new movie DUNKIRK (1 Viewer)

Terp152 said:
Interestingly, the article refers to Atonement, a recent (10 yrs) movie about, somewhat, the Battle of Dunkirk. Atonement rec'd heady reviews and did well at the box office but I disliked it very much.

Looking fwd to seeing Dunkirk soon. Chris
Click to expand...

A terrific book and movie, in my opinion. The Dunkirk scenes were pretty good although that was only one part of the movie.
 
The reviews being printed in Australia are very positive. I should be seeing it next week.
 
Went to the IMAX premier last night with Chris Nolan in attendance. One of the few movies worth seeing in IMAX as most of it was shot in 70mm and your seat vibrates with the explosions. Nolan went to pains to note that almost no CGI was used. Heinkels and Stukas were large scale flying models (the 111 is magnificent).

There was a nice costume display at the theater as well.

As for a review, it is a very enjoyable, and other than one scene in the last ten minutes, it feels very authentic for the most part. The weaving of multiple timelines and narratives is clever and keeps the viewer on their toes.

My one aesthetic criticism is that it was surprisingly clean - no blood, no grit for the most part. The beach never looked as ruinous as it does in the archival imagery. Overall, it's really worth seeing, though it is not as revolutionary war movie in the way Saving Private Ryan was.

IMG_2788.JPG
 
Hoverbug said:
Went to the IMAX premier last night with Chris Nolan in attendance. One of the few movies worth seeing in IMAX as most of it was shot in 70mm and your seat vibrates with the explosions. Nolan went to pains to note that almost no CGI was used. Heinkels and Stukas were large scale flying models (the 111 is magnificent).

There was a nice costume display at the theater as well.

As for a review, it is a very enjoyable, and other than one scene in the last ten minutes, it feels very authentic for the most part. The weaving of multiple timelines and narratives is clever and keeps the viewer on their toes.

My one aesthetic criticism is that it was surprisingly clean - no blood, no grit for the most part. The beach never looked as ruinous as it does in the archival imagery. Overall, it's really worth seeing, though it is not as revolutionary war movie in the way Saving Private Ryan was.

View attachment 216427
Click to expand...

The review linked in an earlier post said Nolan wanted to stay with the PG 13 rating vs the SPR R. I'm okay with that but prefer realism.

I once spoke with a retired US army Ranger who landed on Omaha (he's listed in rosters included in Ranger books). He said he never went back to France or watched war movies, but his buddies said SPR was like the real thing. Chris
 
It's not that the absence of gore is so much the problem, it's that the beach is literally too clean. Archival images show discarded equipment everywhere. Nolan's Dunkirk is surprisingly sterile in that way. The cinematography is gorgeous though. Having the IMAX cameras in the Spits was a major achievement.

Terp152 said:
The review linked in an earlier post said Nolan wanted to stay with the PG 13 rating vs the SPR R. I'm okay with that but prefer realism.

I once spoke with a retired US army Ranger who landed on Omaha (he's listed in rosters included in Ranger books). He said he never went back to France or watched war movies, but his buddies said SPR was like the real thing. Chris
Click to expand...
 
Not bad. The dog fights looked excellent and would be better on a bigger screen which was not present in Gold Class. As stated, no back story to the main characters, but dealing with a big story left little time to explore I guess. Hope it is a success to encourage further WW11 war movies to be made as they are few and far between. Robin.
 
We are at the theater waiting for it to start (on IMAX)!
 
Thought it was brilliant. Nolan captures the chaos, the desolation, the sense of feeling abandoned, but most of all the chaos. It's quite a movie.
 
Hi guys,
I plan to see it today. Very much looking forward to it. Heard it received excellent reviews.
 
I saw it on at our local small theatre. Really good. I'd like to see it again as I lost track of who was who among the British soldiers as they looked alike. The mixed time line took a bit of getting used to. I really identified with the yachtsmen as I came for a small port and I can image my father, brother and our friends and neighbors volunteering to take their boats as the British did.
 
Saw the movie today on large screen format and thought it was a very good movie, not great. Liked how the three story lines, air, sea and land came together at the end. Remarkable acting and photography. But as mentioned earlier, no real "grit of war". Casualties were portrayed as bloodless deaths, ala 1940's, clean and neat. I don't think I saw a drop of blood in the entire movie. No company grade officers or NCO's. That said, I enjoyed it very much but rank it below SPR, Battle of Britain, Bridge Too Far, etc. the truly epic accounts. Definitely recommend see this to all interested in WWII films. Chris
 
My perspective on the movie, which I'm going to see again tomorrow, is that it's so different than your conventional war movie that you can't compare it to those movies. It's in a separate category. In fact, in certain ways it's not a war movie but a tale of survival.
 
jazzeum said:
My perspective on the movie, which I'm going to see again tomorrow, is that it's so different than your conventional war movie that you can't compare it to those movies. It's in a separate category. In fact, in certain ways it's not a war movie but a tale of survival.
Click to expand...

Brad, pls feel free to view the movie however you wish. And I will do the same. Enjoy. Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top