Dunkirk Nolan Fans Member Reviews (NFometer)

The 2017 World War II thriller about the evacuation of British and Allied troops from Dunkirk beach.
User avatar
Posts: 29
Joined: November 2014
Location: New York, NY
  • The Prestige
    The Dark Knight
    Inception
    Memento
    The Dark Knight Rises
    Batman Begins
    Dunkirk
    Interstellar
    Following
    Insomnia
Dunkirk was a good movie but never really left the screening satisfied as I did with his other movies. I don't want to feel like I watched a documentary...I feel like it had less entertainment value than his other films, just my opinion
Last edited by hiral on July 20th, 2017, 1:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 1126
Joined: May 2017
Location: Elk Grove, CA
Ruth wrote:And disseldor nailed the explanation of characters, exactly what I was thinking and why it absolutely worked in this.
It did work in this, I agree. I will re-post something I wrote before though (I'll delete the old one), because of its current relevance with the topic of conversation and the fact that more people now have seen it.

I keep mentally jumping back to a post that I made in another thread that was in response to the Jeremy Jahns video review, specifically the bold part:
MuffinMcFluffin wrote:
Elyk988 wrote:Jahns felt Suicide Squad was a good movie....I think his taste in films officially died with that statement.

YouTube reviewers are franchise plebeians.
He wanted something that Nolan didn't.

What I stated in my review is that in a perfect world I kind of wish Nolan filmed a 2+ hour version, and had two cuts to it: the version we see now, and an extended version with character development. You get to choose your cut of the film you'd like to see. Or, at least, have that kind of thing on Blu-ray.

Ultimately, I'd say this much: while it's cool to break the mold every once in a while and have a film that leaves out that "fluff," it does go to show there is a reason why that "fluff" tends to exist in most movies, including United 93 (at least for the plane passengers). Dunkirk is fine being the exception, but not the rule.
As fine as it is for me to say that Dunkirk could either stand as it is or be another longer Nolan film (as many as 147 minutes, or whatever IMAX film allows for) where what we see in the film's current state is the latter end of it but shown chronologically (and thus would perhaps create a whole new set of opinions), I didn't bother thinking about other films doing what Nolan did with Dunkirk. When I do, it becomes a bit bothersome.

I referenced United 93. I replayed that film back in my head, and cut out any scenes that show any sign of interaction that is not literally focused on the film's story. No background information given, no side conversations about what people plan on doing the next day, no mentioning how their food is or what the weather is like, nothing. That being said, most of the ATC scenes would pretty much remain intact, but the scenes on UA93 would be dramatically reduced. The first fifteen minutes of the movie would pretty much be completely cut out, and the last act would take away the saddest scene of individuals calling their families and tell them that they love them. Let's also remove the ending text crawl. This cut of United 93 would be on-the-nose, factual, relentless and tension-ridden, but it would also be heartless.

I'm not saying Dunkirk is heartless, but many critics are trying to find its heart from this new species, without a stethoscope, and some simply state they only know there is a heart because it is living, but can't seem to place it. "Distant" is a word that I have seen critics use, and I can agree with that adjective. I see why they say this, and even though I for one found the heart (mostly because of Nolan's interviews prior to the film so I understood what he was going for), part of me does wish that Nolan did make a version of this that does introduce everything about what we see on screen thereafter, even if there were two cuts of the film. It doesn't need to be expository, it just needs to flesh items out.

That being said, Nolan never intended for that, and I am okay with that. So his execution of the film was flawless (the lack of character/plot development is not a flaw of this film), but some people were looking for a different film. Myself? I can take either way, but I can't do it often. Again, this is the exception. Let's say Hacksaw Ridge took out the first half of the film. I think I would still like it and I could sympathize, etc... but if Dunkirk came out after that, we would have exception on top of exception. Too many of these kinds of films would dilute the effect that they are going for. Baby Driver is original for syncing the music with the action, but if we have a lot of movies like that then Baby Driver is no longer unique or original.

So I still applaud what Nolan went for, I do. However, I sit back and ask myself: "Can this be a norm? Can I take a lot of other movies that I like which has character development, strip it out, and enjoy it as much? Could have Dunkirk spent a little more time with characters and have the same exact effect, possibly even winning over more audiences?" I think I can answer all of these questions now, and it does leave this film in the exact state that we see it: there is nothing wrong with anybody who doesn't like this film for what it is, including Jeremy Jahns. I will reiterate what I said in my quoted post: He wanted something that Nolan didn't. And that is fine.

If this doesn't win over the Academy during Oscar season because of what is lacking, that too is fine. Do I want it to win? Hell yes, where it is deserved... maybe even Best Picture. But because it is missing overall plot and character development, I am not throwing around the word "masterpiece" for this film. But it is a rinky-dink time at the cinema, and I for one have been itching to see it again. I can't wait until later tonight, and I really can't wait until all of you see this incredible work that Nolan has crafted.
Last edited by MuffinMcFluffin on July 20th, 2017, 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 395
Joined: June 2017
I think the Prestige and Interstellar are his only great movies, so expecting it to be top 3

User avatar
Posts: 3004
Joined: January 2015
Location: Poland
Lord Shade wrote:
m4st4 wrote:For those of you who've seen the movie, can you possibly rank Nolan movies now, or is it too early? Is Dunkirk low tier, mid tier or among his best for you?
Low tier.

1. Inception
2. The Dark Knight
3. Interstellar
4. The Dark Knight Rises
5. The Prestige
6. Batman Begins
7. Memento
8. Insomnia
9. Dunkirk
10. Following
Obviously it depends who you ask. The critics seem to LOVE this film but I tend to agree with Lord Shade. It's definitely his bottom tier. In terms of technical mastery it's probably right there at the top with some of his more recent endeavours but the story is clearly his weakest. Not because it has flaws because for the most part it doesn't (that's why I think the online critics will love this film) but rather that it's just not that interesting. It was supposed to be a ride like Speed, Gravity or Avatar but those films did that better - they still had growth, development and a story, even if simple or uninspired.

My ranking is:
1) The Dark Knight 10/10
2) Interstellar 10/10
3) Memento 10/10
4) The Dark Knight Rises 9/10
5) The Prestige 9/10
6) Batman Begins 9/10
7) Inception 8/10
8) Insomnia 7/10
9) Dunkirk 6/10
10) Following 6/10

User avatar
Posts: 1407
Joined: July 2012
1. TDK
2. Dunkirk
3. The Prestige
4. TDKR
5. Interstellar
6. Batman Begins
7. Inception
8. Memento
9. Insomnia
10. Following

User avatar
Posts: 1639
Joined: February 2011
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Prestige
Inception
Dunkirk
Memento
Interstellar
Batman Begins
TDK
TDKR
Insomnia
Following

User avatar
Posts: 12885
Joined: February 2011
Lack of character development is just one of those cool things you can utter when you're a critic and you have to somehow elaborate on why a film hasn't connected with you. Show Alien to the same group of people and they will all shout "masterpiece". No one would even mention anything about the characterization or the absence of any backstory or whatnot.

I kind of feel that it also became a very important factor for younger film fans after GoT. People somehow came to this odd assumption that every other movies and TV show can only work if every now and then the characters sit around some fire or something and one of them start talking about what happened to them in their childhood or whatever.£

Posts: 395
Joined: June 2017
Master Virgo wrote:Lack of character development is just one of those cool things you can utter when you're a critic and you have to somehow elaborate on why a film hasn't connected with you. Show Alien to the same group of people and they will all shout "masterpiece". No one would even mention anything about the characterization or the absence of any backstory or whatnot.

I kind of feel that it also became a very important factor for younger film fans after GoT. People somehow came to this odd assumption that every other movies and TV show can only work if every now and then the characters sit around some fire or something and one of them start talking about what happened to them in their childhood or whatever.£
Critics love Dunkirk though

The people saying this are more like casual movie watchers

Posts: 555
Joined: July 2010
WHAT A SPECTACLE

Nolan's third masterpiece after TDK and Memento.

5/5

User avatar
Posts: 12885
Joined: February 2011
Yeah, I'm talking about those of them who are mentioning this as an issue. Critics in general don't have a problem with that. Otherwise, films like this, Gravity or Fury Road wouldn't have received such raves obviously.£

Post Reply