directors of the 21st century.
Dunkirk. Alternative title: the 107 minutes Hans Zimmer Mixtape.
How do Nolan and his team create original and practical films, constantly, with so much raw emotion and uncomprehendable sense? Time and time again, I try to understand the meaning and genius behind not only the story but the process too, and time and time again, I'm left dumbfounded. The amount of pure talent we get to witness is unforgettable. Even if you're not a fan of his work, which I find crazy, the complexity is honestly admiring. It's always a blend of belly-aching cruelty and heart-aching humanity. Without a doubt, the greatest modern-day war film I've ever experienced.
This movie is fucking amazing! It gets straight to the point immediately. The story is not over complicated with unnecessary garbage and its a modern history based film under 2 hours. As well as having a great soundtrack from Hans Zimmer. Christopher Nolan did a great job with this film telling on of the most heroic and war altering story's in history and made you care about the characters with little dialog and without throwing typical Hollywood crap in and weighing down the film. With a great cast. This was such a massive morale boost for the U.K. in WWII. The war would have gone much, much different if the U.K. citizens didnt risk their lives to save those soldiers.
The cinematography is gorgeous, but where is the story. This feels more like a dream within a dream.
While "Dunkirk" has been lauded by many for its innovative storytelling and masterful cinematography, I found myself quite disappointed. Christopher Nolan, the film's director, is known for his intricate narratives and character development, but "Dunkirk," I felt, was sorely lacking in these areas.
Firstly, the movie felt emotionally distant. Despite the terrifying situation the characters were in, I struggled to truly care for their fates. The film's choice to prioritize visual spectacle and sound design over character development left me feeling detached. The characters felt more like nameless, faceless figures, rather than fully realized individuals. This lack of emotional connection to the characters severely diminished the impact of the peril they were facing.
Furthermore, Nolan's decision to fragment the timeline was disorienting. While this non-linear narrative approach has worked well in his other movie like "Memento", here in "Dunkirk" it added unnecessary complexity and confusion. It often detracted from the immediacy and desperation of the evacuation, making it difficult to follow the story and fully immerse myself in the film.
Lastly, while the minimal dialogue was an interesting choice, it left little room for the depth and context that verbal interaction typically provides. The scant dialogue combined with the aforementioned issues made the film feel more like an exhibition of dramatic visuals and sounds rather than a coherent, engaging story.
In conclusion, while "Dunkirk" was certainly a technical marvel with impressive cinematography and sound design, its lack of character depth, complex narrative structure, and minimal dialogue ultimately made for a viewing experience that felt more confusing than compelling.
Dunkirk is another exceptional WWII movie that stands alongside cinematic classics like Saving Private Ryan and Fury. The film's excellent cinematography is truly breathtaking and transports the viewer to the heart of the intense battle. Tom Hardy delivers a great performance, capturing the bravery and determination of the pilots fighting in the skies above Dunkirk. Overall, Dunkirk is a must-see movie for anyone who loves war movies or appreciates excellent filmmaking.
A great movie showing the struggles of war during sn especially tough time. Nolan's style works so well with this type of movie.
Great movie! Not my thing
AAW sound mixing/editing. M7S8
It was exteremely boring and I didn't like it. I skipped some parts because of the boringness. Bad movie. 5/10
Not sure why I hadn't gotten around to watching this before now, having seen everything else Nolan has done, but I'm so glad I didn't totally forget about it. There's a tiny bit of Nolan getting gimmicky with time structures, but beyond that, this is a brutal, tense (like genuinely tense), and tight war film. It's also likely Nolan's most human film, where I found myself caring for the characters instead of them being cogs in whatever plot machination he was exploring. It's also a brilliantly beautiful film with striking visuals and a score that will elevate your heart rate completely on its own. This should be an absolute must see. Period.
7.5/10 - What an absolutely horrible, horrifying, and messy evacuation :o We shall never again create such horrible wars.
Some scenes felt off (not making much sense to me - physically, decision wise, or both) but other than that it really showed the horrors of war without the need of much dialogue. Especially the deaths of George and Farrier hurt incredibly (I really hope these aren't real). So many heroes in this one, especially Mr. Dawson, Tommy, Collins, Farrier, and Commander Bolton.
The RAF pilots where my personal heros (especially because I really like aeroplanes).
Edit: I'm glad to know now that the characters and storyline are fictional (but obviously based on real events).
Very good.
'Dunkirk', as you'd expect given the director, is extremely well made. I particularly enjoyed how the film is shot, the sound editing and the score. It's a watchable story about an event from World War II.
I wouldn't, personally, say there's a standout cast performer. I don't mean that negatively, it's just more a film about a group of people rather than individuals - which I assume was the intention. There are still good performances, from the likes of Tom Glynn-Carney and Jack Lowden. It also features star names, including Tom Hardy, Cillian Murphy and Mark Rylance.
The music and how the sequences are crafted is what elevates this film up, while the pacing is almost spot on - they could easily have made this 2hr 15mins+, like most war films seem to do, but keeping it at around 1hr 47mins was a smart choice. I do still feel like it could've been greater, yet I still got entertainment from it.
Such a beautiful film. It gets me every time. Kenneth Branagh's performance is amazing, with just few lines he makes me cry: his eyes, his face, his expression. The music and sound editing is brilliant, because in a film with almost no words the sounds and music notes fill every scene. Christopher Nolan is just a genious and this film proves it. I just did not like the last seconds, it ends abruptly.
This is a fun, action packed, and exciting take on the horror that was Dunkirk. Instead of being plot driven this film takes a much more visual route with limited dialogue but jaw dropping cinematography. There are a few things I would be able to nitpick here and there that I had problems with but overall this is worth the watch.
From Christopher Nolan comes the World War II epic Dunkirk. It doesn’t really have a plot as such, but instead attempts to recreate a visceral experience as it following an anonymous soldier on the beach waiting for rescue, a pilot patrolling the sky, and a civilian boat captain making way for Dunkirk in response to the government’s call for aid. There isn’t very much dialog, and what little there is is rather incidental and only reveals fragments of the Dunkirk battle/evacuation. However, Nolan conveys so much through his use of the camera and the images, that little is needed. The desperation and enormity of the situation comes through, and is quite powerful. Despite its lack of narrative, Dunkirk is a compelling war film.
I really enjoyed this movie. War movies can sometimes be too raw or have some slow/boring moments where I can't wait for the movie to end, but not this one. It was very smooth to watch and time went by easily. It's a non-conventional war movie, it has some violent scenes of course, given the topic, but it's violent mostly psychologically rather than physically, in my opinion. You constantly feel the fear and the sense of lost hope of the soldiers during the whole movie. The soldiers waiting at the beach are in danger non-stop from the air attacks, and unarmed, they are just waiting for their destiny, to be rescued or killed, and they can't fight back, just wait. There's a feeling of near defeat, the characters are not fighting to win, but fighting to survive or postpone their death at least, they're actually retiring and trying to go back home, so they've already lost. There are a few main characters, the "good guys", but you actually never see who is the enemy, in the face. You just see other fighters briefly, but no soldiers. The horror of the war itself is the true enemy here, so the enemy is invisible. The colors are amazing, very cold, grey, the gloomy weather expresses the situation really well. I really liked how the different plots are linked together, especially I liked the scenes with the fighters, so thrilling. Tom Hardy is flying with low fuel levels almost the whole movie, but still fighting anyway, and it gave me so much anxiety. The music is just perfect, it suits so well and it makes everything 100 times more tense. A must-to-watch movie :)
message: 9/10
story: 10/10
climax: 10/10
plot: 10/10
characters: 7.5/10
acting: 7/10
entertainment value: 7/10
total: 8.75/10
i really don’t enjoy war movies but this was amazing, christopher nolan really snapped.
After many great reviews I decided I would go and watch this on the big screen for the atmosphere and in that at lease I have to say it was great. But and it is a big but, for a story I left feeling let down. This is no saving private Ryan or stunning epic as the critics would suggest. I am no history buff and I am from the other side of the world but even I know the story of Dunkirk and this just didn't live up the epic nature of the true story. The characters don't do the story justice, the timelines are blurred and the epic nature is missing. There are some great visual scenes and a few uplifting moments but it just didn't feel tied together. My rating is probably a bit harsh but I just don't rate this a one of the great efforts of story telling. If you didn't know anything of the actual events at Dunkirk this would leave you having missed the epic nature of what was achieved with 700 private boats over 8 days back in 1940.
A fairly unspectacular war movie. Beautifully shot with a nice soundtrack by Hans Zimmer but the movie itself is a bit of a nothing. There are some very tense parts to the movie and it shows the guilt of losing and the fear whole retreating very well, but that's basically the entire movie. There's the story about the nice brave family with a boat, and I suppose one pilot being really good is the other story were following, with a repeated theme of don't go below deck on boats. It was fine. A lot of different moving parts that never really added up to anything greater.
Great war epic.
I appreciate the non-linear triple-line narrative structure despite the fact that it can be rather confusing to understand the timeline.
The terror of a quiet solitude, exposed on an endangered French beach and desperately awaiting evacuation at the height of World War II. Abandoning the more experimental themes he toyed with in Inception and Interstellar, Christopher Nolan has set out to make a mostly-straight war picture, shining his spotlight on a major test (and ultimate turning point) for the British armed forces. Told from three entangled perspectives - one each from land, sea and air - we see heroes, victims, cowards and lunatics emerge from what might have otherwise seemed a nondescript group of young men.
It's far less bombastic than the standard combat film, with a soft, observant character and distinct lack of extraneous dialog. That reticence, paired with an emphasis on beautifully-composed photography, reminded me more of an art film than an action epic. The battlefield's thick tension is inescapable, though, always drawing us back to the moment, with the frightened skyward eyes and skittish, shell-shocked nature of nearby soldiers proving a constant reminder that arbitrary death could be mere moments away. It’s also the rare positive example of a recent tendency toward uneven sound mixes: a barrage of gunfire or sudden, screaming airborne bombing run can pack a mighty punch.
It’s very solid, undeniably one of the most well shot war films ever made.
However, it lacks a bit of emotional resonance.
Most of these characters (especially the ones in the air and at the pier) aren’t that interesting, so it’s not a movie that fully engages you as a viewer. I don’t necessarily need a schmaltzy backstory, but they could’ve given Fionn Whitehead more of a personality at the very least.
Also, I thought the scenes in the air, while they sound incredible, got a bit stale after while.
It’s just Jack Lowden and Tom Hardy shooting at a bunch of planes, and there’s not much more to it.
Still, this movie deserves a lot of respect for its presentation, story structure, directing, acting, editing, sound design, score, etc.
7.5/10
Dunkirk is truly a stunning piece of cinema. Deft direction from Christopher nolan, excellent acting from all involved, and beautiful cinematography. This is a film that keeps you on the edge of your seat for the entire 107 minute runtime, and the suspense is further elevated by a fantastic score from Hans Zimmer. This may well be one of the best films of the 21st century, and it is certainly Nolan's best to date.
This type of movie doesn't hold up as well at home. It still is great and incredibly well made but I need the Imax experience to fully appreciate this.
If you watch Dunkirk expecting a solid plot, you’ll be disappointed, so throw that pre-conceived notion out of the window right now.
This film is about experience; you’re watching it for the cinematography, sound engineering and the score.. and it’s where Nolan delivers.
I enjoyed that movie a lot. While the poster promises a movie with a lot of impressing shots, the movie is actually kept quite simple: No superfluous cgi but a lot of exciting scenes. Well done.
noioso e incapace di suscitare vere emozioni
Impressive movie. It could have flaws with the characters (not knowing them a lot) and the story in general but most of the lines are well done and MAN the movie really grips you and you really want the british soldiers to escape.
This film was so f****g boring...
An ambitious an ultimately successful retelling of one of the most amazing events in World War 2. I don't know if it could be told much better than it was as it captured the desperation and heroism of the event.
https://ihatebadmovies.com/movies/dunkirk
It would be ok, but there was too much hype around. It did not meet the challenge. And that time shift was so Nolan's...
Beautiful, pristine setting and well-represented emotional environment of absolute chaos for each of the characters. Look out for subtle decisions and pieces of dialogue that open the door to a psychological complexity that makes me happy. Zimmer's soundtrack brings the suspense without the Inception-style vibrating bass (finally).
Not a lot of plot or character development, so don't go looking for it. Keep on track with the time splicing. Ask where the decisons of the characters were bound by historical accounts.
Another very strong 8/10 from Nolan.
Superb war movie, great directing and acting
Christopher Nolan is a great favorite director who rarely makes a disappointment, not this time either.
First did not think so much about this war movie but because it was his movie, I rented it on Itunes and I do not regret it.
This is a minor masterpiece that just flew forward. I do not usually like movies based on reality, seen too many half well of that kind of movie.
Nice to get rid of most big stars that are always in these movies and most of them were actors I have not seen before.
But I like Tom Hardy even though he is hidden by his aircraft equipment for the most part.
The best part is, however, is the music of my great favorite composers, Hans Zimmer, his huge soundtrack lies and pumps almost the whole movie and I think it's a big part in making this a big movie.
Thrilling war movie that has amazing directing and soundtrack and kept me at the edge of my seat for almost 2 hours. Based on a true story, it does a great job with its timelines and the cinematography and visuals are also quite stunning. Overall I found it to be really great and you should definitely watch it.
A cinematic experience. Unlike most movies, this one makes you feel something.
Pretty good, but not fantastic
Directed for oscar,great cinematography excellent photography.8.4/10
I wanted to see Dunkirk because of Christopher Nolan’s great work but was hesitant to watch another WWII movie. But this stands out as not just a film about fighting a war but a film about what it’s like to survive war. Well done.
"Home."
You can love, hate or call him overrated all you want, but you've got to give respect to Christopher Nolan for going this old school. Nothing like cardboard props for background soldiers, inspired by the silence films era with little dialogue, and going full practical. The attention to details with scope and intensity making the overall experience harsh, but masterfully well made. Nolan has made something extraordinary and proven why he's the best living film maker working today. All of his movies have this grand scale to it, but never feels hollow.
Watching "Dunkirk" on the IMAX screen was such a overwhelming and frightening experience, but perfectly captures the terror of war those men faced. It got me pretty emotional towards the end. Gunshots sound like actual gunshots and the sound of bomber planes are like something out of a horror film. Every bullet that whizzed by made everyone in the cinema flinch (including me). It's one of the best movies I've seen so far this year. I would go as far to say it's the best war film in recent years & Nolan filmography.
My ears are still ringing from it, as I couldn't hear all that well after it ended.
The cinematography, the sound, writing, and direction are on so many levels of amazing. With Han Zimmer score being his best work yet. Being both phenomenal and hunting, leaving me cold at times. It's no surprise all the tense parts are through Hans score who puts weight to these difficult moments in the movie. And it's only the sound of a ticking watch.
I've found new respect for Harry Styles after this. Because he actually delivered a pretty good performance. Very impressive since it's he's first role and had a lot of screen time than I expected. Same thing with Fionn Whitehead, who's plays another young solider was also fantastic. The rest of the cast like: Tom Hardy, Mark Rylance, Kenneth Branagh, and Cillian Murphy were all terrific. Not a weak performance in the movie.
Now people have been complaining about the lack of information with these characters or no real main character to feel for them. I really don't think these people understand that isn't the point of the film. You understand these characters just by actions and decisions. All of this is based on how they act in a situation. No corny or cliché dialogue. It's visual story telling at it's finest. No has time talk about their back story or how they need to get back home to their wife and kids. The time is ticking, the enemy is getting closer, and your stuck with complete strangers on foreign land. The film doesn't have protagonist and antagonist.
You never see the Germans in person, just bomber planes. It makes they presence more scary and tense every time another attack happens.
Overall Rating: Please do yourself a favor and see this in IMAX. It really adds to the experience.
Cinematographic marvel, seen it on IMAX. The only downside is the beach never feels as crowded as I've seen it in the documentaries. But this adds to minimalism I think..
Dunkirk is frankly a stunning film to experience in the cinema, especially in IMAX 70mm. No backstory is needed and, with minimal dialogue throughout, Nolan lays out the stakes in the first five minutes and proceeds from there. With three intersecting stories playing out over the course of the film, Nolan gets to indulge in playing with time a little and the chronological structure of the film, but it is never confusing and it is often used to great effect to build the tension, either through signposting events to come or switching between events to heighten the tension. The aerial dogfights and photography are stunning to watch and Zimmer's score is relentless. Nolan is often accused of being a cold and emotionless filmmaker, but as a Brit, there were moments in this film that for me, Nolan managed to capture something that is not uniquely British, but is often held up as a British virtue. As Branagh spies "home" coming to get the soldiers and Churchill's words are spoken from a newspaper reading towards the close of the film, the overwhelming sense of British stoicism and resolve in the face of the enemy ensures the old cliche "Keep calm and carry on!" has never felt more worthwhile.
it's a experience of immersion. You feel like you're in the battle yourself. Master Nolan had proved one more time he is the best in story telling, no matter is the subject is real history or fiction
I recommend to watch it in IMAX. It's intense, because you feel is 3 hours long and it's only 1 hour and a half.
No gore, not a lot of dialogue, just an intense motion picture
Damn been on edge of my seat whole movie with heart pounding so hard in some of the scenes. Powerfull movie.
Dunkirk maybe isn't as exciting as other events during WW2 but still very interesting and it's well told here.
Absolutely love the stamp Nolan put on it. It doesn't really seem like a Hollywood film, unlike many war movies. You normally have to look at foreign film for something different in this genre but he achieved it here.
Can't wait to re-watch it when the Blu-ray comes out!
overall not bad of a movie, just little things that bother me like a bomb landing on bodies and they are still intact. just not realistic
Solid war film despite the PG-13 rating. Dunkirk is still a pulse pounding thrilling war film that never lets you up for air. Nolan shows that a War film can be well made even without being incredibly violent.
One of the more impact full movies I've seen
One more Masterpiece from Nolan !! #Amazing
Nolan is still interesting, conveys the fear on the beach, the urge to leave, the noise of attacks
This move could not have been any better. Only thing is that it's too short.
I was so looking forward to this movie. I only discovered this story of the civilian response to the peril at Dunkirk in the last decade, and was deeply moved by the heroism, courage and compassion of ordinary people called to confront extraordinary circumstances. I first became aware of this movie as a trailer in a theatre, and just remembering the events brought me to tears (and I've never been a weepy person). This movie looks at the response - from the air, from the sea and from the beach and the storytelling is engaging and beautiful. It seems like phenomenal actors queued up to have roles of any size, and the casting was excellent. I saw it in an IMAX theatre, and I recommend you see it on the largest screen available to you and in 3D. I give it a 9 (superb) out of 10.
A truly breathtaking experience in 70MM IMAX, and an absolutely gorgeous film as well. Kudos to Nolan once again.
Good movie. Beware gets VERY loud, over 109 Db during some explosions. Enjoy!
Going to the cinema today, but already gave it a 10/10.
Edit: It was superb.
Review by deanzelVIP 11BlockedParent2017-07-22T01:30:39Z
Dunkirk by Christopher Nolan was just a fabulous experience. I definitely enjoyed the movie quite a bit from start to finish, and usually war movies aren't really my cup of tea (at least not anymore). However, cinematically, the entire movie is just a masterpiece. As a big movie buff, I could appreciate how meticulously crafted the whole movie was. It's so hard to create a movie like this within this genre while trying to remain "minimal", but Christopher Nolan accomplishes it in every sense of the word.
He seamlessly interweaves 3-4 different plot narratives/timelines, while using minimal amounts of exposition. He gives the viewer such a sense of a looming and foreboding threat, while never even having a Nazi soldier on screen at any time. He tells us "so much with so little" and allows the viewer to take in the conflict of each situation (and there are a lot of them) rather than point it all out to us. In that sense, you really feel like you're getting into the mind of each one of the soldiers/main characters when they are contemplating some very crucial decisions that literally determine life and death, for not just them, but many other men as well.
Nolan gives us continued development, closure and solid endings in each one of the tiny subplots that he sets off from the beginning. It's definitely a joy seeing how all the different plotlines intermingle with each other at the end especially with the civilian aspect added in. And, most importantly, he accomplishes all this in less than 2 hours (and by a damn good margin as well).
If you appreciate amazing direction, cinematography, and vision within a movie, this will be an absolute joy. It could definitely get Christopher Nolan that elusive Best Director Oscar come Academy Award season. I watched Dunkirk in 70mm, but, honestly, I couldn't really tell the difference, especially without being able to do a side-by-side comparison to a regular version. Overall, it didn't seem too different from the usual XD or IMAX type presentation at my local big theater. Still, the movie is a visual treat lending heavily to more practical effects that gives a nice sense of realism to it all.
Anyways, this gets a solid 9/10 from me, coming from a war movie curmudgeon. Watch it, and you won't regret it.