Dunkirk

Christopher Nolan's back, but he didn't make me too happy this time. To pick a war movie and make it PG-13 is a big mistake for me. After the carnage of Hacksaw Ridge this is very restrained and clean, I missed the filth, the dismembered bodies, the screaming and the guts, instead we get ticking clocks, ships and fighter planes. It bothered me that there is no main character or villain, which is a crucial thing for me, something that no film should miss. Emotionally it left me absolutely cold. But I don’t want only to criticize, I must praise the great audiovisual aspect, the fighter raids had their charm, Tom Hardy was excellent, Hans Zimmer's music nicely supported the atmosphere and the shots of the open sea and sunken ships were nice. On the plus side, the pace is fast, you don't have to wait long for things to happen, but there was a notable scene missing that I would like to watch again in the future. I got it about half and half, I won't be rushing into another screening.70% (07/26/2017)

Count on Dunkirk being the kind of war movie you’ve never seen. For example, out of the total 106 minutes of footage, 106 are accompanied by Hans Zimmer’s music, which not only intrigues with its melodies or strong motives, but it can also get the blood going with its incredible suspense that doesn’t stop, not when you’re watching the credits.  I have never seen the music and visuals to be this well-connected and I must say that even if it’s not Nolan’s best film, it’s still an experience I won’t forget. Also, I mustn’t forget to appreciate the fact that the director has conveyed the movie as the stories of ordinary, but also extraordinary people. Every single character has its purpose and even if Tom Hardy, for example, might not say much, the ending will convince you that his acting was unequivocal. I also liked the roles of Mark Rylance, Kenneth Branagh and especially Harry Styles, who has stunned me with his acting performance. And I’ll admit that I was shocked when I found that he’s actually a One Direction singer. It must take some balls for a world-renowned director to cast a young boy who is known as a member of an annoying boyband and he might know how to sing but has no acting experience. But Christopher Nolan obviously has the balls to do that and I have to say that it’s a joy to live in a time of such great movies. (08/11/2017)

This badly edited depiction of the hellishness of war is packed with great shots and a retro atmosphere that is nicely enhanced by celluloid impurities in the picture and the absence of ostentatiously digital elements. The tension in the film (even in scenes that don’t need it) is created only by its soundtrack. But after the end of the movie, I was glad to enjoy some precious silence. (07/19/2017)

Emotionally, it flew over my head. Like, really, zero experience. Dunkirk looks nice, but that’s all there is to it. What fascinates me somehow is that Nolan, who’s always been a better storyteller than a director of action scenes, chose for his latest film a plot-lacking reconstruction of one action scene. He only gave the shape of a film to a historical event, which, given his cold approach, wasn’t enough for me. He made an unconventional war movie, yes – without Germans, almost without dialogue, alternating three storylines of different lengths … but to me the result is nothing. I never got the impression that the intertwining storylines supported each other in any way. If only their overlaps had some kind of reinvigorating effect (which was 100% de case in the escalating climax of Inception). Here, there’s nothing but chaos, which, IMHO, is also strangely missing some rather important parts of the story (the pier line: the conversation between the commanders, while two boys are hidden under the pier, that no other ship can sink by he pier … and voilà, in the next chronologically linked scene there’s another ship sinking? How did it get there? Did the boys try to get on it? How much time passed? Or was it the ship that sailed in the previous scene?). And though it all somehow fits together temporarily (although, at least for me, nothing comes out it, no catharsis, no satisfaction), in terms of spacial orientation, a couple of the scenes are a real mess. The pathos in the end unpleasantly surprised me, given the course so far. The concept is great, but the execution lacks any subjective effect. (07/25/2017)

The architecture of time and space prevents Dunkirk from looking like a malnourished drama with fleeting characters that again perform more assigned narrative functions (such as Branagh's sculptural explanation), rather than embody some deeper thoughts. In the end, Dunkirk, with all its efforts to achieve objectivity, cannot avoid pathetic words and premature dramatic abbreviations. It’s been a long time since the war has had such a booming and creaking physical element. Unfortunately, the demolished drums are the only thing I carry with me the day after. For me, it’s more of a noble imitation that has to fire on all cylinders to cover the inner emptiness and lack of nuances. The greater the ambition Nolan has in working with a storytelling perspective, the more doubtful the results. The modest, but psychologically and narratively incredibly functional and agile film The Prestige remains an unattainable goal. Dunkirk is a flashy creative maneuver that creates a big wave around itself. However, it does not reach the depths. (07/26/2017)