Dunkirk (Summer 2017) directed by Christopher Nolan

I saw this last night at the local isense screen at Odeon, which has a 4k projector and excellent sound system. The proper 70mm imax would have been too much of a trek. I really enjoyed it all-in-all, it's definitely one of my favourite Nolan films. It is incredibly loud on an isense screen and I would assume that imax will be similar, so prepare yourself for that. The seats were shaking in certain parts of the film. I'll spoiler the rest of my general thoughts on the film below:

  • [*]It's much lighter on dialogue than any of his previous films
    [*]The visuals and the audio are what really make this film, so I'd definitely recommend a cinema viewing on the best screen you can find locally
    [*]Due to it being so light on dialogue I didn't think any one actor stood out, however all performances were good, including Harry Styles imo. Mark Rylance and Fionn Whitehead were probably the best of the bunch
    [*]The aerial combat was incredible, it was probably my favourite part of the film, but I thought the bit where Tom Hardy shot down the Stuka divebomber having run out of fuel was a bit unbelievable and jarring. I would have preferred they'd left that bit out
    [*]The runtime was perfect. I find some of Nolan's films a bit too long, particularly Interstellar, so under two hours was spot on.
    [*]The lack of blood was a shame, I would have preferred a higher certificate with a bit more gore. I know the brutality of war isn't really the point of the film, but it was still a bit weird seeing people being shot without any blood appearing
 
tombrr said:
For someone who doesn't fully understand the differences between all the different types of film, what are the main differences of say seeing this in a standard 2D screen at an Odean/Showcase cinema (my closest cinemas) rather than say at an Imax screen in central London etc?
Click to expand...

Analogue 70mm Imax will have both the best picture with a dramatically higher resolution and show all of the picture with a 1.43:1 aspect ratio

70mm Film (Non imax) Will have a very high resolution but is cropped down to 2.20:1

Imax with Laser will have a 4k image (Lower than 70mm and much lower than Analogue Imax) but will show 'most' of the image with an aspect ration of 1.9:1

35mm Film will have a resolution similar to 4k but is aspect ratio is cropped down to 2.20:1

Imax digital ( MOST IMAX) will have a 2k image that isn't much better than a HD tv but will show 'most' of the image with an aspect ration of 1.9:1

The 'average' local cinema will be showing using 2k projectors with a cropped ratio of 2.20.1 and will be a very watered down presentation of what the film is supposed to be.
 
I just saw this tonight and I'm actually (very) slightly gutted. No way did it live up to the hype. No way is it a masterpiece, it's good but that's it.

I'm not interested in how it was filmed or the technology used. If that floats your boat then good for you. I personally am very interested in WW2 history that's my thing. Approaching a subject of this magnitude is a daunting task. I think it was a terrific attempt but just missed the mark for full satisfaction.

We sat right at the front and the guy working the screen that night actually came down to us and warned us that it was a loud film and that during a test screening they had debated whether or not to lower the volume. Sustained 80db pretty much whenever there was a fighter or bomber on screen...
I had no issues with it but he said move if it's too much for you... lol


*The 3-way time split was fine to follow not sure what the deal was, I read it confused people?
*The Final Spitfire scene was indeed ridiculous and it really ruined it for me. I guess it was just a device to show some better scale shots (with cgi?) of the size of it all as to me It felt underwhelming in parts. There's plenty of literature saying Spitfires are capable of gliding for great distances, one pilot said he glided 15miles with no engine but the one in the film is bleeding off so much air speed and height, it even shoots down a JU87.. utter BS. They are also equipped with endless ammo, but that's usual in films.
*The acting was fine, of what little there was. One direction was fine.
*I Didn't miss any gore at all.

I really don't wanna pick stuff apart scene by scene, I understand the limitations of such a project.
The 3-way time split is a very clever way of reusing the same footage from 3 points of view. So credit to that.

I thought I was going to get extremely emotional, I didn't until the end. I think I got little wet eyed, but I got that when Han Solo died in Force Awakens so .....

8.5/10 Its great but not wow....
 
Just got back from seeing at a local "IMAX", not one of the proper 70mm ones but a big screen none the less, and as others have suggested see this film in the biggest screen you can locally. (Wasn't until reading this thread that I was made aware that the local IMAX isnt full IMAX otherwise might of made more of an effort to go to the printworks in Manchester.)

Thought film was incredible. Not quite like anything I've seen before, guess that was due to lack of dialogue. Sort of felt like it was just happening in front of you rather then been told a story. Very difficult to explain so excuse me if that doesn't make entire sense!

Audio was a real standout, the first gunshots took me by suprise and was very visceral. The sounds of explosions and gunshots are very intense and really got the full immersive effect of surround sound.

Thought the 3 timelines functioned very well and was for me easy enough to follow.

The dogfighting scenes were top notch, albeit with some artistic licence but doesn't diminish the experience of the film for me.

Overall would encourage anyone who enjoys Nolans work or war films to go and see it! Don't think my TV and bluray will do it justice so glad I saw it at the cinema :)

Does leave you with a feeling of awe as to how the operation was completed and the bravery of the people who were in civilian vessels heading into warfare to rescue the troops.
 
Just got back, technically the film was great and the sound design was phenomenal, especially the bits with the dive bombers. That said I didn't really like the film, I didn't connect with any of the characters and couldn't really care less what happened to any of them.
 
Saw it at the very sweaty Science Museum IMAX.

It was intense, engrossing, audibly and visually stunning. However, far from my favourite Nolan film. What he's done is excellent and can only really be experience on the big screen IMAX. I can imagine buying the Blu-ray and playing it on my 5.1 will fall a bit flat - also my neighbours will hate me thanks to Zimmer's thunderous (and awesome) score.

It reminded me of Gravity and Mad Max Fury Road. Excellent technical spectacles, but not much more than that. I give it a 7.5/10.
 
I saw it at a 70mm ArcLight in Sherman Oaks, I felt traumatised afterwards. The sound was top notch and definitely improves the experience.

Very difficult watch for all the right reasons, excellent story telling.
 
Just got back and wow what a film, definitely worth watching in Imax anything less and your gimping the viewing experience, you can tell it's been filmed mostly on imax cameras and the sound in this just amazing from the first bullet being fired to the bombs dropping you 'feel' everything.

I'm surprised by how good it is considering there isn't a huge battle scene i.e Saving Private Ryan on the beach.

It reminded me of watching Mad Max Fury Road with how it doesn't let up at any point through the full run time, no backstories and chats between soldiers regarding loved ones at home and with the SJW getting on their high horse regarding no blacks, they were indeed black soldiers shown in the French Army.
 
Really really enjoyed it and the way the timeline is done (Nolan loves playing with time doesn't he) really makes me want to see it again.

It was a total thrill ride come horror film really. My heart was pounding after the first minute and I was tense till the end.
 
I really enjoyed this film. I think it takes everyone differently of course but for me the way it's put together with timelines means there's little to no downtime and I felt like I was on the edge of my seat for most of it.

My partner got a bit emotional at some point too
 
Incredible

I just saw it, its so unbelievably well made

Drove my car like a spitty all the way home

Massive Tom Hardy boner from me as well

Soundtrack adds so much to the film as well, awesome

The three POV timeline works great as well
 
Last edited:
Urgh. Boring!! What a disappointment. Huge let down.

There's so little backstory, so little dialogue that i found it impossible to care for any of the characters.

The soundtrack was terrible and borderline headache-inducing. On and on it went.

5/10. The worst Nolan film I've seen to date.
 
I saw this at the Waterloo BFI IMAX earlier and thought it was tremendous. Almost from the off it was really quite intense and then the tension just grew and grew throughout. Zimmers score is fantastic in that respect, and it's masterfully edited.

Spoilers from here on out...

I loved the way that the stories took place over different time-scales (1 week, 1 hour, 1 day) but all converged in various places and came together towards the end. I had zero trouble following any of that and you would either have to be not very well versed in film, or frankly, a bit stupid frankly to have issues with it.

The aerial sequences on IMAX were so visceral, some of the best 'realistic' dog fighting i've seen in a film.

Performances were all fine, I forgot I was watching Harry Styles after a very short while. Luckily the casting didn't grate like Ed Sheerans cameo in Game of Thrones recently. Probably helps that i've barely seen an interview or anything with Styles so very few preconceptions about him. Kenneth Branagh stood out for me if I had to pick somebody.

I guess I did notice the lack of gore towards the very start of the movie. The first time a dive bomber kills soldiers on the beach and you see the body of a soldier in the background flying upwards for instance. In Saving Private Ryan/Band of Brothers that would have been a shower of blood and body parts. Then cut to the next shot and the men who were dead afterwards with no obvious blood or wounds. After that I pretty much forgot about it.

I didn't see the 'twist' coming that the silent soldier was a French soldier trying to escape.

The bit where the little boats appeared at Dunkirk and the soldiers started cheering and Branagh had tears in his eyes as the music swelled was very stirring though. A rare moment of patriotic pride from me there.

Back to the editing. There was some great moments where you think you know how something pans out, and then you see if from another perspective which changes things. Such as the downed pilot in the sea 'waving' to Tom Hardy that he's ok. Cut to the scene later and we realise he's stuck and likely to drown. Just completely piles on the tension after you think everything is going to be ok

2 minor complaints, and one has been addressed by plenty of other people.
1) Tom Hardys Spitfire gliding for ages. I imagine they can go for a while, but the bit right at the end when he managed to somehow shoot down the dive bomber with no engine power was completely ridiculous.
2) Those 2 (then 3) soldiers were the most unlucky soldiers at Dunkirk. Just how many boats did they get on/nearly get on that then sank?



TriedandTested said:
Urgh. Boring!! What a disappointment. Huge let down.

There's so little backstory, so little dialogue that i found it impossible to care for any of the characters.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why you need backstory to care in this type of film?

I found I could empathise with some of them almost straight away, as what most of them go through is pretty horrendous.
I can imagine that drowning is a horrible way to go for instance and that's enough to make me want the soldiers to survive

I liked the tiny bits of backstory you got occasionally
like when you find out at the end that Mark Rylances son was killed in the first 3 weeks of the War. Tells you a lot about the man in that one little detail.
 
I didn't see the 'twist' coming that the silent soldier was a French soldier trying to escape.
Click to expand...

Twist!

Did you not notice that he was swapping uniforms and burying the evidence when Tommy first spotted him? There was no doubt in my mind what was happening at that moment. Tommy knew and was covering for him all the way, hence the "tell him" moment. The reason they didn't really speak is because they didn't really have a common language. He stayed up top on the ship so he didn't have to speak to anyone in the hull.

If you see it again I think you will wonder how you missed it! It was all a sub plot of excitement wondering when he would get rumbled!
 
Saw it on Friday evening. Absolutely tremendous from start to finish!

Nolan is the twenty first century master of putting ALL the money on screen and by god could you see every penny here.

Strong performances all round, though one of the few complaints I have is that dialogue seemed to a little clunky at times.

Still not entirely sure whether I liked the time scale mechanic. I thought it was interesting, but a little convoluted. Didn't feel as though it really added anything.

One other thing, I saw it in Liemax and my local Empire. Did anyone else feel that the guns where EXCESSIVELY loud?? I literally had to cover my ears at certain points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom