Review of Dunkirk (2017) by Jeff S — 12 Aug 2017

I've been a fan of Nolan since Memento. His Dark Knight trilogy can't be touched for superhero realism, with depth. He deals with surreal environments where his characters are in a microcosm. Inception is ingenious, and works on many levels. The Prestige, Insomnia, and Interstellar are all brilliant. That's why I'm so confused at how he can drop to this fractured storytelling that does not innovate or bring much of a fresh perspective. It's an art film that leaves out many aspects of War to focus on the unexpected heroes, and the whole pointless, juxtapositions of survival. He tells three intersecting storyline to show some people trying to get on a ship while other are trying to escape a ship, sometimes the same people realize that survival is the contrary . Some anticipate a plane for saving, others fear the sound of plane that comes for attack. Some are selfish for survival, while others want to save everyone else and are willing to sacrifice what they hold dearest. It's a bit dizzying going up and down in water, flying around chasing each others tail.

The Battle of Dunkirk is reduced to a psychological study of alternating goals that may or may not lead to survival. In the end private boat owners are the heroes, and the survivors are just a humble statistic. The musical score was constant and got unnerving, mostly on purpose. The 1940s British accents were often unintelligible with all the noise and music.

Another war is pointless movie like this wasted Nolan's talent. This could have been done by some other director that was getting their start. I watched it in 70mm which was pointless, Nolan made no attempt to glorify anything on display, so the drabness was in full effect. I can't believe this followed the visually rich Interstellar.