Brettster <
brett...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, July 23, 2017 at 4:30:12 PM UTC-7, Howard wrote:
>
>> If there's a fault, it's that the balance of dread to actual
>> destruction is tilted too far toward destruction, and I think Nolan
>> could have done more to evoke a sense of hopelessness rather than
>> pure fear. But that's a minor quibble. The plotting, the acting,
>> and the effects all come together very well, and as an added bonus
>> it's only 1:46 long, and feels neither rushed nor padded.
>
> I saw it today. On the plus side, it definitely does a great job of
> "putting you on that beach," as one critic put it. Nolan conveys the
> sense of dread, horror, fear, hopelessness...all of those emotions.
>
> But I guess I must not be a war movie fan. I prefer to have stories
> and character development along with my conflict, and Dunkirk contains
> precious little of that. Almost the entire movie consists of:
>
> 1. Pilots in planes chasing other planes, shooting at them and
> crashing them into the sea.
>
> 2. Terrified British soldiers ducking as bombs and artillery burst
> around them.
>
> 3. People in pleasure boats frantically trying to rescue humans
> stranded in the water.
Your point of view is perfectly valid, although I think Hollywood
screenwriting has gone too far in feeling the need for exposition.
There's been a tendency to treat audiences like saps who want
motivations spelled out for everyone.
Thinking back on two historical movies I saw recently which I liked a
lot -- Selma and Lincoln -- I appreciated that they dealt with a fairly
narrow sliver of time and jumped right into the story without much
explanation or backstory. I thought the one place where Lincoln fell
flat was when it jumped ahead to his assasination and Spielberg and
Kushner felt it necessary to launch into a spiel about Lincoln's
greatness.
On the other side of things, I still haven't gotten around to seeing
Boyhood, which sounds like it's about as character based as you can get,
but it sounds tremendous.
> There is a wisp of a genuine human drama involving the kid in
> the boat vs. the shell-shocked soldier. For me, that was the most
> interesting part of the film.
>
> If you want to know what it was like being at Dunkirk during the
> war, you won't be disappointed. I can't believe this movie was only
> 1:46. It seemed much, much longer to me.
>
> Full disclosure: I thought Nolan's "Interstellar" was a colossal bore.
I don't think he's very good when he tries to get too deeply into ideas
and the meanings of things.