Willem wrote:Seriously, I'm convinced you need to see it two times before you fully appreciate it

You know, to see the film more than once, you need to be inspired for it by the first, original one. Dunkirk didn't do it for me. But I'll do it for Nolan after a while. Not for Dunkirk.

NotoriousWolf wrote:it was LOUD as shit. Almost gave me a heart attack the first 10 mins lol

This.

I enjoyed it, but as an IMAX action thriller ride. For a Nolan movie it's simply a meh, that's why I'm writing about his fans, yo.

Fans of Nolan's thoughtful previous efforts are going to hate this movie even more, so you probably chose the wrong place.

tommyjon400 wrote:I hated Dark Knight Rises and I'd put Dunkirk even below that.

Interestingly both movies are Nolan trying to take on the war genre. Maybe you should stay away if he announces his next film deals with it as well.

He's talking about the moonstone passing by a destroyer. Yes, yes, exactly. I rewatched a bootleg of a prologue to remember, and I've seen this shot at the end. See, I remembered it incorrectly. It was Moonstone passing through it, not soldiers watching from the beach. But it was showed from the lo...

Honestly, this movie probably has the hardest box-office to predict in the whole Nolan career. At least for me. I have no fucking idea of how it will behave in box-office. Especially on the international level.

You would need an extremely perverted mind to come up with with such a question.

His voice performance in the prologue is superior to the released version. However as a sound engineer, it was distracting that everytime he spoke you could tell they recorded him on set and all of the outside of mask plane noise made it's way into the take. You can clearly tell when and where they...

Now I understand that the real advantage from watching it on a press-screening was not having any 1D-fans around moaning during Harry's appearances. All the people I know who watched it on the public screenings are complaining about it now.