Support NeoGAF

Biff · Jul 23, 2017

Trying to put my finger on why the film lacked the 'oomph' I got from Saving Private Ryan, Hacksaw Ridge, Blackhawk Down...

I initally chalked it up to the lack of blood/gore, but upon further reflection I think it's because

this movie is ultimately about retreat, not victory. The ending success of the movie is the soldiers lived to fight on in a war they were badly losing at the time. Saving Private Ryan and Hacksaw Ridge both had those clear "victory" moments that send chills down your spine.

The closest this movie got to that type of punch was when the stranded soldiers first set eyes on the incoming civilian vessels and begin cheering madly. That was a great scene, and in hindsight I think was the only scene that made me feel anything.

Still a great movie. But just doesn't stack up against the modern war greats. To be honest, it doesn't really stack up against the other Nolan greats either.

1. Interstellar
2. The Dark Knight
3. Memento
4. Inception
5. Dunkirk
6. The Prestige
7. Batman Begins
8. The Dark Knight Rises

(Haven't yet seen Insomnia or The Following)

ItWasMeantToBe19 · Jul 23, 2017

I'm utterly bewildered by what Tom Hardy did at the end of the film and can't parse it at all.

Hardy decides to land the plane instead of parachute but he lands so far away from the British forces that he ends up captured by the Nazis... Why.

jtb · Jul 23, 2017

SCULLIBUNDO said:
Still of the opinion this film should have been R.

I was personally taken out of a certain

beach scene

that would have otherwise had me shook.

Absolutely. Completely inexcusable decision to chase the money.

sunshine and gasoline · Jul 23, 2017

Just came back from watching the film. Not quite what I expected and not as good as I wished for. Certainly, there were some amazing moments and scenes. The aerial battles were stellar and so was the opening scene. But I wasn't really feeling the various characters that we were following.

Going to have to give it some time to digest but I certainly did enjoy the movie.

AlexFlame116 · Jul 23, 2017

Hmm....I've decided that I'm not going to watch it. I'm sure it's a good movie (or not so good if you're part of that opinion) but I don't think that I'll enjoy it too much. Especially after reading some of the comments.

Then again I really really like The Dark Knight Rises so maybe I really shouldn't watch this gathering by how many view TDKR here.

deo · Jul 23, 2017

Watched it around 3-4 hours ago and for those worried about the runtime, dont be. Somehow Nolan managed to make it feel like a nearly 3 hour film and I was constantly at the edge of my seat. It has to be viewed in IMAX for the best viewing experience. Its just so different from any other film Ive ever seen and I love it!

9/10

1 point off because the 3 concurrent timelines can get confusing during the film

DecoReturns · Jul 23, 2017

AlexFlame116 said:
Hmm....I've decided that I'm not going to watch it. I'm sure it's a good movie (or not so good if you're part of that opinion) but I don't think that I'll enjoy it too much. Especially after reading some of the comments.

Then again I really really like The Dark Knight Rises so maybe I really shouldn't watch this gathering by how many view TDKR here.

Watch it.

It's one of those films you have to catch in the cinema. Every films has its critics, I personally think interstellar is Nolan's weakest film, but I'm glad I caught it in the cinema, had some great scenes that can't be replicated on my tv.

Very Berry Sunday · Jul 23, 2017

ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I'm utterly bewildered by what Tom Hardy did at the end of the film and can't parse it at all.

Hardy decides to land the plane instead of parachute but he lands so far away from the British forces that he ends up captured by the Nazis... Why.

Hardy is too close to the ground to parachute. He has been gliding for awhile since he was out of fuel, so he can't gain altitude. His options were very limited. It's not like Hardy can press "A" and he can magically land.

AlexFlame116 said:
Hmm....I've decided that I'm not going to watch it. I'm sure it's a good movie (or not so good if you're part of that opinion) but I don't think that I'll enjoy it too much. Especially after reading some of the comments.

Then again I really really like The Dark Knight Rises so maybe I really shouldn't watch this gathering by how many view TDKR here.

Watch it, especially in IMAX 70mm. Everybody applauded in my theatre at the end.

Einchy · Jul 23, 2017

Lifeline said:
Death Stranding being retooled into a WW2 movie. Mads Mikkelsen as Hitler.

I feel like Death Stranding changes each week depending on whatever movie Kojima is going nuts about.

NinjaBoiX · Jul 23, 2017

I rarely go to the cinema (probably two or three times a year) think I'll go and see this in IMAX, I have a 70mm theatre near me.

deo said:
Watched it around 3-4 hours ago and for those worried about the runtime, dont be. Somehow Nolan managed to make it feel like a nearly 3 hour film and I was constantly at the edge of my seat. It has to be viewed in IMAX for the best viewing experience. Its just so different from any other film Ive ever seen and I love it!

9/10

1 point off because the 3 concurrent timelines can get confusing during the film

"For those worried about the run time, don't be. He managed to make a 2 hour film feel like 3 hours."

What?

BTM · Jul 23, 2017

Saw it in IMAX this morning. Pretty freaking incredible, though it was hard to understand some of the dialogue.

deo · Jul 23, 2017

NinjaBoiX said:
I rarely go to the cinema (probably two or three times a year) think I'll go and see this in IMAX, I have a 70mm theatre near me.

"For those worried about the run time, don't be. He managed to make a 2 hour film feel like 3 hours."

What?

2 hours is pretty short for your average blockbuster nowadays. Most movies I see are longer than that. Dunkirk feels like it goes on forever but for me thats not a bad thing because every scene had me on the edge of my seat.

robotrock · Jul 23, 2017

NinjaBoiX said:
"For those worried about the run time, don't be. He managed to make a 2 hour film feel like 3 hours."

What?

It's a pretty stressful watch. It's paced well but damn it's tense

Warm Machine · Jul 23, 2017

I just saw this at the Arclight in Santa Monica and it did not work for me. Most of the characters look the same in a mid shot with short dark wet hair and the exact same uniform. The Memento style editing was unmotivated and was mostly confusing as ships and planes often look the same throughout and setups resemble each other. The weird stoic nature of everyone made the people feel like silent robots instead of human beings.

I understand that it was meant to be designed as minimalistic as possible. There are three good sections undermined by the broken drama, the spitfires, the civilian ship, and Kenneth Branaugh standing around and waiting. Everything else sunk.

The movie is 1:30 long and feels like it though so you can see it as a positive or negative.

Buba Big Guns · Jul 23, 2017

AlexFlame116 said:
Hmm....I've decided that I'm not going to watch it. I'm sure it's a good movie (or not so good if you're part of that opinion) but I don't think that I'll enjoy it too much. Especially after reading some of the comments.

Then again I really really like The Dark Knight Rises so maybe I really shouldn't watch this gathering by how many view TDKR here.

Just watched it. No idea what the people who don't like it are talking about, this movie was just amazing. I also love TDKR btw

TheGameshark · Jul 23, 2017

Einchy said:
I feel like Death Stranding changes each week depending on whatever movie Kojima is going nuts about.

lol that sounds about right. It'll just end up being a cobbled together mess made up of every blockbuster released during its dev cycle. I expect flying cars from Blade Runner.

Joohanh · Jul 23, 2017

Wow yeah, it feels like I went to see a different movie than the critics. I have nothing against the "setpiece narrative" stuff, it worked great in Fury Road, but here everything was devoid of any weight. You forgot about characters as soon as their current scenes ended. I had no interest in seeing how the movie was going to end.

It's just a great-looking turkey. I do not understand the critical reaction it has gotten, nor do I expect this consensus to last for very long.

Nokterian · Jul 23, 2017

Going to see dunkirk in a few hours with my parents, pretty excited to see it..going in fresh.

TeddyBoy · Jul 23, 2017

I watched this yesterday in the IMAX in the Trafford Centre. I was personally very impressed and I feel you couldn't make a better film about Dunkirk (at least from a British perspective).

I was also really happy how historically accurate they tried to be, especially with the French at Dunkirk.

My friends weren't quite as keen, I feel they expected more of a Saving Private Ryan, which I'm glad it wasn't as Dunkirk was nothing like that.

NYR · Jul 23, 2017

ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I'm utterly bewildered by what Tom Hardy did at the end of the film and can't parse it at all.

Hardy decides to land the plane instead of parachute but he lands so far away from the British forces that he ends up captured by the Nazis... Why.

Way too close to the ground and he had problems with his landing gear, hence the multiple pumps.

Terbinator · Jul 23, 2017

NYR said:
Way too close to the ground and he had problems with his landing gear, hence the multiple pumps.

Why didn't he

turn around and ditch in the sea near to the army?

Angel_DvA · Jul 23, 2017

Terbinator said:
Why didn't he

turn around and ditch in the sea near to the army?

and risk to land on boats carrying people ?

Terbinator · Jul 23, 2017

Angel_DvA said:
and risk to land on boats carrying people ?

It was a pretty big area.

DecoReturns · Jul 23, 2017

Terbinator said:
It was a pretty big area.

rather not die drowning I suppose.

munchie64 · Jul 23, 2017

Wow, what a brilliant film.

The editing may have been what impressed me the most. Everything flowed together quite well. The short running time was a great move as the tension never really let up. Loved it.

Vault Dweller 111 · Jul 23, 2017

Joohanh said:
Wow yeah, it feels like I went to see a different movie than the critics. I have nothing against the "setpiece narrative" stuff, it worked great in Fury Road, but here everything was devoid of any weight. You forgot about characters as soon as their current scenes ended. I had no interest in seeing how the movie was going to end.

It's just a great-looking turkey. I do not understand the critical reaction it has gotten, nor do I expect this consensus to last for very long.

These posts always amuse me. The movie is not loved by 100% of people. 8% of critics and 15% of the audience didn't care for it. You just happen to be among the minority instead of the majority. It's not a big deal, and it doesn't mean that everyone else is wrong.

RipperGrim · Jul 23, 2017

It was good, Nolan made it more compelling with the way it was filmed and how each story connects. One thing I did think though was strangely enough the movie was missing scale. over 300000 soldiers had to be evacuated and there were hundreds of civilian vessels involved. I didn't get that scale from the movie and it's not like Nolan couldn't have gotten the budget for it. So yea the movie is good but quite the spectacle I thought it could have been.

Edit: I really did love how it was immediately into the action, we don't need long backstories for war films based on real events, 99% of the time it's just crap to get you emotional when a character dies later in the film.

nOoblet16 · Jul 23, 2017

Very Berry Sunday said:
Hardy is too close to the ground to parachute. He has been gliding for awhile since he was out of fuel, so he can't gain altitude. His options were very limited. It's not like Hardy can press "A" and he can magically land.

Watch it, especially in IMAX 70mm. Everybody applauded in my theatre at the end.

NYR said:
Way too close to the ground and he had problems with his landing gear, hence the multiple pumps.

Terbinator said:
Why didn't he

turn around and ditch in the sea near to the army?

Angel_DvA said:
and risk to land on boats carrying people ?

Well he could've just made a U turn and landed on the beach near the friendlies instead of going in a straight line and doing the same. Plus the ocean is a big area so he could've landed there and plenty of people could've made their way to him and save him. Also burning his plane would've also probably alerted the Nazis to his position.

Very Berry Sunday · Jul 23, 2017

nOoblet16 said:
Well he could've just made a U turn and landed on the beach near the friendlies instead of going in a straight line and doing the same. Plus the ocean is a big area so he could've landed there and plenty of people could've made their way to him and save him. Also burning his plane would've also probably alerted the Nazis to his position.

There's nothing more he could do. After shooting down the last German Stuka fighter plane, Hardy was all out of fuel and gliding dangerously low, too low to safely eject or circle back to the Allied-held stretch of the beach. His best bet was really to glide ahead and land on an empty beach. By the time he set down, he was alone, unarmed, surrounded by heavily-armed enemy troops, and likely exhausted (physically and mentally). He had to burn down the Spitfire or else the Germans will get it and produce their own Spitfires. Spitfire were the latest and greatest fighter planes at the time.

Plus, remember that we're looking at his predicament with the benefit of historical hindsight. For all he knew, the British government was probably negotiating peace terms with the Nazis, and then he would be back home in a few weeks. As much as he cared for his country and people, he's got a life beyond the war - and there's no point throwing it away when there's no gain to be made.

JB1981 · Jul 23, 2017

Warm Machine said:
I just saw this at the Arclight in Santa Monica and it did not work for me. Most of the characters look the same in a mid shot with short dark wet hair and the exact same uniform. The Memento style editing was unmotivated and was mostly confusing as ships and planes often look the same throughout and setups resemble each other. The weird stoic nature of everyone made the people feel like silent robots instead of human beings.

I understand that it was meant to be designed as minimalistic as possible. There are three good sections undermined by the broken drama, the spitfires, the civilian ship, and Kenneth Branaugh standing around and waiting. Everything else sunk.

The movie is 1:30 long and feels like it though so you can see it as a positive or negative.

Re: stoic nature. Think that was meant to be a kind of British stiff upper lip defiance but I could be wrong

Servbot24 · Jul 23, 2017

TheGameshark said:
lol that sounds about right. It'll just end up being a cobbled together mess made up of every blockbuster released during its dev cycle. I expect flying cars from Blade Runner.

Kojima didn't just start watching movies the last year you know

boneyjangles · Jul 23, 2017

Thought it was a good movie, some nice shots, some nice moments, an emotional last quarter. But not really the spectacle I imagined. I'll give it 7.5/10.

I still don't think Nolan is a good action director, not that there was much action.

Fbh · Jul 23, 2017

Saw it yesterday in IMAX.
Felt like a movie created for IMAX. The sense of immersion with the big screen an amazing audio is really what made me enjoy the experience a lot , the fact every explotion felt so close and you could clearly feel the vibration from the sound was unlike any other movie going experience I've had and you could almost feel the tension as if you were there.

With that said, I was a bit dissapointed by the movie itself. Aside from some cool shots I don't think it was that good and it's something I've got no interest in rewatching unless its re released in an IMAX theater at some point.
Felt a bit like one of those VR games that are really cool in VR but wouldn't be nearly as memorable just playing them on your TV

JrBaconCheeseburger · Jul 23, 2017

I saw this in IMAX with Laser.

How much different is the 70MM Experience?

Because this was already amazing but just wondering.

If anyone knows.

Blader · Jul 23, 2017

nOoblet16 said:
Well he could've just made a U turn and landed on the beach near the friendlies instead of going in a straight line and doing the same. Plus the ocean is a big area so he could've landed there and plenty of people could've made their way to him and save him. Also burning his plane would've also probably alerted the Nazis to his position.

He's way too close to the ground to do a U-turn by that point.

nOoblet16 · Jul 23, 2017

JrBaconCheeseburger said:
I saw this in IMAX with Laser.

How much different is the 70MM Experience?

Because this was already amazing but just wondering.

If anyone knows.

IMAX laser is just digital IMAX at 4K. The true 70mm IMAX have screens that are like 3-4 times bigger and have a LOT more picture information as at the end of the day IMAX laser is only 4K on an 8m tall screen. 70mm IMAX also has even more squarer screen than the on you saw which was already more square than rectangular co.pared to normal cinema)

It's amazing and better than normal cinema but true IMAX is a giant leap in comparison.

diaspora · Jul 23, 2017

nOoblet16 said:
Well he could've just made a U turn and landed on the beach near the friendlies instead of going in a straight line and doing the same. Plus the ocean is a big area so he could've landed there and plenty of people could've made their way to him and save him. Also burning his plane would've also probably alerted the Nazis to his position.

no, he couldn't have made a u-turn

Fancyarcher · Jul 23, 2017

jtb said:
Absolutely. Completely inexcusable decision to chase the money.

I'm not sure that making it PG-13 was a money decision (maybe for box office purposes), as much maybe Nolan decided to do things differently, certainly we're only making claims at this point, especially since based off everything we know Nolan cares more about the theater experience, then actual profit.

JB1981 said:
Re: stoic nature. Think that was meant to be a kind of British stiff upper lip defiance but I could be wrong

Yes, that was actually a common tactic / rule during the battle too. If you take issue with it, then well that's just how it was in real life too.

Skiptastic · Jul 23, 2017

Beer Monkey said:
Indiana State Museum IMAX. If anybody went there, was it too loud? Should I bring earplugs?

Is Row G far enough back?

Thanks.

I was in row J. Row G is perfectly fine, probably better as your entire field of vision is screen.

And I didn't need earplugs but I'm pretty sure my hearing isn't that great. Some of the sounds were intense and loud but not overly so in my opinion.

Sorry for the late response.

Raigan5088 · Jul 23, 2017

OMG that movie was incredible, just come back from watching it in IMAX and holy shit!

Really hope it gets the awards it defiantly deserves, one of the best war films ive ever seen.

KiKaL · Jul 23, 2017

Beer Monkey said:
Indiana State Museum IMAX. If anybody went there, was it too loud? Should I bring earplugs?

Is Row G far enough back?

Thanks.

Saw it last night there in Row F. It is loud but my wife, the couple we went with and myself had any complaints on the loudness but maybe we are just not as sensitive as some.

jtb · Jul 23, 2017

Fancyarcher said:
I'm not sure that making it PG-13 was a money decision (maybe for box office purposes), as much maybe Nolan decided to do things differently, certainly we're only making claims at this point, especially since based off everything we know Nolan cares more about the theater experience, then actual profit.

Well, it was the wrong decision.

And I don't see the need to give him the benefit of the doubt. Nolan produced the film. Nolan's not stupid, he hasn't made a big budget bomb yet - he's not about to tempt fate. There is little market for war films that expose the brutality of war.

Fancyarcher · Jul 23, 2017

jtb said:
Well, it was the wrong decision.

And I don't see the need to give him the benefit of the doubt. Nolan produced the film. Nolan's not stupid, he hasn't made a big budget bomb yet - he's not about to tempt fate. There is little market for war films that expose the brutality of war.

Who knows why, but either way I thought he succeeded even with the PG-13.

whytemyke · Jul 23, 2017

jtb said:
Well, it was the wrong decision.

And I don't see the need to give him the benefit of the doubt. Nolan produced the film. Nolan's not stupid, he hasn't made a big budget bomb yet - he's not about to tempt fate. There is little market for war films that expose the brutality of war.

Maybe he thought that since every other war film in existence does that, he would be ok just telling a really compelling story that hasn't been told on film before?

How much blood and gore do you want from a movie where the biggest cause of death is drowning?

Something like every critic out there is raving about the movie and most Nolan fans are digging it. But jtb here wanted to see some shit explode so Nolan must have been wrong about the movie. 🙄

norm9 · Jul 23, 2017

diaspora said:
no, he couldn't have made a u-turn

Yeah he could have. But .Nolan wasn't sure how to end it and needed emotional weight.

More_Badass · Jul 23, 2017

jtb said:
Well, it was the wrong decision.

And I don't see the need to give him the benefit of the doubt. Nolan produced the film. Nolan's not stupid, he hasn't made a big budget bomb yet - he's not about to tempt fate. There is little market for war films that expose the brutality of war.

It's the third highest grossing WW2 movie in history (1 is Pearl Harbor, 2 is Captain America). That's without inflation

With inflation, it's just behind Saving Private Ryan's adjusted $58 million

jtb · Jul 23, 2017

whytemyke said:
Maybe he thought that since every other war film in existence does that, he would be ok just telling a really compelling story that hasn't been told on film before?

How much blood and gore do you want from a movie where the biggest cause of death is drowning?

Something like every critic out there is raving about the movie and most Nolan fans are digging it. But jtb here wanted to see some shit explode so Nolan must have been wrong about the movie. ��

Enough to accurately depict the violence of the events happening on screen. I mean, they're drowning because they're being bombed and torpedoed by the Germans, not because they hit an iceberg.

More_Badass said:
It's the third highest grossing WW2 movie in history (1 is Pearl Harbor, 2 is Captain America). That's without inflation

With inflation, it's just behind Saving Private Ryan's adjusted $58 million

Pearl Harbor? Jesus christ.

More_Badass · Jul 23, 2017

jtb said:
Pearl Harbor? Jesus christ.

Well, opening weekend. Should have been more specific

jtb · Jul 23, 2017

More_Badass said:
Well, opening weekend. Should have been more specific

Looks like it still managed to pull $200m (in 2000, no less) domestic when all was said and done. Damn, what a terrible film.

Skiptastic · Jul 23, 2017

KiKaL said:
Saw it last night there in Row F. It is loud but my wife, the couple we went with and myself had any complaints on the loudness but maybe we are just not as sensitive as some.

I love being reminded that IndyGAF/HoosierGAF is a thing!

Support NeoGAF

Dunkirk - Review thread

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

semen stains the mountaintops

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Honorary Canadian.

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Similar threads