Dunkirk
4/4
Starring: Fionn Whitehead, Aneurin Barnard, Harry Styles, Mark Rylance, Tom Glynn-Carney, Barry Keoghan, Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy, Jack Lowden, Kenneth Branagh, James D'Arcy
Rated PG-13 for Intense War Experience and Some Language
"Dunkirk" is an experience.
No other descriptor does it justice. Like other classics, such as "Saving Private Ryan," "Schindler's List," or even "Boyhood," Christopher Nolan's newest project transcends its form and becomes something else entirely. You don't watch "Dunkirk," you live it.
"Dunkirk" lacks any true narrative, and that's by design. This movie isn't about plot or characters. It's about the event. The men the camera follows are simply a way to navigate it. In order to paint a full picture of the evacuation of Dunkirk, Nolan divides the film into three intertwining parts. One follows, Tommy (Whitehead), Gibson (Barnard) and Alex (Styles) as they try to find a way off the beach any way they can. Another follows a couple of fighter pilots played by Tom Hardy and Jack Lowden as they struggle to defend the hundreds of thousands of British soldiers from attack by German aircraft. The third follows a civilian (Rylance) and two teenagers (Glynn-Carney and Keoghan) as they take their boat to rescue as many soldiers as they can.
This isn't an actors show. No one goes for effect or tries to stand out. All are effective, and while it will certainly be up for numerous Oscars come January, acting won't be a category for which it will be seriously considered. Even big stars like Mark Rylance, Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy and Kenneth Branagh underplay their roles. They are just a piece of the overall pie and tailor their performances accordingly.
Considering how little dialogue there is, it's understandable. Normally, I find such movies pretentious (examples: "Shame" and "Hunger"), but Nolan wisely focuses on action. This is a film about what these men do, not who they are or what they say. Almost all of the dialogue is unintelligible, but it hardly matters since it's so unimportant that it's almost superfluous. Nolan knows that when concentrating on an event in this fashion, dialogue will only dilute the film's strengths. Take away the dialogue entirely and almost nothing will change. That's how strong this film is.
Nolan eschews any sort of storytelling structure. There are some highs and lows, sure, but he doesn't play by any narrative rules. From the first frame to the last, the film is at high intensity. Such a decision is certainly bold, but also incredibly daring. But Nolan has never played by the rules or backed down from taking chances. It is only his talent (and bankability) that made Warner Bros. allow him to tell this story in this way.
"Dunkirk" is not your typical summer entertainment. Then again, neither was another war film, the aforementioned "Saving Private Ryan," which was also released in the summer (to its detriment at Oscar time). Comparisons to Steven Spielberg's WWII epic are entirely appropriate. While not as gory, it's just as intense as the infamous Omaha Beach scene. It feels more violent than it actually is, mainly because Nolan wisely suggests much of the violence than shows it. Yet there are scenes of stark intensity. Screaming men drowning, men being burned alive in the water, terrified men trapped in sinking ships. Hans Zimmer's aggressive score (one of his best, by the way) adds to the drama and terror. That this MPAA gave this a PG-13 instead of the hard R it deserves is beyond words. This movie is unequivocally not for children. Trust me on this.
Christopher Nolan has never settled for the easy road. He challenges himself and the audience. He dares to be different and to risk it all with every film he creates. But he is such a meticulous craftsman that his success is all but assured. His skill has earned him the respect of critics, audiences, and his fellow filmmakers from Steven Spielberg and Martin Scorcese to Werner Herzog and Michael Mann. The release dates of a new film of his is something to be celebrated and anticipated by everyone who loves film.
Is "Dunkirk" his best film? Tough to say, since his filmography reads like a list of the most celebrated and groundbreaking films of the past 20 years. One thing is clear: "Dunkirk" will be on my Top 10 list at the end of the year, and if another film surpasses it, I will be shocked beyond all words.
Starring: Fionn Whitehead, Aneurin Barnard, Harry Styles, Mark Rylance, Tom Glynn-Carney, Barry Keoghan, Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy, Jack Lowden, Kenneth Branagh, James D'Arcy
Rated PG-13 for Intense War Experience and Some Language
"Dunkirk" is an experience.
No other descriptor does it justice. Like other classics, such as "Saving Private Ryan," "Schindler's List," or even "Boyhood," Christopher Nolan's newest project transcends its form and becomes something else entirely. You don't watch "Dunkirk," you live it.
"Dunkirk" lacks any true narrative, and that's by design. This movie isn't about plot or characters. It's about the event. The men the camera follows are simply a way to navigate it. In order to paint a full picture of the evacuation of Dunkirk, Nolan divides the film into three intertwining parts. One follows, Tommy (Whitehead), Gibson (Barnard) and Alex (Styles) as they try to find a way off the beach any way they can. Another follows a couple of fighter pilots played by Tom Hardy and Jack Lowden as they struggle to defend the hundreds of thousands of British soldiers from attack by German aircraft. The third follows a civilian (Rylance) and two teenagers (Glynn-Carney and Keoghan) as they take their boat to rescue as many soldiers as they can.
This isn't an actors show. No one goes for effect or tries to stand out. All are effective, and while it will certainly be up for numerous Oscars come January, acting won't be a category for which it will be seriously considered. Even big stars like Mark Rylance, Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy and Kenneth Branagh underplay their roles. They are just a piece of the overall pie and tailor their performances accordingly.
Considering how little dialogue there is, it's understandable. Normally, I find such movies pretentious (examples: "Shame" and "Hunger"), but Nolan wisely focuses on action. This is a film about what these men do, not who they are or what they say. Almost all of the dialogue is unintelligible, but it hardly matters since it's so unimportant that it's almost superfluous. Nolan knows that when concentrating on an event in this fashion, dialogue will only dilute the film's strengths. Take away the dialogue entirely and almost nothing will change. That's how strong this film is.
Nolan eschews any sort of storytelling structure. There are some highs and lows, sure, but he doesn't play by any narrative rules. From the first frame to the last, the film is at high intensity. Such a decision is certainly bold, but also incredibly daring. But Nolan has never played by the rules or backed down from taking chances. It is only his talent (and bankability) that made Warner Bros. allow him to tell this story in this way.
"Dunkirk" is not your typical summer entertainment. Then again, neither was another war film, the aforementioned "Saving Private Ryan," which was also released in the summer (to its detriment at Oscar time). Comparisons to Steven Spielberg's WWII epic are entirely appropriate. While not as gory, it's just as intense as the infamous Omaha Beach scene. It feels more violent than it actually is, mainly because Nolan wisely suggests much of the violence than shows it. Yet there are scenes of stark intensity. Screaming men drowning, men being burned alive in the water, terrified men trapped in sinking ships. Hans Zimmer's aggressive score (one of his best, by the way) adds to the drama and terror. That this MPAA gave this a PG-13 instead of the hard R it deserves is beyond words. This movie is unequivocally not for children. Trust me on this.
Christopher Nolan has never settled for the easy road. He challenges himself and the audience. He dares to be different and to risk it all with every film he creates. But he is such a meticulous craftsman that his success is all but assured. His skill has earned him the respect of critics, audiences, and his fellow filmmakers from Steven Spielberg and Martin Scorcese to Werner Herzog and Michael Mann. The release dates of a new film of his is something to be celebrated and anticipated by everyone who loves film.
Is "Dunkirk" his best film? Tough to say, since his filmography reads like a list of the most celebrated and groundbreaking films of the past 20 years. One thing is clear: "Dunkirk" will be on my Top 10 list at the end of the year, and if another film surpasses it, I will be shocked beyond all words.
Comments
Post a Comment