A Geeky Guy's Movie Guide to Dunkirk
Dunkirk wasn't just one movie, it was three different stories tied together by one world changing event: the evacuation of over 300,000 Allied soldiers from the beaches of Dunkirk during WWII.
How can one movie effectively tell three different stories in under 100 minutes?
It can't.
That was my problem with Dunkirk. By telling pieces of three different good stories, Christopher Nolan failed to tell one great one.
Don't get me wrong, I liked the movie. But I feel I should have loved the movie. It had all the ingredients to be an incredible film. It was based on an amazing and emotional story. It had a great writer and director. The cast was fantastic. The cinematography, effects, and use of the IMAX camera were perfect.
Unfortunately, instead of blending these elements into one amazing meal, Nolan chose to serve it in a 3 section TV dinner tray.
Any of the three stories could have been the focal point of a fantastic movie. Personally, I would have focused on the old man compelled by his sense of duty to sail his boat into danger in order to do his part to stop the Nazis. However, all could have been compelling.
I can't believe I am writing this, but for the first time in quite a while, I thought this movie needed to be significantly longer. If Nolan was set on telling three distinct stories (one from a British pilot's point of view, one from a trapped soldier's point of view and one from a civilian's point of view) he needed at least another 45 minutes to tell each story as thoroughly as it deserved.
With approximately 5 minutes left in the movie, I realized that I did not know a single character's name. And I didn't really care. None of the characters were fleshed out at all. Even if this was done intentionally in order to send the message that in a war, the importance of the individual is insignificant compared to the common goal... it didn't help to make a compelling movie.
Of course I wanted all of the main characters to survive... but no more than I wanted every faceless extra on the beach to survive. I had zero connection at all to any of the characters.
That lack of connection was my problem. If the movie and been 45 minutes longer, Nolan could have established why I should care about these particular characters. At the very least, if he had focused on one story, I could have rooted for those characters and then cared about the others as they related to the main protagonists.
If you have read my other reviews, you know that I get incredibly emotionally involved in movies. I am not afraid to cry. In fact, I respect any movie maker who can move me to tears with his or her work. I thoroughly expected to cry a few times during this movie. Heck, as I read the tagline on the poster as I entered the theater, I got a little choked up.
"When 400,000 men couldn't get home, home came for them".
Oh yeah, this one was going to make me cry.
Then it didn’t.
To be fair, I might not be the average audience member. Every year I show my students a 12 minute documentary titled Boatlift. It tells the true story of civilian sailors rushing toward Manhattan Island on September 11, 2001. They all went there because people needed them. They went there because heroes "do what they can".
Every time I watch that video, I get choked up.
Unfortunately, I think I expected Dunkirk to be a more spectacular version of that documentary. But that was silly. Nothing could be more spectacular than seeing regular people tell their stories of how they "did what they could".
So... would I recommend the movie?
Yes. 100% yes... especially if you see it in IMAX. Just make sure you turn down your expectations a bit (mine were on 11).
Each of the stories is good and they fit together well. My greatest criticism is that I wanted more of each story. All of the actors do a fine job (although why they chose Harry Styles to be in the movie is beyond me). The battle sequences are excellent.
Seeing this in IMAX made the entire experience worth while. I was lucky enough to see it in a real IMAX theater. Although the entire movie looked amazing, the airplane dogfight scenes were especially breathtaking. If the movie merely consisted of 30 minutes of dogfights on an eighty foot screen, it would have been worth the price of admission alone.
By the way, my wife loved this movie. She compared it to Blackhawk Down. She said the two were similar in that both just jumped into the battle without much character development. She had no problem rooting for the heroes without this step.
Geeky Dad's Movie Guide
Number of times I fell asleep: 0
Number of eye rolls: 0
Number of face palms: 0
Number of times I checked steemit: 0
Number of times I said "That's ridiculous": 0
Would I recommend this movie: Yes... but do yourself a favor and see it in IMAX
Full price/Matinee/Rental/Free/Not worth the time: IMAX Matinee
Movie Dunkirk review (2017) by Christopher Nolan
Saw this movie a couple days ago and I agree with a lot of what you said. I hadn't even realized until you mentioned it that I didn't know a single character's name except for George throughout the film. I think I went in expecting a closer resemblance to "Saving Private Ryan" and was severely disappointed in comparison to that movie. I expected to grow with the characters and feel their emotions, but that was not what this movie was about. (That was 100% on me for expecting something the movie wasn't).
I did enjoy how the three stories intersected, but I thought they could have culminated with a little more drama. It felt somewhat forced in terms of the connection between the story-lines.
One thing that I noticed though was that the pilots speak in terms of gallons of fuel as opposed to liters like I would expect for a British group. Is that simply an oversight, a historical accuracy (potentially American built planes?), or a way to connect with an American audience better?
In the UK we use a mixture of metric and imperial units. It's not uncommon for older people to use gallons, although most young people use litres.
Oh very interesting! Thank you for the response. It was just a little thing I picked out and was confused about for the whole movie.
Instead of three stories, I think it was the same story told from different perspective. Because you would watch at some points, the same event from the air and sea perspective. It this it was what made it interesting for me.
Other point that I liked was that the movies didn't focused on the characters. but on the event. Because, I didn't want to watch another war movie where the characters talk in the middle of the fight about their life back home.
I wrote a small review about the movie as well.
I can see that. I think I was hoping for a story before the battle, not during it.
I think the three stories intersect very intelligently though. It was interesting learning about each independent character and then seeing how they effect each other towards the end of the film - most notably with Tom Hardy's character as the pilot who is trying to stop them being slaughtered from the skies.
I agree it should have been a little bit longer though in order to flesh out the characters more. But adrenaline-soaked thrillers like this tend to be pretty short.
I just needed a little bit more to push me over the emotional edge. I may need to see this movie again and watch it from a different point of view.
This movie is apparently a horrendous experience for anyone who knows a bit about history.
Dunkirk beach looks also incredibly pristine. And what happened to the French Army? They are not even mentioned when it was their jobs to hold the krauts to let the English Army escapes.
For the sake of good shoots, the movie is quite ignorant of its own subject.
It's tough making films set in war because you have to please the history buffs. I think you have to view this film as a narrow snapshot of a handful of British soldiers rather than an in-depth overview of the events at Dunkirk.
There were a couple of brief mentions of the French but that is another reason I wanted it to be longer. Too many details left out.
I want to see that dog fight and I feel like developing a character is not needed with a growing younger audience. My opinion, but younger audiences are not looking for human connection anymore. @hanshotfirst, always enjoy your movie reviews.
Thanks! Good point about the younger crowd. It seems that many of them like their entertainment in bite sized chunks they can watch on their phones. Not saying anything is wrong with that... but it is much different than my preference.
I think Nolan wanted to show the chaos and randomness of war more than one single character story. I look at this movie as something experimental, if you ask me, experiment was good and as you said a bit short.
The dogfights, visuals and sound were amazing. He should get a ton of credit for that alone.
Great review, but I really wanted to thank you for the link to BOATLIFT.
A student told me about it a few years ago and I have show it every year since then. It's amazing.
Great critique Han - appreciate your efforts in sharing your movie experiences as only you know how! SK
Thanks! My wife was really happy I wrote this so I would stop bothering her with my opinions. She liked it quite a bit and just wanted me to shut up about it. That happens a lot lol.
Aw man. I was really looking forward to this one, it's been awhile since I've seen an epic blockbuster on the big screen, well this genre anyway. I know you ultimately recommended it, but a movie where you don't remember characters names? Eh. Not sure I want to spend the price of admission no matter how great the scenery and battles.
And when, tell me when, are they going to come out with something that rivals the Lord of the Rings trilogy? You know, I would absolutely spend the money to watch all three in a row at an IMAX theater right now, the extended versions. I don't care if I know a bit of it by heart. I'd probably still cry when Sam nearly drowns himself chasing Frodo.
Don't even get me started on Lord of the Rings. I may cry right now.
Every freaking time. I cry every time. And always will.
Not to mention
But I can carry you, I'm tearing up!! LOVE!
My friend had recommend me this movie and I was planning to watch it on this coming weekend. Whenever I watch a movie, I first read reviews. When he recommended me this movie, I checked its reviews on this site: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/dunkirk_2017/
Your review is entirely opposite of what rottentomatoes website is saying. So, I am going to watch it.
You wrote it in a very good way. So, your post earned an upvote. Keep posting!
I hope you enjoy the experience.