[Closed] Dunkirk (spoilers within)

Agreed, incredible film.

The volume was loud for us too. For me though it added to the atmospherics and gave an indication of how terrifying being attacked by stukas would have been.

I'm generally not a fan of Nolan but I think I'll go and we this.

Aye, the volume certainly added to the realism of the whole experience! The soundtrack worked really well too and there were absolutely no lulls at all throughout the film IMO.

Most 2nd war films are rather good nowadays like Saving Private Ryan etc. 🙂

My wife's boss owns the boat 🙂

Did we win this time?

Watched it last night on a baby Imax. Thought it was awesome.

I occasionally took a couple of seconds to work out where we were on the timeline, but it didn't detract too much.

Definitely want to see in on the BFI Imax now.

It is really good;isn't it? Agree with the loud comments.

Watched it on Friday. Thought it was excellent.

Think I preferred the human damage being left to my imagination rather than in my face like SPR.

Went to see it last night. That's one superb bit of cinema. Very little special effects, not much dialogue, just a small part of a huge story told immensely well.
You've gotta be a hard man not to cry.

Took my dad to see it this afternoon. Best film I've seen at the cinema in a long time. 10/10 from my dad which is very high praise given that he says no decent films have been made since about 1986!!

I was expecting it to be loud, but when those Stuka's first come in it's almost terrifying just being sat in the cinema, let alone what the real thing must have been like

Thinking of taking my 90 year old mum who remembers the original. She's not impressed with the trailers as the men are all a lot cleaner than she remembers .
A loud sound track should be just her thing.

Saw it tonight in IMAX and it was bloody fantastic.

Tom Glynn Carney who plays Mark Rylance's son Peter in the film, is a close family friend (his mum is godmother to my youngest) is going to be a huge star and I've been watching him in plays and stuff since he was 10 but the soundtrack and the cinematography just blew me away.

hmm... [url= http://warisboring.com/dunkirk-is-a-booming-bloodless-bore/ ]‘Dunkirk’ Is a Booming, Bloodless Bore - War has never been this dull[/url]

While it was certainly loud, it made for such a contrast when (SPOILERS) he shoots down the final stuka at the end without any fuel and you see him just glide across the beach in almost total silence.

Amazing film.

Wasn't over impressed to be honest, felt like it would have been three good films, edited into a single not so great one.

None of the characters except the father felt anything more than two dimensional and the constant switching from beach to boat to plane meant none of those built up enough steam or tension at any one time.

The final spitfire scene was laughable, he could have glided all the way back to Blighty at that rate and the "flyby" looked incredibly Gerry Anderson by comparison with the rest of the effects.

It was ok, but certainly not fantastic.

YMMV and clearly does for some.

did enjoy the film (defects included) but was disappointed that it forgot the 'forgotten' - the poor sods who formed the rearguard and enabled the beaches to be cleared, their reward was a lack of publicity and 5 years in a POW camp - my good lady had a whinge as that's what happened to her dad, he never talked about it, however near the end when alzheimers had set in he appeared to go into combat mode - 'get down, get ready, they're coming' and he would take cover behind something................

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/7750005/Dunkirk-the-soldiers-left-behind.html

Mrs BigJohn & I thought it was tremendous, magnificent, marvellous and made us feel real empathy and gratitude for those brave and stoic people.

A really powerful and gratifying experience.

But on the way home she turned to me and said ... but it wasn't a very good film, was it.

I had to agree.

If the pilot who dumped in the sea had used his elbows to splay the canopy out of the runners, he'd have got out with much less fuss/quicker.

Speaking as someone who's had an emergency exit breifing for a spitfire 8)

I though it was ok, not bad, not amazing.

After all these positive comments here I was surprised to be left disappointed really, the opening scene I thought was great. Went downhill from there and kept going down.

I can't believe some of the camera shots, would have been easy to eliminate the view in the background of a blast furnace or a modern crane in loads of shots. Anachronisms EVERYWHERE you looked. And the continuity between the two wholly different beaches with vastly different numbers of soldiers. very very poor. Might just be me, but just looked lazy and cheap.

I can't understand how all the bullets fired into that boat were followed by gallons of water pouring in. If you were shooting at a boat, you'd aim above the waterline, surely, rather than shoot into the water 10 metres in front where the bullets would just spin and lose velocity.

Saw this in the week and thought it close to being brilliant but the timeline was mangled, the target practice below the waterline and the laughable last gliding scene let it down badly.

From the reviews I was expecting better.

Well just saw it and i thought it was bloomin brilliant... 10 out of 10

Went last night and thought it was great. 9/10

It would've been better if he hadn't got the wheels down in time and the spit had dug in and flipped. That just felt a little bit too 'happy ending' for my tastes, despite the fact the pilot would have spent the rest of the war in a POW camp.

It was a spectacular film, but it just felt like all the death and destruction was a bit too detached. More death of the main characters would have been a bit less Hollywood, but a bit more affecting.

I can't believe some of the camera shots, would have been easy to eliminate the view in the background of a blast furnace or a modern crane in loads of shots. Anachronisms EVERYWHERE you looked. And the continuity between the two wholly different beaches with vastly different numbers of soldiers. very very poor. Might just be me, but just looked lazy and cheap

Yes, Nolan's aversion to using CGI might have worked against him here. Not once did I get the impression of 300,000 soldiers or more than 3 Spitfires.

Agree with a lot of the points made.

Haven't seen continuity editing that bad since The Count of Monte Cristo. The Weymouth harbour scenes with clear shots of the 1958 Weymouth Pavilion (and others have said you could see the 2012 Jurassic Skyline although I didn't spot it) are a bit inexcusable. It matters because the whole set up was meant to be one of immersion which is the excuse for no CGI, script, character development, context or backstory.

I don't think he did justice to the scale of it.

And Branagh was a bit wasted in my view.

Don't get me wrong I enjoyed it I just don't see how you'd ever give it 10/10.

I think it was an immersive experience but it was far from perfect.

I felt the scale of the event was completely wrong, it looked small and in isolation.

The actual evacuation and use of civilian boats wasn't really given enough time and seemed rushed.

The spitfire part at the end was poor, like watching a Wes Anderson film for a few minutes.

I did enjoy it overall but think it missed the mark on the above.

The only anachronism which stood out for me was the interior of the train at the end - I vaguely recall it as 1970s british rail?

The sound quality was poor in the imax at which I saw it. Bass distortion, swamped dialogue.

Great film though.

Ermehgerd, that was exhausting.

The look on Branagh's face when he was preparing to die - that will stay with me.

The score made it.

As with all of Nolan's stuff (caveat - haven't seen Interstellar yet) it had moments of film-making genius, and moments of utter lack of care and silliness.

Looking at it just as a piece of cinema it is close to brilliant - immersive, engaging and brave. If the sound design doesn't win an Oscar there's something wrong. I enjoyed the juggled narrative but can see why it might annoy some viewers.

Looking at it as an accurate document of those events, it's obviously flawed.

Loved the in joke of having Hardy speaking pretty much all his lines from behind a mask.

It was riveting and quite a few moments I was tensed up

Liked -

The way it jumped straight in
The sound of the planes (Stukas!)

Disliked -

Lack of scale (only about a dozen small boats? Empty beaches)
Unnecessary timeline shifting
The youngest kid on the boat
The French guy swapping uniforms at the beginning was so obvious and then built up into that needless confrontation
And +1 to lack of rearguard story

Overall I enjoyed it, probably wouldn't watch it again, not a great film but good entertainment if that makes sense

colournoise - Member
If the sound design doesn't win an Oscar there's something wrong.

Bit late but watched this last night, i will admit in advance that i have read a lot around this period of history.
It was shoddy and poorly constructed and utterly failed to convey the sheer scale if what actually happened It looked like 3 or 4 boats turned up and lifted a few battalions off the beach? The RAF lost around 200 aircraft, six destroyers sunk and a further 200 navy ships lost- to be frank it was very poor and the 2004 BBC series portrays the whole situation more accurately.

Bit late but watched this last night, i will admit in advance that i have read a lot around this period of history.
It was shoddy and poorly constructed and utterly failed to convey the sheer scale if what actually happened It looked like 3 or 4 boats turned up and lifted a few battalions off the beach? The RAF lost around 200 aircraft, six destroyers sunk and a further 200 navy ships lost- to be frank it was very poor and the 2004 BBC series portrays the whole situation more accurately.

& I thought Barry Norman was dead!

Thanks for that but was it a good film apart from the dissection?

Thanks essel! High praise indeed

Just for the record my other halfs grandfather was evacuated from Dunkirk and he said you couldn't swing a cat on the beach

Ok Barry, I haven't seen it but is it worth seeing? I'm no critic really but for Joe Bloggs is it worth watching?
There's plenty of discrepancies in most 'fact based' films as you well know.

Totally failed for me on many fronts . Failed to convey the scale of the whole thing was it's biggest failing, seemed to go very quickly from boats trying to get soldiers off the beach to being back in England which I actually was glad of because I was totally bored by then . The longest bit of gliding ever by the spitfire at the end . Was front crawl the only swimming stroke that anybody could do in those days ? The inside the abandoned boat scene was just silly . For me the dogfight scenes didn't seem very realistic . Overall I didn't care who lived and who died by the end . Oh and Kenneth Brannagh , I know of his pedigree but his performance was just so wooden . Others obviously disagreed .

The little thing that grieved me slightly was the burning spitfire at the end; totally missing the engine! And an obvious pole holding the prop in place. Sometimes it sucks knowing how things are put together in real life; obvious physics and mechanical 'nopes' in films really jar with me but seem to pass most people by.

On second thoughts, maybe the lack of a Merlin would explain the Spit's exceptional glide slope moments earlier? 😆

I loved it, especially the soundtrack. Amazing!!

Enjoyed some parts 7/10 from me.
Preferred the original.

Given the Spitfire was out of fuel, what would have caused it to go up in flames like that...?

Given the Spitfire was out of fuel, what would have caused it to go up in flames like that...?

When the pilot fired the flare into the cockpit to destroy it so it does not fall into the hands of the enemy?

Ok film. Some brilliant elements, but some significant 'meh' bits too.