Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Dunkirk - Chris Nolan's latest film (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Bob Magaw
- Start date
lakerstan
Footballguy
Saw this tonight. I think it is going to surprise a lot of people, and I expect those going into it thinking they are getting a regular movie are going to be disappointed. It is definitely not your typical film. It was amazingly well made, and a great piece of cinema art, which I truly enjoyed and respected, but like other Nolan films, you have to pay attention, and I'd say it is less commercial than his previous movies. I think the general population will be divided on this one...
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
As long as it doesn't feature a dreaming time traveler magician with short term memory loss and dressed as Batman, I can't imagine a Nolan film set in WW2 being anything but awesome.
Last edited by a moderator:
glvsav37
Footballguy
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Nugget
Footballguy
How violent is the movie? My son is going into 4th grade and loves WWII. I don't want him to be scarred for life, but I do think this would be a cool movie to see in a theater.
He did pretty well at the WWII museum in New Orleans and we talked about the holocaust for a while after that visit.
He did pretty well at the WWII museum in New Orleans and we talked about the holocaust for a while after that visit.
boilerdave
Footballguy
It's rated PG13 and this review makes it sound like it's not a blood and guts war movie.
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/07/dunkirk-is-a-stunningly-spare-survival-film/534252/
boots11234
Footballguy
Unbelievable. Were there any black people or women allowed in the British or American armies at this point in the war? Im pretty certain there were women and blacks in support roles but were they allowed to even fight so early in the war? I suppose they could have added a brothel scene, hospital scene or something for the women but not sure how they could have added black people. Dumb
McGarnicle
Footballguy
BeaverCleaver
Footballguy
This is great from that article
"Complaining about the lack of women and minority actors in a movie about Dunkirk is like complaining about the lack of Sinatra music in Straight Outta Compton or wondering why cancer failed to get equal time in Philadelphia or hectoring Hollywood over the omission of realistic sex scenes in the Toy Story trilogy."
"Complaining about the lack of women and minority actors in a movie about Dunkirk is like complaining about the lack of Sinatra music in Straight Outta Compton or wondering why cancer failed to get equal time in Philadelphia or hectoring Hollywood over the omission of realistic sex scenes in the Toy Story trilogy."
mcintyre1
Footballguy
Yeah... definitely not giving Ben Shapiro's rag any clicks. Agree that would be a dumb criticism of a historical movie, though. I can see an argument for working in a storyline about women in some way, but at a certain point you have to keep a movie focused in order to be good.
Last edited by a moderator:
boots11234
Footballguy
Sebowski
Footballguy
. This looks fantastic.
Buzzbait
Footballguy
Ilov80s
Footballguy
I agree that this is a dumb complaint about the film, but yes African Americans absolutely served and saw significant combat in WW2.
boots11234
Footballguy
Yes but wasn't that later in the war like the Japanese Americans? Dunkirk was at the start and onl involved the British if I recall correctly.
Buzzbait
Footballguy
It was later. The timeline for Dunkirk was mid-1940 before the US was officially in the war. The comment from the critic about a lack women and African American's for Dunkirk is ridicules.
It was later in the war but have to give a plug to the Tuskegee airmen (aka Red-Tail Angels)
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Right, I misread a bit of the post. Like I said, it's a dumb complaint. For this movie and any movie, the better criticism would be regarding all the non-actors that were involved in making the film. Were POC and women involve in costuming, fx, casting, etc.
lakerstan
Footballguy
A lot of tension and shooting/exploding, but never gets overly graphic. I also think you should see it on as big a screen as you can. It can be a little difficult to follow because of the timeline, but nothing to KEEP someone from going.
lakerstan
Footballguy
This is correct - America has no role in this movie whatsoever - regardless of color.
Last edited by a moderator:
boots11234
Footballguy
higgins
Footballguy
Just saw it...
Some observations in spoiler tags for those that want to avoid any specifics...
By the way, the above reads like I'm some movie critic with a thesaurus -- far from it -- but after watching it, the movie put me in a different place than I usually am. Amazingly well done!
Some observations in spoiler tags for those that want to avoid any specifics...
- The first 2/3 of the movie basically moves between 3 different time/story/vantage baselines that are a little unusual at first but, in retrospect, are necessary to tell the story the way it's intended.
- There is very little dialogue that advances the story/plot -- the thrill of the movie is seeing it from the point of view of the 3 individual vantages/baselines.
- The advancement of the story (without dialogue, as intended) would have turned out boring/dull if not for Nolan, the cinematographer, and Hans Zimmer working hand-in-hand to create the tension necessary for you to feel like you're living through the characters.
- Speaking of Zimmer, he has many incredible, memorable soundtracks, but this one isn't tremendous because of any catchy theme -- it's instead tremendous in the way he adds to the suspense/tension in abstract, conceptual musical bits and pieces. --> example1 / example 2
By the way, the above reads like I'm some movie critic with a thesaurus -- far from it -- but after watching it, the movie put me in a different place than I usually am. Amazingly well done!
Last edited by a moderator:
Courtjester
The Town Drunk
Seeing in the morning in XD--cannot wait. I get excited for very few movies, but for some reason I am for this one.
The wife and kids are seeing Wish Upon at the same time, so it will be nice to just be alone and enjoy this.
The wife and kids are seeing Wish Upon at the same time, so it will be nice to just be alone and enjoy this.
Hot Diggity Dog
Footballguy
No but the French did and during the battle of France many are captured by Germans and many were executed. I believe they were mostly from the French colony of Sengala (sp?). Question is if any were at Dunkirk. Do not know that.
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
*hands on hips* excuuse me - that's African-Bri.........West Indi.............Abo........uh........some kind of -tainians, ok?!
boots11234
Footballguy
Haha. Got it. I was trying to figure out the PC thing to say too but couldn't so went with blacks. Sue me. ?
Last edited by a moderator:
The Future Champs
Footballguy
Looking forward to this at the Cinerama this week.
Courtjester
The Town Drunk
Just got back from it--wow!! I could just feel my gut tightening in some of those scenes. The German dive bombers in that XD Cinema audio was like nothing I have ever heard in my life. Every gun shot made me jump. So great to see a movie that lets the emotions on the actor's faces tell the story rather than words. Very worthwhile to see in a big-screen format.
Hot Diggity Dog
Footballguy
OrtonToOlsen
Footballguy
The Junkers Ju 87 or StuKa had a siren attached to it for the sole reason of scarring the crap out of people.
Hot Diggity Dog
Footballguy
Went to the movie, it was fantastic!! Also report there was a dark face or two, dark as in sub Saharan African, with the French! I thought it was a nice nod to the historical record.
Last edited by a moderator:
flarkworms
Footballguy
Saw it last night. Thought it was good but it didn't live up to the hype. Battle scenes were very intense and well executed, but there was zero character development, the timeline/storyline was quite confusing and the (limited) dialogue was difficult to understand, mostly because it was overwhelmed by the (fantastic) musical score.. I'd like to see it again with closed captioning.
beer 30
Footballguy
I get this and usually have the same sort of feelings after watching a war movie. Just watched Black Hawk down the other night, a film I've seen 50 times and still have trouble identifying who is who during the battle. I think it's just incumbent on the genre. You get a ton of people all dressed the same way in a boat, on a battlefield, whatever and you lose any identity to them whatsoever. We got spoiled with Band of Brothers that was able to focus on very small set of figures in a much larger war and carry them all the way through from point A to Point B. You rarely have that ability in a war film. Just real tough to develop a character unless you are willing to throw away everything else happening in a war scene and focus on just what happened to the character.
I'm like you, much prefer watching a war movie a couple times with the captions on. You pick up so much more that way.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s
Footballguy
flarkworms said:
What was confusing about the timeline? They literally tell you: this is the mole and it's 4(?) days, this is the sea and it's 1 day and this the air and it's 1 hour. Then there are obvious points where it overlaps. I agree some of the dialogue was tough since the movie was loud, the music was loud and they all had British accents.
As for character development, I felt for a movie that takes place over the course of 4 days/1day/1hour- depending on which timeline the characters were in, I thought we did see them develop and grow. The young blonde son of the Mark Rylance grows in how he handles the death of George. First he is mad and wants to blame Peaky Blinders for the injury, rub it in his face. However, he grows to understand the hell Peaky Blinders went through and decides not to burden him with the boys death. We see who keeps their moral code in the worst of times and who doesn't when Harry Styles wants to send the Frenchman out and the stretcher bearer kid sticks up for him. Then, we see how ashamed Harry Styles is on the train but how easy the stretcher bearer kid sleeps. One of them had a very clear conscience and the other did not. The stretcher bearer could have told Harry that the old man was blind, but he chose not. That was interesting. I assume he didn't tell Harry because he thinks Harry should be ashamed of how behaved/if the blind man knew what Harry had done, he wouldn't have wanted to look him in the eyes anyway.
As for character development, I felt for a movie that takes place over the course of 4 days/1day/1hour- depending on which timeline the characters were in, I thought we did see them develop and grow. The young blonde son of the Mark Rylance grows in how he handles the death of George. First he is mad and wants to blame Peaky Blinders for the injury, rub it in his face. However, he grows to understand the hell Peaky Blinders went through and decides not to burden him with the boys death. We see who keeps their moral code in the worst of times and who doesn't when Harry Styles wants to send the Frenchman out and the stretcher bearer kid sticks up for him. Then, we see how ashamed Harry Styles is on the train but how easy the stretcher bearer kid sleeps. One of them had a very clear conscience and the other did not. The stretcher bearer could have told Harry that the old man was blind, but he chose not. That was interesting. I assume he didn't tell Harry because he thinks Harry should be ashamed of how behaved/if the blind man knew what Harry had done, he wouldn't have wanted to look him in the eyes anyway.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s
Footballguy
The other thing I noted, the movie is very violent and is non-stop action (I know some movies say they are non-stop action but this is literally non-stop action), but I don't think there was a single drop of blood in the entire movie. This is not Saving Private Ryan with guts and blood and people losing their arms.
shader
Footballguy
Pretty good movie. I thought the plot was rather bland. I didn't care about a single character except the old man w/the boat. They did a pretty horrific job of explaining the point/timeline/significance of this evacuation for all the non-history folks out there...
But the score/effects were 100% top-notch. Every event seemed 100% realistic, from the way the bombers hit the bridge, to the ships sinking, the men jumping off, etc
Still a bit annoyed though. The Germans were closing in and surrounding Dunkirk. I think they did a really poor job of capturing that feeling of doom and catastrophe that led to the evacuation. They overcame it quickly because of the amazing score..but overall I just thought the script was about a 5/10, but then that imperfect script was done about as perfectly as you possibly could...aside from the fact that you could only hear about 50% of the dialog.
But the score/effects were 100% top-notch. Every event seemed 100% realistic, from the way the bombers hit the bridge, to the ships sinking, the men jumping off, etc
Still a bit annoyed though. The Germans were closing in and surrounding Dunkirk. I think they did a really poor job of capturing that feeling of doom and catastrophe that led to the evacuation. They overcame it quickly because of the amazing score..but overall I just thought the script was about a 5/10, but then that imperfect script was done about as perfectly as you possibly could...aside from the fact that you could only hear about 50% of the dialog.
Similar threads
