Dunkirk is a 2017 war film written, co-produced and directed by Christopher Nolan. With hardly any dialogue, this portrayal of the Dunkirk Evacuation during the Second World War relies heavily on its visuals and deafening music. It features an ensemble cast starring Fionn Whitehead, Harry Styles, Kenneth Branagh, Cillian Murphy, Mark Rylance and Tom Hardy.
The most intriguing part of the film is its concept. Nolan completely abandoned his familiar mind-blowing concepts previously used, and instead opted for an ambitious, bombastic and unsentimental epic World War II film. Since the film is extremely energetic and intense, it is nearly impossible to establish the same edge-of-the-seat thrill with moments like, “Meanwhile, back on the home front” where the audience can rest, or have a breather. But honestly, I wasn't thrilled. There’s simply no characters to grasp onto, or relate with. Barely any of the characters have names, and only George has a meager backstory. The other side of the coin is that including “Meanwhile, back on the home front” cliche moments to provide a backstory would kill the tension and that this was what Nolan had intended on. Nevertheless, adding cliche moments isn’t the only way provide backstory. Furthermore, just because a gambit is a conscious part of the film’s design doesn’t always mean it works. Historically, the movie is generally accurate, portraying the frightening experiences of soldiers on the beach, frantically praying for their lives. However, miscalculations such as the British:French soldiers ratio and exaggerating the significance of the Little Ships’ contributions to the operation cannot be dismissed. In the midst of the mediocre execution, the film is original and ambitious in rejecting the common norm of “the protagonist(s) has(ve) to relate to the audience”. Hollywood doesn’t make films like this anymore. And for this, I respect it.
Now, we move on to the film's strongest facet, the cinematography and direction. Hoyte van Hoytema remains one of the finest cinematographers working today considering his achievements in Interstellar, Spectre and now Dunkirk. Nolan’s decision to utilize practical effects (real ships, real planes, and even real bombs) can only be praised. The crew even went as far as hiring over a thousand extras to fill the beaches of where the Evacuation of Dunkirk actually took place in order to immerse the audience entirely. Absorbed or not, the film was undeniably fascinating in terms of depicting the chaotic events on air, sea and land with practical effects. Nolan has become so good at applying practical effects into action scenes (take the hallway fight from Inception as an example), that it has become the new norm for him.
Acting is next in line, but somehow slips everyone’s mind when they think of this film. It’s pretty clear why, considering the fact that the film includes an ensemble cast. The actors aren’t given the opportunity to display their capabilities with no backstory to any of them. As the audience, we hardly receive any insight of their personalities whatsoever; as some of the blame can be put on the screenplay. There is Tom Hardy though, proving he’s one of the best actors working today, even with a mask. From The Dark Knight Rises to Mad Max: Fury Road, this incredible actor has proved he could do so much with just his eyeballs.
Unfortunately for Nolan, his ability to write outstanding screenplays such as Memento has weakened over time. From The Dark Knight Rises, to Interstellar, the screenplays feature many flaws, telling-- yet not showing, and overall poor dialogue. Dunkirk doesn’t escape the pattern. As frequently mentioned above, characters aren’t given enough backstory and insight leaving many parts of the film half-baked and redundant. On the other hand, the narrative structure of the film was masterfully constructed. Of course, in my opinion. It was practically the only element that stopped the film from being as repetitive as it already was. Like most of Nolan’s films, Dunkirk is obsessed by the relative perception of time; depicted in Inception and Interstellar. This is notably evident in the soundtrack, which features a ticking clock throughout the film.
Speaking of the soundtrack, Hans Zimmer’s deafening music is still a subject of debate. But in my opinion, the thunderous music is extremely valuable in heightening the suspense and underlining the concept of time, even going as far as including Nolan’s watch ticking in the soundtrack.
As controversial as the execution of the concept of the film is, Nolan is clearly trying to be inventive, and it’s that what matters in progressing cinema forward. Like all influential films throughout cinematic history, they don’t have a perfect execution to their experimental ideas. But as more filmmakers are inspired, time perfects the seemingly “outrageous” ideas. Who knows? Dunkirk could become the next Citizen Kane. You can practically see it from here.
B-
The most intriguing part of the film is its concept. Nolan completely abandoned his familiar mind-blowing concepts previously used, and instead opted for an ambitious, bombastic and unsentimental epic World War II film. Since the film is extremely energetic and intense, it is nearly impossible to establish the same edge-of-the-seat thrill with moments like, “Meanwhile, back on the home front” where the audience can rest, or have a breather. But honestly, I wasn't thrilled. There’s simply no characters to grasp onto, or relate with. Barely any of the characters have names, and only George has a meager backstory. The other side of the coin is that including “Meanwhile, back on the home front” cliche moments to provide a backstory would kill the tension and that this was what Nolan had intended on. Nevertheless, adding cliche moments isn’t the only way provide backstory. Furthermore, just because a gambit is a conscious part of the film’s design doesn’t always mean it works. Historically, the movie is generally accurate, portraying the frightening experiences of soldiers on the beach, frantically praying for their lives. However, miscalculations such as the British:French soldiers ratio and exaggerating the significance of the Little Ships’ contributions to the operation cannot be dismissed. In the midst of the mediocre execution, the film is original and ambitious in rejecting the common norm of “the protagonist(s) has(ve) to relate to the audience”. Hollywood doesn’t make films like this anymore. And for this, I respect it.
Now, we move on to the film's strongest facet, the cinematography and direction. Hoyte van Hoytema remains one of the finest cinematographers working today considering his achievements in Interstellar, Spectre and now Dunkirk. Nolan’s decision to utilize practical effects (real ships, real planes, and even real bombs) can only be praised. The crew even went as far as hiring over a thousand extras to fill the beaches of where the Evacuation of Dunkirk actually took place in order to immerse the audience entirely. Absorbed or not, the film was undeniably fascinating in terms of depicting the chaotic events on air, sea and land with practical effects. Nolan has become so good at applying practical effects into action scenes (take the hallway fight from Inception as an example), that it has become the new norm for him.
Acting is next in line, but somehow slips everyone’s mind when they think of this film. It’s pretty clear why, considering the fact that the film includes an ensemble cast. The actors aren’t given the opportunity to display their capabilities with no backstory to any of them. As the audience, we hardly receive any insight of their personalities whatsoever; as some of the blame can be put on the screenplay. There is Tom Hardy though, proving he’s one of the best actors working today, even with a mask. From The Dark Knight Rises to Mad Max: Fury Road, this incredible actor has proved he could do so much with just his eyeballs.
Unfortunately for Nolan, his ability to write outstanding screenplays such as Memento has weakened over time. From The Dark Knight Rises, to Interstellar, the screenplays feature many flaws, telling-- yet not showing, and overall poor dialogue. Dunkirk doesn’t escape the pattern. As frequently mentioned above, characters aren’t given enough backstory and insight leaving many parts of the film half-baked and redundant. On the other hand, the narrative structure of the film was masterfully constructed. Of course, in my opinion. It was practically the only element that stopped the film from being as repetitive as it already was. Like most of Nolan’s films, Dunkirk is obsessed by the relative perception of time; depicted in Inception and Interstellar. This is notably evident in the soundtrack, which features a ticking clock throughout the film.
Speaking of the soundtrack, Hans Zimmer’s deafening music is still a subject of debate. But in my opinion, the thunderous music is extremely valuable in heightening the suspense and underlining the concept of time, even going as far as including Nolan’s watch ticking in the soundtrack.
As controversial as the execution of the concept of the film is, Nolan is clearly trying to be inventive, and it’s that what matters in progressing cinema forward. Like all influential films throughout cinematic history, they don’t have a perfect execution to their experimental ideas. But as more filmmakers are inspired, time perfects the seemingly “outrageous” ideas. Who knows? Dunkirk could become the next Citizen Kane. You can practically see it from here.
B-