Dunkirk

This badly edited depiction of the hellishness of war is packed with great shots and a retro atmosphere that is nicely enhanced by celluloid impurities in the picture and the absence of ostentatiously digital elements. The tension in the film (even in scenes that don’t need it) is created only by its soundtrack. But after the end of the movie, I was glad to enjoy some precious silence. (19/07/2017)

Pomo, you just didn't get it. This isn't "sloppily edited", this is the brilliant creative intent of Nolan. The way he works with time in this film, how he tells three storylines through different time spans and then glues them together with the surgical precision of a master watchmaker, letting them intersect at the end to achieve a cathartic effect is simply admirable. Brilliant screenwriting. And this film has such high production values that I wouldn't hesitate to compare it to David Lean's war epics. This film will be the subject of extensive essays in film schools in the future, and film theorists will discuss it until judgement day. And it’ll get Oscars for sure. (24/07/2017)

Though Nolan’s previous films were more refined in terms of narrative and intellectually more ambitious, their ostentatious structure often overshadowed emotion. Dunkirk, which stays more grounded in a number of respects, is his most functional prototype of the epic movie that Hollywood currently needs, a major film that you will want to see not only in a technically well-equipped cinema (preferably IMAX), but also repeatedly. Thanks to Nolan’s focused direction, everything in the film is subordinated to the maximum sensory experience, the intensity of which rises with each viewing, as you become better oriented in the temporal relationships between the individual storylines and can experience more while working less on solving the narratological puzzle. Dunkirk is intoxicating, dizzying and unrelenting in its intensity from start to finish. (Viewed three times in the cinema, of which IMAX twice.) 90% (09/08/2017)

Emotionally, it flew over my head. Like, really, zero experience. Dunkirk looks nice, but that’s all there is to it. What fascinates me somehow is that Nolan, who’s always been a better storyteller than a director of action scenes, chose for his latest film a plot-lacking reconstruction of one action scene. He only gave the shape of a film to a historical event, which, given his cold approach, wasn’t enough for me. He made an unconventional war movie, yes – without Germans, almost without dialogue, alternating three storylines of different lengths … but to me the result is nothing. I never got the impression that the intertwining storylines supported each other in any way. If only their overlaps had some kind of reinvigorating effect (which was 100% de case in the escalating climax of Inception). Here, there’s nothing but chaos, which, IMHO, is also strangely missing some rather important parts of the story (the pier line: the conversation between the commanders, while two boys are hidden under the pier, that no other ship can sink by he pier … and voilà, in the next chronologically linked scene there’s another ship sinking? How did it get there? Did the boys try to get on it? How much time passed? Or was it the ship that sailed in the previous scene?). And though it all somehow fits together temporarily (although, at least for me, nothing comes out it, no catharsis, no satisfaction), in terms of spacial orientation, a couple of the scenes are a real mess. The pathos in the end unpleasantly surprised me, given the course so far. The concept is great, but the execution lacks any subjective effect. (25/07/2017)

A fascinating production background and a demonstration of the capabilities of a Hollywood blockbuster at its peak. However, there’s no emotion in there. It's like a war documentary but without the distinctive voiceover. I understand that this was the creative intent, but for the first time in my life I was missing Nolan and suddenly it felt like when a girl cheats on you after being in a happy relationship for years. I'll give it another chance in time, but I'm afraid that without the assistance of the IMAX format, my opinions will just be solidified. (22/07/2017)

Count on Dunkirk being the kind of war movie you’ve never seen. For example, out of the total 106 minutes of footage, 106 are accompanied by Hans Zimmer’s music, which not only intrigues with its melodies or strong motives, but it can also get the blood going with its incredible suspense that doesn’t stop, not when you’re watching the credits.  I have never seen the music and visuals to be this well-connected and I must say that even if it’s not Nolan’s best film, it’s still an experience I won’t forget. Also, I mustn’t forget to appreciate the fact that the director has conveyed the movie as the stories of ordinary, but also extraordinary people. Every single character has its purpose and even if Tom Hardy, for example, might not say much, the ending will convince you that his acting was unequivocal. I also liked the roles of Mark Rylance, Kenneth Branagh and especially Harry Styles, who has stunned me with his acting performance. And I’ll admit that I was shocked when I found that he’s actually a One Direction singer. It must take some balls for a world-renowned director to cast a young boy who is known as a member of an annoying boyband and he might know how to sing but has no acting experience. But Christopher Nolan obviously has the balls to do that and I have to say that it’s a joy to live in a time of such great movies. (11/08/2017)

Yeah, it's awesome. It took me a while to figure out why, how and what for, but I'm excited. Initially, what bothered me about Dunkirk was a certain impersonality and the fact that we don't really know anything about the characters, but Christopher Nolan clearly didn't want that and pushes everything through extremely intense scenes that can be both action-packed and atmospherically depressing. The director's staging games keep you entertained for a full hour and three quarters, and the aerial battles and the destruction of giant ships look absolutely breathtaking in IMAX. And even though it's not Saving Private Ryan (and it doesn't want to be anything like it), the feeling of every one of the three hundred thousand soldiers fighting for their lives is awfully strong. An absolutely breathtaking experience on the big screen, and undoubtedly one of the best films of the year. (16/08/2017)

The architecture of time and space prevents Dunkirk from looking like a malnourished drama with fleeting characters that again perform more assigned narrative functions (such as Branagh's sculptural explanation), rather than embody some deeper thoughts. In the end, Dunkirk, with all its efforts to achieve objectivity, cannot avoid pathetic words and premature dramatic abbreviations. It’s been a long time since the war has had such a booming and creaking physical element. Unfortunately, the demolished drums are the only thing I carry with me the day after. For me, it’s more of a noble imitation that has to fire on all cylinders to cover the inner emptiness and lack of nuances. The greater the ambition Nolan has in working with a storytelling perspective, the more doubtful the results. The modest, but psychologically and narratively incredibly functional and agile film The Prestige remains an unattainable goal. Dunkirk is a flashy creative maneuver that creates a big wave around itself. However, it does not reach the depths. (26/07/2017)

Nolan cannot be denied that he did not just shoot another war film according to a proven scheme. In many ways, it is in line with old-school war films, which are no longer made today, just in the form in which they were never made. Following the example of Greengrass's United 93, in view of The Dunkirk evacuation, he got rid of all political background, expressed no opinion, did not mirror anything. He was not interested in other parties of the conflict, sidelined characters, dialogs and story, and focused on a single aspect; the feelings of those thousands people who were evacuated, those soldiers who where cut off from their homeland. The movie strictly follows (except for the elaborate structure of the narrative and the form, which can be fully enjoyed only during the subsequent screening) the concept of "beach/week-water/day-air/hour" with an unseen enemy and thus fully mediates the feelings of pilots enclosed in a cramped, deafening cockpit, while German fighters circling around, panicked drowning boys in the billowing night waves and soldiers on land who don't know if they'll get their turn during the evacuation or will be left at the mercy of the advancing German army. This is by far the greatest strength of the film. The cast couldn't have been better, because even if Branagh doesn't move from the pier, Hardy from the cockpit or Rylance from the helm, they are so convincing and charismatic that simply could not be any better. At the same time, they play everything purely with their eyes or imperceptible gestures (and in the case of Caine, using purely intonation). Thanks to the symbiosis of Nolan/Zimmer/Smith, the result is undeniably captivating, chilling, nerve-wracking as well as intense and earthy production (the difference from the best CGI is simply tangible, that´s for sure) and a technically refined masterpiece like no other far and wide. But… But at the same time, Zimmer's phenomenal addition of sound (not really a music background) is overused so that the whole footage rumbles and ticks. It´s non-stop. I repeat, non-stop. Do you get that? Non-stop! Neither a second of silence, nor a second without the highest possible intensity of pumping creaking, while the "calm" sequences on the ship would obviously call for quiet moments. However, it is still a "Dunkirk miracle", because everyone in the seventy-millimeter Imax took the bait and myself breathed exclusively in the rhythm given by Nolan. (21/07/2017)

As expected, escalated with drama and focus, with a lifespan of a personal experience on the edge of perfection and with a cutting musical accompaniment that is physically exhausting. Christopher Nolan has been in top form for more than a decade, a form that everyone else can only envy, and perhaps solely due to the tightness of the war genre, which does not allow any deviations in the script, Dunkirk will be one step behind his previous masterpieces in my eyes. (25/07/2017)

Nolan's audience and his film heroes have one thing in common: a feeling that could be compared to what happens to the fuel mixture in the engine during the compression phase. After just a few dozen seconds, you will witness the massacre of a military unit and events are set in motion like an avalanche. Nolan has made an intense film, constantly forcing his characters to act, escape mortal danger, and make decisions about their own lives and the lives of those around them. Mistakes or hesitations are not forgiven and have the most tragic consequences. The viewer is bombarded with a huge amount of sensations from the first minute. Don't expect moments of calm and reflection. Prepare for dynamic editing, constantly alternating between events on land, at sea, and in the air. The director does not use a collective hero, and each component of the army and civilians rushing to help have specific faces, but Nolan is not interested in telling the story of one or a few individuals. He has made a complex film where the main role is the battle itself, or rather the historical event - the evacuation of a 400,000-strong army trapped in a small enclave on the coastline. Sound plays an extraordinary role in Dunkirk. The film never goes silent for a moment. You will be bombarded with noises, shots, and explosions, a mixture of tones and musical compositions that intensify the tension and anticipation. Nolan uses not the biggest stars, but rather the best actors, from whom charisma radiates from a distance. They don't need dialogues, as a glance or a slight gesture is enough to send chills down your spine. Prior to its premiere, Dunkirk generated expectations that it could become the film event of the year, and I believe Nolan has fulfilled this assignment. What I saw here is a precise film from a director with a clear vision, attitude, and above-average abilities, and who has control over his film. I am talking about the dynamic editing, but please do not confuse it with chaos. If you have a problem with the editing, the fault lies within you and in how perceive things. What I saw was an epic drama that I strongly recommend seeing on the big screen. And finally, what I saw was a film that rehabilitates concepts such as heroism and patriotism. After a series of productions saturated with ideologies and nationalism, this film is quite a relief. Overall impression: 95%. (22/07/2017)

Time, time, time. Fascination with time even spills over into Nolan’s depiction of Operation Dynamo. In slightly Mann style, he filmed the inferno of war in his own way, again very originally. Blending the planes of earth, sea and air demands great skill, but we’ve seen it once before. Structure-wise it proceeds practically like in Inception. Visually, it’s a feast for the eyes. Hoyte puts his money on the environment in its natural beauty, whether the beaches of Dunkirk or the North Sea. This time, Zimmer primarily completes these images. It grabs you when it’s meant to, but this wouldn’t work so well all alone. The acting is flawless. A minimum of dialog. Even with so little room to perform, Hardy is boss. Good afternoon… (20/07/2017)

Nolan did it again? What actually? He managed to make a technically brilliant film of a well-known military conflict, without unnecessary gimmicks that would blur both the visual and the overall artistic impression. If it gets awards for sound design and cinematography, it won’t be any surprise. At the same time, as usual, he managed to hit the contemporary tip of the artistically ambitious mainstream with perfect precision. That is, he made a smart film for the masses with a PG-13 rating that pretty much anyone can go to the cinema to see. Of course, the material helps a lot, but still, hats off to him. His other trademarks are not worth dwelling on, they are again powerful and confident: the cinematography by Hoytema and the music by Zimmer. But when one looks back in time at other films that managed to hit (or define) the aforementioned "spike", they had a lot more emotion. And we're talking about films that are basically new, one or two decades back, when they were already making very similar films, i.e. technically sophisticated, with similar dynamics and often even philosophical and political foundations. And we don't have to go too far, as some of the milestones were filmed by Nolan himself. We have to give him credit, though, he’s fantastic, but Dunkirk is essentially a documentary reconstruction with a star cast. What makes a film a film is the emotions, the relationships, the tangible characters, but this time, these attributes are almost absent in the supposedly best director of A-list Hollywood. I refuse to accept that and mindlessly give him a full rating. (22/07/2017)

I was looking forward to a good war film, and I got something even better. Dunkirk is, above all, a very cunning war film, told in a style that makes an already thrilling story even more thrilling and from start to finish a very tense spectacle. It's ambitious and impressive, yet not as unnecessarily self-important as, say, Interstellar. Also, the sparing runtime befits the film. The melancholy mood in the style of The Thin Red Line mingles here with impressions of A Bridge Too Far, each episode has meaning and the viewer is delighted when the splinters of that little-big drama gradually come together one by one. After some time, I really liked the almost continuously playing and very non-traditional music by Hans Zimmer. (19/07/2017)

Every second of Dunkirk added one more page to my dream manual on how to create super-complex and flawless filmmaking, how to take a simple story and present it in a spectacular and unadorned way, how to squeeze the physical and mental maximum out of every scene thanks to perfectly matched sound, music and camera movements. Nolan is the visionary that Welles was in the 1940s, Kubrick in the 1960s and Spielberg in the 1970s. The ability to build atmosphere unobtrusively, relying on the actors' gazes and the audience's expectations, is absolutely fascinating and unprecedented. Rylance, Branagh, Murphy and Hardy couldn't have given more to their roles, and their eyes tingle more than the whole of Hacksaw Ridge's wartime turmoil; Hans Zimmer's genius is once again miles away from any of his other colleagues – there haven't been many more striking and flexible soundtracks in the history of cinema. One of the most beautiful cinematic experiences in at least a decade. (20/07/2017)

Christopher Nolan has once again managed to make a riveting film that excels especially in the technical execution, which is a breathtaking example of filmmaking craftsmanship. This time he has chosen a completely different genre than we are used to from him, but still proves that even in these "genre waters" he is confident and does not drown. The film offers a number of stunningly shot scenes accompanied by very evocative music that was breathtaking. The acting is minimal and slight, but solid and memorable nonetheless. I also enjoyed the sequences shot from multiple perspectives, which you piece together over time like pieces of a very good puzzle. In short, another deep bow to a master of his craft who once again brought me to my knees with his film. (01/09/2017)

Evacuation in Dunkirk as a purely technological concept. The script is a game, metal and sound are the main characters, we don't see the enemy, the men don't bleed, and some timekeeping mechanism ticks incessantly in the constant soundtrack. It would be fine if instead the film didn't build icons out of strong old well-dressed men who always get their way and, to add to that, didn't attempt an emotional catharsis at the end. Even so, it's a truly breathtaking spectacle most of the time, but a few times it strays from the whole preconceived concept, and when it does it’s mostly through melodrama, which is simply a mistake. I don't get the PG-13 rating, just for the sound of the attacking Stukas it should have been rated at least NC-30. Yuck. (21/11/2018)

For once, I actually did read the comments here before watching the film, so I really didn't expect to go this high with my rating. I thought a war movie without war in it would be similarly "great" as a comedy without humor or an action movie without action. Dunkirk struck me as a behind-the-scenes look at war. The filmmakers got the atmosphere right, Mark Rylance gave the best performance out of everyone involved, and I have to admit that I was even pondering a fifth star, but... I was puzzled by a lack of (German) artillery fire on the beach, a complete lack of British air defense both on the beach and at sea, and Tom Hardy couldn't convince me that Supermarine had originally developed a glider for the army. (22/01/2018)

Christopher Nolan has made an immensely powerful film that may be about war, but it is first and foremost about people. About how strong they are, how weak they are, how they can come together, and also about how they can kick each other down. The film isn't great because it has great fight scenes, but because it captures the human fate and pain of war in an incredibly realistic way. (25/07/2017)

A depersonalized war epic in which instead of powerful and emotionally wrenching human stories or heroism, Nolan presents a wartime hell in an anonymous, detached guise. Indeed, it is quite difficult to fixate on any one character, as the narrative honestly follows the "rescue" as a whole and, with few exceptions, essentially gives no character room to make individual sacrifices for the benefit of all. Dunkirk's strength lies primarily in its detached, impersonal, bold approach and Zimmer's hellishly evocative soundtrack, which I can't imagine the sound of some scenes without hearing. In IMAX it was incredibly good; home viewing cut almost a quarter of the original experience. But in the war movie category, it's stunningly original and innovative. (20/11/2018)