Dunkirk (Summer 2017) directed by Christopher Nolan

kindai said:
The RAF consists of the same 3 planes?
Click to expand...

Since the air scenes took place over 1 hour, what's the issue....it's not unrealistic to follow one sortie of 3 planes for an hour is it?.....and since the RAF weren't particularly at Dunkirk, why do you think it's an entire portrayal of them
 
A 12 aircraft squadron would be broken up into four 'vics' of three aircraft each, called 'sections' and generally identified by colour.

So it's entirely in keeping with reality.

Nolan said there were 400,000 different stories he could have chosen, but the focus is on specific people and not the whole event.

Hence the primary POV being the 2-3 soldiers (Land) , one little boat (Sea) and 3 Spitfires (Air)
 
brendy said:
I enjoyed it in the main but again lack of scale, why was he so against cgi to give it more presence?
Click to expand...

I think it's a subjective thing. I felt the sense of scale was more then enough for the story it wanted to tell. Even if you do have an issue with it, there's plenty of great war flicks that play fast and loose with the truth that you've most likely given a free pass to over the years.

This isn't necessarily specific to you, but these days there does seem to be almost a mob style mentality towards movies and games that receive a great deal of praise. I'm not for one second saying that if you have an issue with the movie, you're being deliberately contrary, but that certainly seems to be the way for a lot of people. Instantly dismiss everything the movie objectively does well cus it's edgy ennit. There's so few places to have decent, nuanced discussions about flicks or games these days.

Again, not saying that's necessarily the case with you or anyone here really, but it's certainly a mentality I've seen everywhere online recently.
 
^^^
I think the vast majority in this thread liked the film, quite a few though ( myself included ) felt that more men on the beach would have enhanced it, hardly a "mob style mentality" because of the praise it received. :confused:
 
Mr.E. said:
^^^
I think the vast majority in this thread liked the film, quite a few though ( myself included ) felt that more men on the beach would have enhanced it, hardly a "mob style mentality" because of the praise it received. :confused:
Click to expand...

Again, I don't want anyone to think that I'm discounting the opinions of all those who had issues with it.

DrToffnar said:
I'm not for one second saying that if you have an issue with the movie, you're being deliberately contrary, but that certainly seems to be the way for a lot of people. Instantly dismiss everything the movie objectively does well cus it's edgy ennit. .
Click to expand...
 
Managed to see it today and was absolutely blown away by it... that goes for my wife too. Any sense of scale and 'epic' I thought it might lack (based on the trailer) was unfounded. It might be contained and only offer a narrow view for the most part, but this created a feeling of claustrophobia and tension that continued to build right to the end. I thought the characters were all very strong, despite the lack of dialogue and back-story... for this film it simply didn't need it, and I felt very much connected to all of them, and very moved at times.

The score had a few moments where in intruded too much (too loud in the mix) and pulled me out of the experience, but overall the rhythmic escalations helped to drive the on screen action forward and ramp-up the level of tension.

The photography was natural and didn't veer in to the gimmicky of flashy... Sadly we only saw it on a medium sized screen at VUE in Exeter, but the presentation was flawless, and the sound amazing. In fact I don't think the sound has ever been such a big part of a film for me, visceral is the word. It won't be the same watching at home, but I will buy it on blu the day it comes out.

Nearly a 10 out of 10 for me.



.
 
Last edited:
I just saw it tonight and thoroughly enjoyed it. The action tells the story - not the dialogue. If you appreciate history and what happened in those days, I think Nolan has done a great job to convey the sense of terror these men went through.
Mark Rylance is outstanding, I was so impressed with him in Bridge of Spies, why isn't he on our screens more?
I'm also glad I went to the cinema to see it - instead of waiting for blu-ray (like I usually do). You'll never have the volume cranked up high enough at home to enjoy the sound FX. Well, without receiving a complaint from your neighbour and a visit from your local environmental health dept. This movie needs to be played loud.
 
I briefly didn't get the time scene difference, until I said to my friend. Why is it dark in France it's only an hour ahead. When I noticed Cillian Murphy was on both the small boat and a rescue Row boat, it twigged.
It did seem strange in parts because everytime I thought I was watching another boat go down, it was the same minesweeper from several perspectives. The many bombers I kept seeing was actually only the same one with the same 2/3 Spitfires behind.
Simarly the ending in what looked like a circling plane with no engine power, was actually just the plane from 3 different angles going in a straight line.

I think it needs a second viewing to make it easier to appreciate those connections.
 
Last edited:
ChroniC said:
I briefly didn't get the time scene difference, until I said to my friend. Why is it dark in France it's only an hour ahead. When I noticed Cillian Murphy was on both the small boat and a rescue Row boat, it twigged.
It did seem strange in parts because everytime I thought I was watching another boat go down, it was the same minesweeper from several perspectives. The many bombers I kept seeing was actually only the same one with the same 2/3 Spitfires behind.
Simarly the ending in what looked like a circling plane with no engine power, was actually just the plane from 3 different angles going in a straight line.

I think it needs a second viewing to make it easier to appreciate those connections.
Click to expand...
Yea for a while I thought that was unbelieveable piloting keeping it in the air for about 20 mins unpowered! :D
 
VincentHanna said:
I have tinnitus as well and it didn't bother me.
Click to expand...

Same here, and it didn't effect me either. It was mainly the bass that was so powerful and loud, to the point where it makes your insides wobble, but I didn't come out feeling cloth eared, like after a loud concert.

This is a cinema must see!... it just won't be the same at home, unless you have a very good system.
 
Bassmansam said:
How do you relax watching a film like that knowing that your ears are going to take a battering.
Click to expand...

Trust me, you don't relax watching this film :D

Seriously though I didn't know it was going to be so loud, but it really did not affect my hearing either during or after the film. If you're very concerned, could you not use some plugs of some sort to take out some of the volume, but still feel the bass through your body?... there is little dialogue, so taking some of the frequencies out should not spoil the overall experience.
 
Dull characters, lack of character development or empathy, lack of plot content, historical inaccuracy, events not based on real people yet presented as if they were… Many more things wrong with it than are right with it.

Can't think of anything further to say about it, really.
 
I saw it last night, thought it was a superb piece of filmmaking. After I jumped nearly clean out of my seat at the first gunshot I was totally immersed. Yeah it took me a while to figure out the timeline and when I realised the bomb run was the same thing from different eyes it made my hair fairly stand on end.

The only thing I have a slight misgiving about were the obvious shifts in altitude between edits on the flying sequences but it was a minor niggle.

9.99/10, would see again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom