"Dunkirk" movie - Warner Bros - Christopher Nolan

[Garandomatic]

I really enjoyed what i saw. The non-linear nature i was a bit indifferent towards, but it was something... Very mental... Totally succeeds in making you sick of the torpedoes and Stukas, much like those Tommies. Gave me a very odd feeling about the scope of the war. Maybe it was those wide open expanses in the beach and channel shots, maybe it was knowing that there were five more years left to go. Definitely showcases the director's mind, but it grabs you by the stomach and holds on until those little boats ate within sight of those chalky cliffs.

 

The trailer for The Darkest Hour was mind-blowing...!

[VMI88]

 

NEGATIVE:

You have to know the history to understand the plot.

The storyline jumps all over the place.

The characters are not developed.

 

POSITIVE:

Cinematography and sound.

 

I had the exact reaction you did. The cinematography was great and there were some very moving scenes. However, the storytelling was choppy and confusing. There was one point where they were switching back and forth between daytime and nighttime scenes with no explanation. I think if I didn't know the basic history I would have been hopelessly confused.

[Kadet]

I always rate a movie by how much I think about it the next day. Dunkirk rates very high IMO. I thought the tone and format were fascinating. I also think the lack of character development and choppiness were intentional to show that the events were much larger than the individuals involved. Warfare is very confusing, and I thought the film's format captured this well. Also, I thought the air combat scenes were some of the best I have seen in a movie. One minor gripe was the use of Spanish ME-109s to represent the BF-109 E models flown by the Luftwaffe during this period. The cowling area on the Spanish versions is distinctively different than the originals. I don't believe there are any flying 109 Es left, but they could have worked some CGI magic to correct the shape.

[63 RECON]

All of this is just my opinion on how I saw the movie and i am by no means an expert movie reviewer. Whilst it took me a good 20 minutes to figure out the story was being presented in a multi stranded, non linear narrative fashion, I felt it was a good way to present such a massive real world story.

 

As I stated in my other post, it allows the viewer to get a few separate perspectives of the same part of the story. Its not a new way to tell a story, its been done a few times in the past i.e pulp fiction and even Nolan has done it before, hes a bit of a fan of that style.

 

Yes it helps to know a little bit about Operation Dynamo but not really essential to grasp the story. in a simple way its a film about survival of defeated and scared soldiers wanting to get back home via any means possible. Yes the characters are not developed in the classic sense of the word and whilst feeling emotionally removed from each character, I still felt myself understanding their plight and rooting for them.

 

The Tom Hardy character is a great example, all shot in the cockpit of the spitfire, he has a total of about 10 lines in the movie, all very matter of fact radio traffic stuff. no rubbish heroics or smart arse one liners. So when he decides to go after that HE-111 to save the ship knowing full well he has zero fuel and no wing man, even with his oxygen mask on you can see the decision making in his eyes as he contemplates all the factors at play. Its a fantastic scene in a great movie.

 

I was also thinking to myself about the scenes with soldiers on the beach and the mole "they aren't talking much" but then I thought of how you would feel standing there cold, wet, scared, defeated, hungry, with dead friends all around and basically accepting your fate. I don't think you'd be doing too much talking.

 

I'm sure there is much more to be said but as said I'm not a movie expert so ill finish with a geeky point. From my understanding the movie is the story of the last 2-3 days of the evacuation but only really showed a few raids by the Luftwaffe when in reality there was dozens each day.

 

Also the RAF flew over 2000 or so sorties over the 9 days losing more pilots that the battle of Britain so it would have been pretty busy in the air above the beaches and yet we only saw 3 spitfires tussle with a few 109s and HE-111s which was still great and I'm sure it was done to aid in simplifying such a massive story and focusing on a few main characters and which in no way detracts form the greatness of the movie.

[Garandomatic]

I always rate a movie by how much I think about it the next day. Dunkirk rates very high IMO. I thought the tone and format were fascinating. I also think the lack of character development and choppiness were intentional to show that the events were much larger than the individuals involved. Warfare is very confusing, and I thought the film's format captured this well.

I read something to this effect when I looked into the aircraft used. If I recall, the director didn't want us to see token characters sitting around a fire, talking about their lives back home or their best girl. Interesting approach. Makes you focus on one thing, and one thing only. Escape. Whole movie was nothing but suspenseful urgency.

 

I agree with the Spanish 109s, but it was so well done otherwise. I saw the Heinkel and thought it was real! For it and another plane, they used very very large scale RC planes. It was extremely difficult for me to tell HOW they pulled off the water landings/crashes, and I kept cringing because of the bogus article that I posted here that claimed that the director would be crashing a real warbird.

[Garandomatic]

 

I'm sure there is much more to be said but as said I'm not a movie expert so ill finish with a geeky point. From my understanding the movie is the story of the last 2-3 days of the evacuation but only really showed a few raids by the Luftwaffe when in reality there was dozens each day.

 

I think the timeframes coincide with the titles to each strand. The Mole was a week, and it shows multiple days, so I think that timeline was a week long, and all of its segments fit into that. The Boat was a day, roughly the time you'd spend going to Dunkirk and back, and the aerial strand was an hour, so everything shot from the perspective of the fighter pilots fit into an hour. I have been thinking about it, and although a part of me wishes that it didn't jump from night to day and back, it does get you thinking about the troops, the civilian boaters, and the fighter pilots from square one, and keeps you there through the movie. If it were arranged otherwise, the boat would be crammed at the tail end of the movie, with the aircraft sprinkled in with it, and I don't know that it would be as powerful.

[gomorgan]

Taking the bride this evening, looking forward to it..

[Bluehawk]

The Bride and I saw it together this afternoon...

 

Having seen "war movies" for longer than I can remember the titles of, this one ranks high on the dramatic emotions side, a compilation of battle vignettes and personal challenges. As others have written here, historically it is not a film which in itself places the events in that particular World War context, but it certainly reminds a viewer of what armed violence can suddenly become. Having some knowledge of that history is not truly essential, though useful... my wife knew nothing about Dunkirk beforehand, but her compassionate responses to what she was seeing/hearing were genuinely felt in general.

 

I did find myself being grateful that the British naval officer at the end of the film, was given dialogue which went a ways in acknowledging that French fighters were also at Dunkirk during those days...

[USMCR79]

I had some trouble following how the movie progressed since it went back and forth from night shots to day shots very quickly - However I would say it was one of the best action packed movies I have seen in quite awhile.

 

Bill

[cutiger83]

One minor gripe was the use of Spanish ME-109s to represent the BF-109 E models flown by the Luftwaffe during this period. The cowling area on the Spanish versions is distinctively different than the originals. I don't believe there are any flying 109 Es left, but they could have worked some CGI magic to correct the shape.

 

 

 

I agree with the Spanish 109s, but it was so well done otherwise.

 

 

I read in one of my magazines that there was a valid reason for using the Spanish ME-109s. The director explained perfectly why they did this. I will try to find the article again.

 

...Kat

[Garandomatic]

I truly think it's because there may be only one real 109 flying, while the Hispano Buchons are relatively common.

 

One interesting thing i read said that the markings are all fictitious, and the writer speculated that it was to tell the story for all that were there and not appear to recognize only one squadron. I guess the three spitfires and the 109 all flew out of a former raf fighter station for the two weeks they spent filming. What an amazing sight that would be for those that live nearby!

[irish]

Just saw the movie this afternoon with the wife. Very good, great action and it had the added bonus for me of Brad Pitt "not" being in it

[Andrei]

I am back from the theater. And I enjoyed watching Dunkirk. The non linear story could be a little bit confusing at first but once you caught the plot you are immersed in the movie.

A little negative comment, the beach doesn't look very busy and crammed with Tommies as in the french movie "Weekend à Zuydcoote".

[RustyCanteen]

I am back from the theater. And I enjoyed watching Dunkirk. The non linear story could be a little bit confusing at first but once you caught the plot you are immersed in the movie.

A little negative comment, the beach doesn't look very busy and crammed with Tommies as in the french movie "Weekend à Zuydcoote".

 

I have not had the opportunity to see the new film yet, but I was curious how it was received in France -so your post caught my attention. The trailer made it seem as if the film was focused exclusively on the withdrawal of the BEF (and I understand that 'Dunkirk' has a special place in the history of the UK) however from studying the the real life situation, it seems that the French Army's contribution (as I recall, they effectively held the front -increasingly on their own as at Lille- as the BEF withdrew to the beaches) isn't really addressed since the film is from the perspective of the UK? I want to stress that I am not judging the film as I have not even seen it, but I was wanting to know what the reaction to it has been in the country it actually took place.

[CNY Militaria]

I saw it in IMAX today....really great in that format. I had chills watching the first air raid scene!

 

Bob, to answer your question, you see the French Soldiers holding the defensive line in the first few moments of the film, and then are largely in the background the rest of the time with some animosity on the part of the BEF Soldiers toward the French ones displayed throughout. At the end, one of the senior British Officers references their contribution again.

[Andrei]

I know that "Dunkirk" got a few criticism from the french newspapers for the lack of french troops. Even if the main characters are not deeply developed, you understand the movie plot is about the first seen young BEF soldier, the RAF pilot (Tom Hardy) and the little ship boat captain. Three characters who in the real life would have been unlikely to meet french soldiers during the evacuation. So it didn't bother me at all.

As other members stated in their post, if you don't know the story of Operation Dynamo, you can think that the RAF didn't do its job and the French were nowhere to be find. It could be perceived as a flaw in the scenario.

[RustyCanteen]

I saw it in IMAX today....really great in that format. I had chills watching the first air raid scene!

 

Bob, to answer your question, you see the French Soldiers holding the defensive line in the first few moments of the film, and then are largely in the background the rest of the time with some animosity on the part of the BEF Soldiers toward the French ones displayed throughout. At the end, one of the senior British Officers references their contribution again.

 

 

Hi,

 

Not Bob, but thank you very much for the info.

 

I know that "Dunkirk" got a few criticism from the french newspapers for the lack of french troops. Even if the main characters are not deeply developed, you understand the movie plot is about the first seen young BEF soldier, the RAF pilot (Tom Hardy) and the little ship boat captain. Three characters who in the real life would have been unlikely to meet french soldiers during the evacuation. So it didn't bother me at all.

As other members stated in their post, if you don't know the story of Operation Dynamo, you can think that the RAF didn't do its job and the French were nowhere to be find. It could be perceived as a flaw in the scenario.

 

 

Hi,

 

Very good, I did not know it was told through the three characters. It sounds like it is a good film; just read up on the real-life history after watching it.

 

Thank you

[CNY Militaria]

 

 

Hi,

 

Not Bob, but thank you very much for the info.

 

 

 

Hi,

 

Very good, I did not know it was told through the three characters. It sounds like it is a good film; just read up on the real-life history after watching it.

 

Thank you

My bad lol...I was looking at one of his posts on another topic just before and got confused when I saw your admin avatar!

[RustyCanteen]

My bad lol...I was looking at one of his posts on another topic just before and got confused when I saw your admin avatar!

 

 

Haha, yeah I had my avatar changed for a while for that very reason.

[patches]

I am back from the theater. And I enjoyed watching Dunkirk. The non linear story could be a little bit confusing at first but once you caught the plot you are immersed in the movie.

A little negative comment, the beach doesn't look very busy and crammed with Tommies as in the french movie "Weekend à Zuydcoote".

Wow I remember that movie, it was with Belmondo.

 

 

Weekend at Dunkirk as it was called here on T.V., an alright movie I recall, I recall the one scene on the beach when a Frenchman shots down a German plane with a Chauchat or what it was called, you know the 1930s MG, one was seen being fired by a German at British Paratroopers coming down in The Longest Day.

 

Weekend at Dunkirk haven't seen it since, oh 35 years, maybe time to see it again, a Amazon DVD buy

[Garandomatic]

How amazing would it be to see this film with a vet of the battle...?

 

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/07/24/97-year-old-dunkirk-veteran-it-was-just-like-was-there-again.html

[ScottG]

Saw it tonight, quiet desperation and grim determination sums it up pretty well in my opinion. Well worth the price of admission. Scott

[respectingthesacrifice]

Wow I remember that movie, it was with Belmondo.

 

phpcVZ4VrPM.jpg

 

Weekend at Dunkirk as it was called here on T.V., an alright movie I recall, I recall the one scene on the beach when a Frenchman shots down a German plane with a Chauchat or what it was called, you know the 1930s MG, one was seen being fired by a German at British Paratroopers coming down in The Longest Day.

 

Weekend at Dunkirk haven't seen it since, oh 35 years, maybe time to see it again, a Amazon DVD buy

Nice movie indeed. The MG you mentioned was a FM 24/29 (FM stands for MG in French)

[Powerhouse]

I saw it last night via IMAX.

 

NEGATIVE:

You have to know the history to understand the plot.

The storyline jumps all over the place.

The characters are not developed.

 

POSITIVE:

Cinematography and sound.

 

 

I have seen this film in IMAX... sound is terrific....

I am in general agreement with these remarks

The scenes of air combat are well rendered. The sound of the IMAX causes vibrations as if you were in the plane ...

In France, the film was received in a mixed way, many deplore that the French troops are not more represented.The French troops, however, held the perimeter while the English re-embarked

One of the aspects that emerges also is that the beach seems very empty... compare with the photos of archive

Many, except for the youngest ones, have in memory the film with belmondo and perhaps make the parallel.

But to temper all this, it seems to me that the director had clearly chosen to represent only the english side.

And, for me it is not badly done.

 

 

 

 

 

[cutiger83]

I saw the film and really enjoyed it. When it showed the horizon with all the civilian boats heading to shore, it couldn’t help but choke anyone up.

 

As for the film not showing the French side, this film is entirely about the English evacuation of Dunkirk not the battle. If all movies showed all sides of a story, the movies would be hours long and millions more in cost.

 

..Kat