Dominic Brehetto

Rest In Piss To Your Cousin
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
31,723
Reputation
4,291
Daps
88,459
Reppin
Family
Man,I really dislike this film.

Still shocked to say it. I've loved every Nolan film. Consider him my favorite director and a goat.


But this film is just so unappealing. The more I sit with it the more I hate it.

It's like every criticism of Nolan boiled down to 1 film.

Unbelievable to make a pg13 war film with no actual characters
 

Geek Nasty

Brain Knowledgeably Whizzy
Supporter
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
30,265
Reputation
4,466
Daps
114,287
Reppin
South Kakalaka
I just watched it, damn I loved it. I give it 7.5/10 I don't get where all the hate comes from. I guess everyone was expecting some Hollywood Michael Bay history or something. Great thing about it his how all the stories were so intertwined. Everyone's little acts of heroism had large impacts later on.

And, people who crying because there's not enough talking you sound like women :mjlol: I just watched the Red Turtle not a fukking word in the whole movie. You didn't need dialogue or someone spelling out the plot for you if you can sit and think without something blowing up to let you know "that's broke now."

There's so many great little moments with NO dialogue where you should be able to tell what's going on. When the last Spitfire pilot reluctantly turns around to take out the bomber knowing he's not going to make it home. It's a real heroism story, not cartoon shyt.
 

The G.O.D II

A ha ha
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
86,184
Reputation
4,831
Daps
189,923
The cinematography was amazing and Hans did his thing with the score as usual but holy shyt was the “plot” just pointless. Movie was basically French/British soldiers trapped on a beach getting bombed on every half hour while rich cacs sailed their boats to the rescue. Definitely Nolan’s worse movie despite the usually critic slurpjob
 

gluvnast

Superstar
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
9,729
Reputation
1,529
Daps
27,761
Reppin
NULL
Y'all are so conditioned to films that have a central character with a backstory to tell among with other sub-characters in a general cliche plot and throw a bunch of stuff around it and call it a war film. And that's not how war is in reality. Even the greatest of the greats like Saving Private Ryan was about a particular cliche plot of a bunch of people put together to find someone. Dunkirk is a DECONSTRUCTION of all of that, and maybe that's what y'all do not get. Essentially, Dunkirk is the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan minus all the violent gore to which was needed for THAT film to showcase how violent war truly is, but takes away from the suspense, whereas in Dunkirk it is all about the suspense due to their particular situation. But just like in the opening scene Saving Private Ryan, there's no TIME to know anyone's back story, no TIME to know who is who, no TIME character development. It is all about the GOAL AT HAND. In the opening scene on Normandy Beach in Saving Private Ryan, it was D-DAY and all the allies trying to successfully make it on the beach. That was it. In Dunkirk, it was the absolute need to successfully retreat. That was it.

If you ever been in the military and been deployed into places like Iraq and Afghanistan, this is pretty much accurate. You don't or rarely SEE your enemy, but you are being attacked everywhere. Paranoia occurs often because you do not know when there's a down time or when you'll be attacked again. PTSD happens to those who one day appear to be of sound mind. Mental mistakes, accidental friendly fire happens. People perspectives differ, especially when it is reported by the news as soldiers being heroes over something that was regarded as a failure. When you are IN IT, and all in your mind is to try to get out. There's no time to waste trying to get to know a person and Nolan make that point clear. People who are saying it is pointless really missed the point entirely. The plot IS about Dunkirk and how the soldiers got OUT. And it is shown by every measure of participation, when to my recollection I have no ever seen in a film. This is from the perspectives of the ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE, and even CIVILIANS all intertwine to one overall goal which was to get those stranded soldiers out of that. And y'all complaining because there's no character arc, or no cliche plot of some individual heroes story, or no back story when there's no one really needed.

Nolan want to put you into their shoes, not looking from the outside.
 

Dwolf

Veteran
Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
35,576
Reputation
9,585
Daps
107,292
Reppin
Murim
Y'all are so conditioned to films that have a central character with a backstory to tell among with other sub-characters in a general cliche plot and throw a bunch of stuff around it and call it a war film. And that's not how war is in reality. Even the greatest of the greats like Saving Private Ryan was about a particular cliche plot of a bunch of people put together to find someone. Dunkirk is a DECONSTRUCTION of all of that, and maybe that's what y'all do not get. Essentially, Dunkirk is the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan minus all the violent gore to which was needed for THAT film to showcase how violent war truly is, but takes away from the suspense, whereas in Dunkirk it is all about the suspense due to their particular situation. But just like in the opening scene Saving Private Ryan, there's no TIME to know anyone's back story, no TIME to know who is who, no TIME character development. It is all about the GOAL AT HAND. In the opening scene on Normandy Beach in Saving Private Ryan, it was D-DAY and all the allies trying to successfully make it on the beach. That was it. In Dunkirk, it was the absolute need to successfully retreat. That was it.

If you ever been in the military and been deployed into places like Iraq and Afghanistan, this is pretty much accurate. You don't or rarely SEE your enemy, but you are being attacked everywhere. Paranoia occurs often because you do not know when there's a down time or when you'll be attacked again. PTSD happens to those who one day appear to be of sound mind. Mental mistakes, accidental friendly fire happens. People perspectives differ, especially when it is reported by the news as soldiers being heroes over something that was regarded as a failure. When you are IN IT, and all in your mind is to try to get out. There's no time to waste trying to get to know a person and Nolan make that point clear. People who are saying it is pointless really missed the point entirely. The plot IS about Dunkirk and how the soldiers got OUT. And it is shown by every measure of participation, when to my recollection I have no ever seen in a film. This is from the perspectives of the ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE, and even CIVILIANS all intertwine to one overall goal which was to get those stranded soldiers out of that. And y'all complaining because there's no character arc, or no cliche plot of some individual heroes story, or no back story when there's no one really needed.

Nolan want to put you into their shoes, not looking from the outside.
Movie was trash :wow:
 

CodeBlaMeVi

I love not to know so I can know more...
Supporter
Joined
Oct 3, 2013
Messages
37,641
Reputation
3,454
Daps
103,520
I rewatched it a month or so ago. I watched it first in theaters on iMax.

It’s my least favorite Nolan film.

I take it for what it’s worth as a visual spectacle so ehh.

I don’t care war films when actual documentaries are more interesting.
 
Last edited:
Top