Cocal wrote:I'm moving a little conversation from the general discussion thread as it seems to fit in here. I really felt something is off about the time on land and it seriously bugs me.

okungnyo wrote:

Cocal wrote:
It kinda ties in with one problem I had with the film - The feeling of time passing, or rather lack thereof. It's stated that The Mole part is a whole week but to me it felt like a day, maybe two. Was there like a little timejump when they were sleeping on the beach or what? To be fair, I only watched it once, but I can't tell when one day was supposed to turn into the next.
Did anyone else feel like what was shown didn't really match up to the timespan it was said to cover?

I agree that the sea portion felt like a day, and the air portion felt like an hour, but the mole portion felt like only two days, not a week.

Maybe the time skip occurs when that private wakes up and is taken aboard on the officers' ship?

That scene is probably the last day of the evacuation, i.e. like five days later in the chronological timeline.

Correct. Again, see my second post in this thread.

I feel that I'll personally have to add to the timeline in saying when that soldier wakes up, and how the commander stays back for the French troops.

First - @666kalpa - I disagree only because I saw a graph of the timelines that showed them intersecting much closer to the end of the week. And I read that the AIR and SEA timelines take place on the last day of the week of LAND. Also..

Innovator wrote:I'm planning on watching Dunkirk for a second time next week, as it's all becoming a bit of a blur, but there's one thing about the timeline that is bugging me. The events on the beach were supposed to represent one week, but we saw like what, two days at the most?

I might have missed something.

I agree. I think it would have helped to at least have a night on the beach. I agree it seemed like just a couple of days. With multiple watching we could probably draw lines at where scenes might be occurring on a following day.

I took it as the timelines weren't about how long those Soldiers were stranded on the beach, but rather intervals of each perspectives in general. That means the main characters on the beach were there for 3 days, plus a day coming back from shore and the rest coming in and on the train. It also explains how the newspaper story about George was published already by the time Alex and (I forgot the other guy's name) were able to get their hands on it, because their timeline is the longest. So the events even AFTER the rescue were on separate timelines equating the total time span per story.

dormouse7 wrote:First - @666kalpa - I disagree only because I saw a graph of the timelines that showed them intersecting much closer to the end of the week. And I read that the AIR and SEA timelines take place on the last day of the week of LAND.

... and??

What if I said that I saw a graph of the timelines that showed them intersecting during the middle of the week, and I read that the AIR and SEA timelines take place on the third day of the week of LAND?

I mean think about it for a second.

gluvnast wrote:I took it as the timelines weren't about how long those Soldiers were stranded on the beach, but rather intervals of each perspectives in general. That means the main characters on the beach were there for 3 days, plus a day coming back from shore and the rest coming in and on the train. It also explains how the newspaper story about George was published already by the time Alex and (I forgot the other guy's name) were able to get their hands on it, because their timeline is the longest. So the events even AFTER the rescue were on separate timelines equating the total time span per story.

I don't think the local paper that George appears in is the same one that Alex and Tommy are reading.

okungnyo wrote:I don't think the local paper that George appears in is the same one that Alex and Tommy are reading.

Correct, they are in different cities.

gluvnast wrote:I took it as the timelines weren't about how long those Soldiers were stranded on the beach, but rather intervals of each perspectives in general. That means the main characters on the beach were there for 3 days, plus a day coming back from shore and the rest coming in and on the train. It also explains how the newspaper story about George was published already by the time Alex and (I forgot the other guy's name) were able to get their hands on it, because their timeline is the longest. So the events even AFTER the rescue were on separate timelines equating the total time span per story.

I thought about this too, but if the time is counted all the way to them being on the train, that would mean the timeline follows the soldiers rather than The Mole. Which would be weird when it's called The Mole.

To me there's just no explanation that actually makes sense. Edit: Yes it can make logical sense but it's not what we are shown.

Churchill's June 4, 1940 speech is in the newspaper when the cast soldiers arrive in the UK.

June 4, 1940 was the last day of the Dunkirk evacuation.

"The Dunkirk evacuation, code-named Operation Dynamo, also known as the Miracle of Dunkirk, was the evacuation of Allied soldiers from the beaches and harbour of Dunkirk, in the north of France, between 26 May and 4 June 1940"

Therefore, the SEA timeline takes place on June 4, 1940, the last day of the week of LAND. AIR is also present at the end of the British evacuation so it is also on June 4, 1940.

Don't they finally leave Moonstone when it's already getting dark though? And then read the newspapers aboard the train the next day when it's daylight? That'd make the sea and the air timelines on June 3th.

or am I stupid

Sure, AIR and SEA could be on June 3 if they arrived at night. That makes sense.

I REALLY wish I could find the curved graph I saw that showed the timelines converging close to the end of the week of LAND, with AIR and SEA converging at slightly different times.