they said it was outside the defensive perimeter but immediately cut to a shot of them approaching the ship so the distance felt shorter than it was supposed to be.
The perimeter was getting smaller wasn't it? I didn't think the boat was that far away, indicating their safe zone was getting smaller and smaller. When the gunfire erupted around the boat that officer did say "it's started" or something like that.
These are the new impressions on this page. Seems many GAF users are out of touch with the public/reviewers at large. Is it because we want a more Nolanesque Nolan movie?
Just an interesting observation. Maybe a good thing to set expectations properly in check.
I thought it was good, full of suspense, and certainly captured the horrors of war in a unique way. Those who glorify war should certainly view this film for a reality check. It was a really loud film as well with plenty of scenes that startled me .. Nolan must really enjoy keeping the audience awake.
That being said, initially I thought the film had a slow burn and I was starting to regret seeing it day one. However, it definitely picks up halfway and the climax is certainly a rival for Interstellar's docking scene.
Zimmer's score was top notch;some excellent ambient music, but surprisingly not too memorable compared to his other works.
Perhaps it was the heat of the moment .. but certain characters do silly things in the film that perplexed me ..
such as trying to plug the gaps in the boat while they're being shot at..
Overall, I thought it was a very profound film which poignantly showed the glories and horrors of war without delving too much into melodrama or patriotism. It was a cold and brutal knock to the senses.
I loved how autonomous the troops were on the beach at the start. Lining up in orderly queues, ducking when being bombed, promptly lining up again. No crying, no panicking, no messing about. It was a solemn march of the defeated.
Interstellar isn't a war movie though. That movie has its own flaws, but I never found it to be a slog (that "love" twist though, so awful).
The
"target practice"
was my favorite part, but even that wasn't that special. Compare it to
Upham and the german
from Saving Private Ryan, for example.
Flags of our Fathers is another really slow movie, which isn't even really focused on the war, with a few good action moments. This was pretty similar.
My girlfriend said this was basically "the sinking of the Titanic 20 times over, but none of them were as cool as the actual Titanic."
My roommate called it "Not Quite Drowning: The Movie."
If you're claustrophobic or sensitive to almost drowning, I can see how this would be really tense. I was expecting more action, basically. I wish it had gone for an R rating. The only blood I can remember was caused by accident.
Lots of things going on with perception in this movie.
The french coward/hero branded a traitor, the dude wondering why the blind man didn't look at them, worrying about being branded cowards, the son understanding eventually what Cillian Murphy was going through, the other pilot being mocked by infantry, etc.
I think I loved it but I'm not sure.
I think one of my favorite shots was
the torpedo wash emerging above the surface. It was so casual and then you realize what it is. Gave me chills.
Lots of things going on with perception in this movie.
The french coward/hero branded a traitor, the dude wondering why the blind man didn't look at them, worrying about being branded cowards, the son understanding eventually what Cillian Murphy was going through, the other pilot being mocked by infantry, etc.
The high school kid behind the counter didn't know, so I don't know.
Interstellar isn't a war movie though. That movie has its own flaws, but I never found it to be a slog (that "love" twist though, so awful).
If you're claustrophobic or sensitive to almost drowning, I can see how this would be really tense. I was expecting more action, basically. I wish it had gone for an R rating. The only blood I can remember was caused by accident.
I loved how autonomous the troops were on the beach at the start. Lining up in orderly queues, ducking when being bombed, promptly lining up again. No crying, no panicking, no messing about. It was a solemn march of the defeated.
Lots of things going on with perception in this movie.
The french coward/hero branded a traitor, the dude wondering why the blind man didn't look at them, worrying about being branded cowards, the son understanding eventually what Cillian Murphy was going through, the other pilot being mocked by infantry, etc.
I think I loved it but I'm not sure.
I think one of my favorite shots was
the torpedo wash emerging above the surface. It was so casual and then you realize what it is. Gave me chills.
re: perception, I couldn't stop thinking that this was a shade removed from being a Samuel Beckett play. The recurring motif of missed perception, the practically absurd and slapstick nature how violence and waiting alternate, the mild attempt at puns and wordplay.
Mole/Mole anyone? Anyone??
I just wish it was committed to an idea or tone the whole way through - particularly with the ending.
Damn, that 70mm IMAX experience was....Jesus, when they are doing the dogfights, I was bobbing and weaving with the screen, shit was so good. Best of all I got my,"I saw Dunkirk in 70mm" shirt, so that was the cherry on top.
Damn, that 70mm IMAX experience was....Jesus, when they are doing the dogfights, I was bobbing and weaving with the screen, shit was so good. Best of all I got my,"I saw Dunkirk in 70mm" shirt, so that was the cherry on top.
I've seen also Godzilla, Interstellar, Star Wars, and TDKR in IMAX. None of those movie benefit as much as Dunkirk does in my opinion. IMAX 70mm helps capture the look and scope of Dunkirk and paired with the audio creates an impressive experience.
Yeah, you can see everything perfectly, back 2 rows are perfect for that theater. The sound is 2nd to none. That theater got a revamp recently, so brand new sound and screen. Looks beautiful, sounds beautiful.
These are the new impressions on this page. Seems many GAF users are out of touch with the public/reviewers at large. Is it because we want a more Nolanesque Nolan movie?
Just an interesting observation. Maybe a good thing to set expectations properly in check.
So preface this with the fact that I'm a huge Nolan fanboy but was going on 4 hours sleep when I saw this at 9:30 pm at night:
I think Dunkirk will be one I won't go back and see over and over in the theater. It is amazing in its scope and visuals and the whole package, but there were very few times where I did get emotional (I have pretty much gotten to tears on every Nolan movie since The Prestige).
I think critics who ding the movie because it's hard to get invested in characters you don't fully know aren't too far from the truth. I wouldn't give it a negative score because of that. There is enough of that to make me enjoy the film. But I didn't love it the way I have loved previous Nolan films because it was missing that deep emotional attachment I got with Coop and Murph, Batman, Dom and his family, etc.
I did get choked up at certain parts (
the boy getting his name in the paper, Tom Hardy's final saving moment and the cheers from the soldiers)
but not the full emotions I've gotten in the past.
So...that being said...holy fuck is this a great movie to see in IMAX. I got to see it at the 70mm IMAX in Indianapolis and the fact that so much of this is shot in IMAX (it felt like 90% was shot for IMAX, only certain small scenes where it reverts to non-IMAX shots) really made you feel like the investment was worthwhile. I can understand complaints about not understanding what people are saying (lol Nolan movie amirite?) but I never felt like I didn't understand what was going on or what decisions people were making and why. Every time a bullet hits metal in this movie, it was intense.
Intense is the word for this film. I could feel my shoulders being so tense while I was watching. I was getting warm because I was so into the film. Some people are comparing it to Gravity because it felt like a ride/roller coaster. I can see that, but I enjoyed this more than Gravity because I felt the character development in Gravity was awful. This one astutely avoided most of that, which is to the overall benefit of the film, but could also remove some of the emotional impact. Which might be the point, I don't know.
Like, in my eyes, this would be near the bottom of my list for favorite Nolan films, but I'm so much of a fucking Nolan fan that it's still an A/A- compared to movies in general.
I jumped to the last page of the review thread, and these were the only new impressions. Not cherry picked, literally the only new impressions on that page.
Cinematography and sound are absolutely top-notch.
The rest... meh. It was okay. I was reminded of Flags of our Fathers more than Saving Private Ryan. It's a pretty slow movie, honestly.
Compared to how hooked I've been to literally every other Nolan film, I thought it was a fairly weak showing. It's not a bad movie by any means, but it could basically have nothing to do with WWII and it wouldn't be much different.
Absolutely agree. Thinking back on it I know it was a good movie I just don't care for it.
There was never a sense of urgency, I didn't care for the fate of any of the soldiers, never thought there was a big threat from the Germans. Also I know the lack of dialog was on purpose but you think based on the situations these men are put into they would talk more. I found that extremely unrealistic and took me out of the movie.
Absolutely agree. Thinking back on it I know it was a good movie I just don't care for it.
There was never a sense of urgency, I didn't care for the fate of any of the soldiers, never thought there was a big threat from the Germans. Also I know the lack of dialog was on purpose but you think based on the situations these men are put into they would talk more. I found that extremely unrealistic and took me out of the movie.
Seems like it is cratering on RT already. Down to a mere 94% and 8.8 average now. Not much to shout of. Soon it'll be below The Dark Knight and be just another Nolan disappointment again. I have Liemax tickets for tonight, but I'm already losing the sense of hype and feel like calling it off.
Just got back. Even in Liemax it is a glorious experience. This is definitely an "experience" movie though, much like Gravity. It's about being put in the middle of a situation and seeing it through. The sound design and cinematography were great, the audio was very aggressive and intense. The scale is probably the biggest Nolan has done yet and it really makes the film feel huge. Tons of extras, lots of large scale scenes which feel BIG. I don't think the time perspective issue was confusing, but I also don't think it was really necessary. Definitely a Nolan "gimmick" rather than something that completely defines the film. I would say the biggest problem with the movie is that it feels surprisingly cold and artificial for a film about a situation which has so much of humanity in it. There's something about the want the narratives are framed, how they are depicted, which feels too designed and on the nose. This is something it shares with all Nolan films. Every line is something said for a purpose, speaking to the audience as much as to another character. That holds the film back from being perfection, because it makes what should be very natural and seamless feel somewhat unnatural.
Honestly, I was pretty disappointed with Dunkirk. It failed to capture the visceral intensity that other movies in similar settings were able to do. This is where Pot could've benefited from having an R-rating.
I rarely was able to grasp the dialogue. Hell, I thought the first several lines were in a different language at first. I saw this in 70mm and some of the shots were gorgeous, but at others it was too sparse to be interesting. In all honesty, I think I would've been fine without 70mm.
The soundtrack was amazing for the most part. I thought it may have been turned up a dial too high though, but I guess it's to make up for the lack of dialogue.
I still haven't pieced together the timeline. I prefer how it was handled in Memento. In Dunkirk, the timelines was blended in too seamlessly. It really took me out of it.
I didn't hate Dunkirk but unfortunately, it really didn't do much for me. It reminded me of an arthouse film with its minimalistic dialogue and limited setting.
Walter Chaw, easily my favorite film critic, wasn't a fan. I won't be able to see it until next Friday, but I already have my IMAX ticket. Sounds like he had problems with the lack of story, but I imagine I'll like it just for the spectacle and technical aspects.
I feel like I'm going to be trying to defend this movie all the way up to, and including Oscar Season. I guess I should just give up that crusade now. But posts like that are just so ridiculous.
I feel like I'm going to be trying to defend this movie all the way up to, and including Oscar Season. I guess I should just give up that crusade now. But posts like that are just so ridiculous.
it will win its much deserved best director and cinematography oscar. I'm looking forward to a lot this upcoming fall/winter, but I can't imagine it getting too much competition in those categories.
This has still got 20% on Interstellar as far as reviews go, with a much higher average rating. The reception is clearly much more positive than Interstellar.
Just got back. Even in Liemax it is a glorious experience. This is definitely an "experience" movie though, much like Gravity. It's about being put in the middle of a situation and seeing it through. The sound design and cinematography were great, the audio was very aggressive and intense. The scale is probably the biggest Nolan has done yet and it really makes the film feel huge. Tons of extras, lots of large scale scenes which feel BIG. I don't think the time perspective issue was confusing, but I also don't think it was really necessary. Definitely a Nolan "gimmick" rather than something that completely defines the film. I would say the biggest problem with the movie is that it feels surprisingly cold and artificial for a film about a situation which has so much of humanity in it. There's something about the want the narratives are framed, how they are depicted, which feels too designed and on the nose. This is something it shares with all Nolan films. Every line is something said for a purpose, speaking to the audience as much as to another character. That holds the film back from being perfection, because it makes what should be very natural and seamless feel somewhat unnatural.
Now that you mention it, it does seem quite obvious that pretty much all the words coming out of the characters' mouths seem calculated yet again. Nolan has always had this problem in his film, and this one doesn't really move away from it. Thankfully, dialogue is quite a bit more limited than any other movie in his filmography.
