Read User Reviews and Submit your own for Dunkirk

10

dangersJul 25, 2017

I have seen a surprising amount of great blockbuster films this year but none of them has been like Dunkirk. Giving a 10/10 to Dunkirk isn't enough. It's another flawless masterpiece from Nolan and such a unique experience. Easily the bestI have seen a surprising amount of great blockbuster films this year but none of them has been like Dunkirk. Giving a 10/10 to Dunkirk isn't enough. It's another flawless masterpiece from Nolan and such a unique experience. Easily the best movie I've seen all year and among the best films I've seen that were made in the last 17 years.… Expand

116 of 147 users found this helpful11631

All this user's reviews

3

TheDirtyGermanAug 4, 2017

Underwhelming. For me that's the only word can describe this movie. I saw this movie with my 73 year old father in law and we both had the same reaction to this movie. We really wanted to like it. We both love great war movies. This movieUnderwhelming. For me that's the only word can describe this movie. I saw this movie with my 73 year old father in law and we both had the same reaction to this movie. We really wanted to like it. We both love great war movies. This movie was beautiful to watch, especially in IMAX. The first 10 minutes or so was pretty good. After that, no real substance. No character development. Virtually no dialogue. It was so difficult to really care about any of the characters. Tom Hardy's character was pretty good, but still no depth. The timeline is a bit odd, but I didn't feel that it added anything to the movie. Nothing like Memento, my favorite Nolan movie. The movie seemed so much longer than than the 107 minutes that it was. Pacing was awful. I have no idea how it gets so many 100 scores.… Expand

30 of 41 users found this helpful3011

All this user's reviews

3

mbmartinsJul 30, 2017

booooring movie... I really don't understand what people see so good. Confusing and simplistic plot. Shallow characters. Want a good war movie goes see until the last man, because this is a noolan hype and nothing anymore

46 of 63 users found this helpful4617

All this user's reviews

3

AlprJul 30, 2017

Found the movie quite boring, and it was hard to follow sometimes, specifically with the pilots. Dunno how this movie is rating so well honestly. Been awhile since I found a movie so dull, I'd rather watch Wonder Woman again and that movie was meh.

39 of 54 users found this helpful3915

All this user's reviews

2

ARBonaventuraJul 28, 2017

I pride myself on my judgement of movies and Metacritic nearly never fails me, yet it did this time. I am blown away by the "professional" critic reviews. It just does not make sense and I find myself sitting here wondering what is wrong withI pride myself on my judgement of movies and Metacritic nearly never fails me, yet it did this time. I am blown away by the "professional" critic reviews. It just does not make sense and I find myself sitting here wondering what is wrong with everyone. The other reviews below consistent question of "was this the same movie I watched?" ring so true. It was plain bad, and I cannot for the life of me understand why the "critics" thought it good. Were they paid off? Were they caught up in the Nolan hype? There were so many fallacies and inconsistencies in this movie that I do not want to cover them all, but I really felt the need to say... Please do not waste your money if you are an intelligent, analytical, deep, perceptive adult... This movie is not for you. If you are a teenage boy or someone who just needs to turn their brain off for two hours and watch stuff happen in front of them, this movie may be for you. It is not a logically executed, well written, or intellectually / emotionally stimulating movie. It is shallow, dry, and poor from start to finish. War is hell, and this movie did not have the emotional capacity or grit to show that reality.… Expand

23 of 32 users found this helpful239

All this user's reviews

2

AxeTJul 31, 2017

Even worse than expected. There was no doubt the jackass critics herd perennially on auto pilot would laud praise upon a noble little known true war story put on screen by a massively over-rated pompous director because they all sensed itEven worse than expected. There was no doubt the jackass critics herd perennially on auto pilot would laud praise upon a noble little known true war story put on screen by a massively over-rated pompous director because they all sensed it must be important purely based on the subject and pedigree. They in their utter dishonesty and phony pretentious lack of any shred of integrity assume in order to be perceived as serious and smart must heap praise on something like this. Venture to say, no matter what Christopher Nolan came out with the praise would be the same near unanimous nonsense it is. They didn't see the actual movie. They only saw the pretense. For the last time: subject matter is not primarily what you are reviewing idiots, the way it is executed is.

Here's why it's not only not the great movie they exclaim, but a pretty bad movie! There is no plot nor any character development, and there is no true suspense precisely because of this! You can't be on the edge of your seat no matter what the action on screen if you are not invested in the characters. This is an uninspired, stodgy, overly reverent trudge through a historic event with no invention working to transform such into a movie. Hollywood movies are supposed to entertain. Hey, that goes for whatever the content and no matter the tone. If you want a dry history lesson on the event, go read a text book or watch a documentary (and nearly any fathomable documentary on this battle would be more interesting).
Just imagine had James Cameron's "Titanic" not invented the fictional core love story and characters both modern day and past for that story in favor of pure, straight documented, totally accurate depiction of the historic event? It would not resonate as the epic Hollywood classic it became in short time. And it's not as though they blew off the historical accuracy which was painstakingly recreated in nearly every detail. It's that Cameron understands what movies should be for the audience, not just himself. The characters here are puppets whether real or imagined. The spare acting caught on screen is devoid of performance which while realistic is dull and it's not the cast's fault. There's no script! Kenneth Branagh tries, but sorry a watery eye in one close up and looking up for a few seconds in alarm of coming doom is not all there is to acting. If it is, then anyone can do the job on cue and to effect as professional actors must do. Worse still, like his last lame pretentious effort "Interstellar", the sound mix is AWFUL again! The freaking dialogue is mixed too low to the sound effects and even more so to the music! It's bad enough these actors have mumbled hard to understand heavily accented deliveries, but to then self indulgently attempt to be more "real" by making the decision to compromise intelligibility is just plain asinine. It's unprofessional. It's downright incompetent! Music is artificial to begin with, so his illogical argument last time about being more real to life experience is again just a fallacy here!

The staged big screen aerial dog fight footage is how this movie initially seemed to showcase itself in advertising and is about the only worthy of attention aspect of the entire production. So a few real flying shots of vintage WWII fighter planes from some unique angles with unnoticeable not overdone CGI is worth sitting bored out of your mind for two hours? Ah, no.

A-lister Nolan is a moviemaker who cares about the audience and the entertainment value he is delivering, but he is gravely mistaken in his efforts. No question he is highly intelligent, creative in general, a scholar of cinema history, and understands all the technical mechanics of filmmaking as well or better than anyone. What he is not is an artist who delivers genuine emotion. That's what great movies and great art in general is truly about. Nolan is a very cerebral writer/director not unlike say Kubrick who also fell short on emotion in all his work. However, Kubrick was such a genius and brilliant designer of mind bending psychological exploration that the lack of emotion in his art is acceptable as the canvases are overflowing with inspiration as it is just on an intellectual and aesthetic level. Nolan is only a pale imitation of that (though granted a better poser than say PT Anderson, another retro junkie also falling for old gimmicks of the medium over good storytelling). The truth is he hasn't made any great films, only a few good ones, and the rest are all pretentious mediocre bores. The only good thing about this thing is that surprisingly it is not overlong as is the stupid trend. That's because the story is thin to begin with and padded out for running time. If you must still go see it, go digital. The film prints are literally half the resolution and quickly damaged by today's uncaring theaters! Mr. Nolan the luddite is delusional in his denial of reality. Passé tech 70mm is a hoax now!… Expand

23 of 33 users found this helpful2310

All this user's reviews

2

TantricSkyJul 30, 2017

Obviously I missed something here, a lot in fact. I found this film to be boring, annoying (the highly intrusive score didn't help on that account) and, considering the potential of the material, strangely limp and lifeless.

28 of 41 users found this helpful2813

All this user's reviews

1

kingdodeeJul 25, 2017

If you want a 2-hour long extended version of its trailers, go see Dunkirk. If you have seen even one of them, you have already seen this movie. It is so dull and uninteresting that the best thing about this one is that it is not 2,5 hoursIf you want a 2-hour long extended version of its trailers, go see Dunkirk. If you have seen even one of them, you have already seen this movie. It is so dull and uninteresting that the best thing about this one is that it is not 2,5 hours like Nolan's other movies. It really fails on every level: it does not entertain (even the intended 'suspense' scenes are so cliché that they are a pain to sit through), it does not appeal to your senses (even Hans Zimmer's score is bad), it does not give you any sense of relief or achievement, nor does it paint a cruel and realistic picture about the horrors of war. If you want the story of Dunkirk, go with any of the documentaries, and forget about The Overrated Movie of the Century.… Expand

32 of 49 users found this helpful3217

All this user's reviews

2

AreYouSeriousJul 22, 2017

How? How is this getting the 10/10's? Four of us saw this together - age ranging from 21 to 47, and all disliked it. The first few minutes are good, but after that - what a complete bore-fest. No characters that you care about, or gravitateHow? How is this getting the 10/10's? Four of us saw this together - age ranging from 21 to 47, and all disliked it. The first few minutes are good, but after that - what a complete bore-fest. No characters that you care about, or gravitate to. No real story; 3 separate stories that are disjointedly strung together, but are worse for wear by the added time-jumps. The relentless score that literally wears you down. No blood (I'm not one for the gratuitous slo-mo violence of Hacksaw Ridge - far preferred the documentary feel of Saving Private Ryan), but no blood, when they have just been blown up by a bomb, pulled me straight out of the film.

We all felt like it was 4 hours long, as the shots seemed to all look the same, repeating, over and over again. This is the first time in my life where I TRULY feel like the reviews have been bought. I reckon the studio executives watched it and thought "How the hell is this going to appeal to a wide audience? We better buy some amazing reviews, or we'll never get our money back."… Expand

56 of 89 users found this helpful5633

All this user's reviews

3

OfficeNinjaJul 23, 2017

While visually impressive, I found Dunkirk to be a mix of boredom and confusion. There is three different timelines that converge which only makes it confusing, and does not add weight to any of the scenes. It's difficult to tell any of theWhile visually impressive, I found Dunkirk to be a mix of boredom and confusion. There is three different timelines that converge which only makes it confusing, and does not add weight to any of the scenes. It's difficult to tell any of the characters apart, especially with very limited dialog. I'm not sure people love this movie so much, it's a pretty forgettable war movie.… Expand

44 of 70 users found this helpful4426

All this user's reviews

1

jhepJul 29, 2017

Do war movies need to have a script ?.......YES. Do war movies have to have characters ?......Yes again....."Dunkirk" has neither script nor characters and as a result you rapidly lose interest in what becomes of any of the individuals weDo war movies need to have a script ?.......YES. Do war movies have to have characters ?......Yes again....."Dunkirk" has neither script nor characters and as a result you rapidly lose interest in what becomes of any of the individuals we encounter because you never bond with them. In fact after a while they just seem very unlucky in their various attempts to get away!) This is a very cold film about an amazing event. Nolan seems far more interested in showing what bungled mess the Dunkirk experience was. He depicts the whole thing as futile, messy and basically more ANNOYING than anything else i.e., what a bunch of Losers! The result is a sort of yuppie take on WW2. And a rather desperate tossing in of Churchill's "We shall never surrender" speech in the final moments of the film doesn't make up for this film's fatal wrongheaded approach to its subject.… Expand

27 of 44 users found this helpful2717

All this user's reviews

0

iter27Jul 23, 2017

Nothing of substance. A tremendous waste of time and money. I am beyond flabbergasted on how the "Nolan" fanboys can defend such a mess of a movie. Pretentious af.

24 of 40 users found this helpful2416

All this user's reviews

3

SergeantSozJul 22, 2017

I've never given a movie such a low score but I have to this time to help lower the ridiculous overall score. While I appreciate this movie not going over the top, it just doesn't suck me into the story like other war movies. There is zeroI've never given a movie such a low score but I have to this time to help lower the ridiculous overall score. While I appreciate this movie not going over the top, it just doesn't suck me into the story like other war movies. There is zero blood. It shows a guy getting bombed and he remains in one piece. The score was good but all it did was make everyone anxious. I know Zimmer wanted to create a sense of urgency since the film is about an evacuation but even the most simple, boring things, the music is going off the rails trying to rise up some suspense. It WILL drive you nuts. Take the music out of this movie and there's probably 20 minutes or less of dialogue and you're left with the most boring movie ever. I could give it a 5 but honestly I would never watch this twice. I don't know a single name of any of the characters. There's zero development once so ever so why give a crap about any of them. You can barely understand them also. Hacksaw Ridge was too Hollywood and too over the top but at least it was entertaining. This movie's only positive notes is the bone-chilling sound of German fighters about to dive bomb the soldiers. Nolan isn't a bad director but he's a terrible story teller. All of his movies are vague and confusing.… Expand

30 of 52 users found this helpful3022

All this user's reviews

10

PeterAlexanderJul 21, 2017

A masterpiece. Dunkirk is a thrilling, haunting picture of sound and cinematography. With little to no character development, and mostly drowned out dialogue, this movie is truly a spectacle of action, drama and at times, horror. Such anA masterpiece. Dunkirk is a thrilling, haunting picture of sound and cinematography. With little to no character development, and mostly drowned out dialogue, this movie is truly a spectacle of action, drama and at times, horror. Such an intense take on war has never been filmed before, and hasn’t had me so immersed in the cinema for many years. Christopher Nolan has once again created a film that has you drawing for breath by the end.… Expand

65 of 113 users found this helpful6548

All this user's reviews

5

SeriousReviewJul 22, 2017

It is a good movie, but it could have been so much more. First off, roughly 900 vessels were involved in the Dunkirk evacuation and about 10 are shown. I understand not wanting to use excessive CGI, but it really detracts from what should beIt is a good movie, but it could have been so much more. First off, roughly 900 vessels were involved in the Dunkirk evacuation and about 10 are shown. I understand not wanting to use excessive CGI, but it really detracts from what should be a turning point in the film. Numbers like 400,000 men are bandied about in the film, but all of 500 men are actually shown, even from a distance. Furthermore, Nolan sacrifices character depth and any kind of backstory - even going so far as to have most of the characters pretty much nameless - in order to showcase his artistic vision. The upshot is that I found it difficult to emotionally invest in any of the characters. Whilst his gritty portrayal is beautiful and it has its moving moments, of which the opening scene is particularly memorable, in general the film fails to capture the scale of Dunkirk and at the same time manages to underwhelm in character development. It isn't a bad film, but it is often boring and what really sucks is the squandered potential it had.… Expand

33 of 59 users found this helpful3326

All this user's reviews

2

FerdifiableJul 22, 2017

The IMAX version, at least, is fully endorsed by the International Earplug Association. If you don't have tinnitus before you see this overrated disaster movie, you will when you walk out. Abusively, gratuitously loud, with a soundtrackThe IMAX version, at least, is fully endorsed by the International Earplug Association. If you don't have tinnitus before you see this overrated disaster movie, you will when you walk out. Abusively, gratuitously loud, with a soundtrack designed to loosen your internal organs from your skeletal frame. I might have liked this movie but I couldn't tell; it's impossible to appreciate anything else about Dunkirk when your fillings are being vibrated out of your teeth. I suppose the point was to bludgeon me into knowing that war is hell, but somehow Spielberg managed to convey this with considerably more weight without causing me actual physical pain. Overwhelming the senses is apparently the film industry's way of creating a unique theatrical experience. If so, it's inducing me to the opposite: perhaps if I'd waited to watch at home with some control over my viewing experience I'd have appreciated it more.… Expand

22 of 40 users found this helpful2218

All this user's reviews

2

purexiiiJul 21, 2017

Probably one of the worst movies I've seen. The only thing stopping me from walking out was hope that it would get better - it didn't.

I am dumbfounded how this even gets remotely close to an 9.0/10 average here and imdb. (Botted votes?Probably one of the worst movies I've seen. The only thing stopping me from walking out was hope that it would get better - it didn't.

I am dumbfounded how this even gets remotely close to an 9.0/10 average here and imdb. (Botted votes? Bribery?) Firstly the plot is empty, bland, boring, uneventful - I could go on all day...

The character development is abysmal - non-existent. You feel detached the whole film except for the first minute (which are excellent bar the annoying background title text) and then it goes straight off the cliff into the dump. I was excited and enthralled expecting an amazingly engaging film - boy was I WRONG.

Even watching Tom hardy blast away with his 10% accuracy is uninspiringly dull.

The only good points are 'decent' cinematography(the best of which being the colours and contrasts which i actually enjoyed in some brief scenes), good sound effects, soundtrack is nice but overused and repetitive.

In essence the film over-utilises cinematography and sound to form it's basis while leaving the lacklustre story and characters to support it instead of the opposite i.e developing a strong plot line and delving into the depth and breadth of characters while letting the cinematography and sound support them.

Don't waste your time or money on this cash grab. 2/10 AT BEST!… Expand

43 of 79 users found this helpful4336

All this user's reviews

10

BellaSwan1992Jul 25, 2017

Hands down the movie of the year. Incredibly intense, powerful, and moving, and packs an amazing amount of stuff into a lean 100-minute runtime (doubly impressive considering how little dialogue there is). Massive props to Christopher NolanHands down the movie of the year. Incredibly intense, powerful, and moving, and packs an amazing amount of stuff into a lean 100-minute runtime (doubly impressive considering how little dialogue there is). Massive props to Christopher Nolan for making a WW2 movie with an authentically British cast instead of doing the obnoxious modern forced-diversity thing, and for focusing on the courage and heroism of the Brits instead of demonizing German soldiers like Spielberg did in Saving Private Ryan.

For my money this is hands down the best WW2 movie I've ever seen, even better than Mel's Hacksaw Ridge last year. If there's any justice this will take Best Picture at the Oscars.… Expand

31 of 58 users found this helpful3127

All this user's reviews

3

ohsiyoJul 21, 2017

Are there 2 different versions of this movie? The movie that all the "experts" are raving about is not the one I saw. Have they all lost a bet to Christopher Nolan or is there blackmail involved? What showed at my theater was not much moreAre there 2 different versions of this movie? The movie that all the "experts" are raving about is not the one I saw. Have they all lost a bet to Christopher Nolan or is there blackmail involved? What showed at my theater was not much more than a glorified movie of the week. There is almost no dialogue, and what little there is is drowned out by the soundtrack which tells us it's not important in the first place. There is no plot, no character development, no acting, confusing characters, and time jerks from dead of night to simultaneous broad daylight. There is no audience connection or identification with the characters or situation. Granted, this is a critical episode in a World War, but the movie is filmed as "a day in the life." The "experts" claim the acting is fabulous, but there is no acting. Tom Hardy sits in the cramped cockpit of a plane with his face covered by a mask the entire time. 400,000 soldiers are stranded on the beach, and we see maybe 500. There is supposed to be a massive rescue flotilla and we see maybe 12 boats. The "experts" describe the movie as "avant garde" and a "masterpiece". What I saw was "meh". Although I found it difficult at times to watch, "Saving Private Ryan" was a war movie with intensity, plot, and characters. "Dunkirk" doesn't come close. And what is "The Mole?"… Expand

33 of 62 users found this helpful3329

All this user's reviews

2

Captain_MisfireJul 22, 2017

After many reviews I was looking forward to seeing the film but came out feeling rather dissapointed. It was dull, uninspiring and had no tension that really grabs and pulls you towards the film with further interest. I felt so detached fromAfter many reviews I was looking forward to seeing the film but came out feeling rather dissapointed. It was dull, uninspiring and had no tension that really grabs and pulls you towards the film with further interest. I felt so detached from the film, I don't know where the good reviews are coming from, are we talking about the same movie here?
The big actors in this film dissapoint because there is hardly any acting. Tom Hardy sits in a cockpit for the entire film (everyone could do that) and can't hit a barndoor with a machine gun, I can only see 2 eyes and a forehead.. At the end his plane runs out of fuel, hovers in the air but he seems to fly on forever. Cillian Murphy mumbles and walks around on a tugboat from time to time. There is no character development or interesting dialogue that makes you feel involved/connected and caring about the troops and their misery. Hardly any signs of fatigue, broken nerves/ shattered spirits and wounded men (except for a few men on stretchers). These scenes do not make me think that I wouldn't like to be in someone's shoes being stuck on a beach, not knowing what's coming next. The possibility of death/ becoming a prisoner or saved by a rescue operation, seeing so many struggles on a beach you can't imagine how you will get picked up..

The beach in the film is very(!) clean (with some dead soldiers that's really impressive) and there seems to be no sign of chaos, fatigue, fear or despair. There is absolutely no equipment scattered over the beach that looks close to a scrapyard, no trash, discarded gear and no abandoned vehicles etc. About 3 to 400.000 soldiers were saved but I saw 500-750 in the film (they all looked the same btw, hair and face), also I saw 10 to 15 boats TOPS. More than 900 boats took part in this operation over the course of 9 days and that's a fact. The smaller boats were used to carry men off the beach and put them on bigger steamers/boats, didn't see that. This film could have improved significantly with an extra 30 minutes at the beginning of the film. Brief fighting/retreating around Dunkirk showing the peril, discussions in Churchill's HQ about the situation in France and trying to save the troops against staggering odds. Such dialogue could have made it gripping, showing wht was at stake in that part of the war. Show me how everyone in England came together with everything they had that could float, trying to save the troops. Tom Hardy would be better placed trying to hold off the Germans and surrender at the end when he knows many troops are saved. In real life many thousands and injured who could not be saved were sacrificed and stayed behind In to keep the Germans away. A dejected Murphy waits on a beach to be rescued, that role could have suited him. The dogfights were rather dull.
I was confused because of the jarring cuts in time and the shift (too fast) between the 3 characters. I can't believe some positive reviews here "intense", "great acting", "best war film" Someone even commented they couldn't find flaws, in the first 5 minutes by looking at the housing in the background and the tiling, didn't look like 1940. Look at the background when they filmed the beach from the sea, modern housing and lights, streetlamps, shipping containers and crains.
Can't understand why Christopher Nolan couldn't just make a straightforward, linnear warfilm that tells a gripping (true)story without all this fancy colouring and artistic filming. I went to see this film for it's story and not for the way it was filmed, coloured or making many switches from one time to another. It doesn't focus on anything in particular except for rescue.

I wish these (expert) reviewers watched some documentary's like the world at war that really grips you and then watch the film again. Heck, even look on google for Dunkirk equipment and such. Steven Spielberg should have made this as Nolan would film Saving private Ryan with no casualties and no dialogue. Wouldn't want to see the film again.… Expand

46 of 92 users found this helpful4646

All this user's reviews

1

TalvarJul 21, 2017

The film is nothing more than a DVD release story line. Very poor showing for something that was hyped by "professional" reviews. If you are expecting an epic war movie (which i believe the true story line could show) then you will beThe film is nothing more than a DVD release story line. Very poor showing for something that was hyped by "professional" reviews. If you are expecting an epic war movie (which i believe the true story line could show) then you will be disappointed. Some big name actors do not perform, largely down to the poor directing. Save yourself the cinema ticket.… Expand

28 of 57 users found this helpful2829

All this user's reviews

10

crizzyviewJul 25, 2017

Dunkirk engages the audience from the first scene. The soldiers of the British army are being directed by their comrades to the beach at Dunkirk. Thousands of soldiers are lining up with great dignity to patiently await their rescue.Dunkirk engages the audience from the first scene. The soldiers of the British army are being directed by their comrades to the beach at Dunkirk. Thousands of soldiers are lining up with great dignity to patiently await their rescue. Churchill has requisitioned civilian boats to pick them up.

So, you ask with great anxiety about the result of the herculean effort to rescue and deliver the soldiers to Britain, did Harry Styles survive to the end of the movie? My answer is: go and see. The visual display, the persistent and exciting percussion of the musical score, the booming zooms of the aircraft, bombs, gun fire, and other sounds of war immediately brought me to the beach at Dunkirk while my gut rumbled and vibrated in my seat. I became a soldier on that beach, a Spitfire pilot, and an officer of the Royal British Army. I felt excitement, desperation, patience, forgiveness, sacrifice, empathy, the thrill of the rescue effort, and the possible consequential joy of being able to go home. This movie is an artistically delivered rendition of what it means to be a soldier, a sailor, and an officer. Will you be rescued? Will the support of the Royal Air Force be enough to get you off that beach and back into your family kitchen at home? I urge you to experience what I felt in watching Dunkirk. It's a movie that dramatically emphasizes the importance of persistence, strategy, and humanity in the war against impossibility. Ten fingers.… Expand

25 of 51 users found this helpful2526

All this user's reviews

10

MastacraftJul 25, 2017

Flyers drift into the streets dropped from above urging the Allies to surrender after they had been absolutely decimated instead many soldiers literally wiped their ass with it.*

Let us begin with the way the story is shown by directorFlyers drift into the streets dropped from above urging the Allies to surrender after they had been absolutely decimated instead many soldiers literally wiped their ass with it.*

Let us begin with the way the story is shown by director Christopher Nolan which is simply incredible and gives way to the imagination of what was coming for the British and French army. Dunkirk gives this eerie feel to the elephant in the room; Hitler & the axis powers who are not shown on screen but leaves any viewer with some historical knowledge aware the Germans are looming over 400,000 soldiers who nervously wait hat in hand for their fate, all Hitler has to do is snap to cease the existence of Britain as we know it on the jaws of Dunkirk. Instead of taking the typical Hollywood route Nolan focuses on the evacuation, the imagery, the sheer enormity of the task at hand and leaves towering figures such as the likes of Churchill (who recently had his own terribly inaccurate biopic told for the tenth time) as merely a mention – this is a soldier’s story, a people’s story.

Hans Zimmer brings back renditions of the Dark Knight with the soundtrack piercing into your eardrums as the skies roar above with the spray of spitfire bullets hitting the Luftwaffe like rattling drums. One cannot help but feel nervous and uncomfortable with the soundtrack and in a movie depicting such a terrible event and time there is nothing more fitting.

Dunkirk makes you feel as small and helpless as every soldier felt that fateful day and effortlessly avoids pitfalls nearly every war movie makes to glorify the victory while hammering home the evil of Nazi Germany which takes away from the big picture that ALL war is evil. In war sides survive, nobody wins and seeing it depicted in ways like this goes along way for showing the humanity of one side to the other – imagine propaganda films in the early 1940’s showed a little more of that! Right in the cockpit is how one feels during one of several intense Dogfight scenes as we are kept up close. Just as impressive is historical accuracy keeping inline with what occurred as the real heroes of the RAF fought off the Luftwaffe much further away from the beach to allow the evacuations to even be a possibility and we stay focused on the evacuation not the full scale war.

Tom Hardy who can do no wrong lately (fresh from Taboo - go see it!) is the all-star in stellar cast who once again blends in effortlessly to the picture instead of controlling it and this movies momentum builds as every actor keeps stride. As a period piece it is important a movie looks the part and aside from the colouring of the dropped leaflets Dunkirk is absolutely on point from uniform, to locations to planes all of this attention to small details will keep the harshest historians happy.

Action is directed very smartly and replaces blood and guts with that distant feel and imagination asked of the viewer again and again. Darkly mesmerising is the only way to describe in my eyes the early bombing scene as a soldier cowers on the beach as each bomb hits, bam, bam, bam, boom till a soldier disappears near him and you are left to think of the horror laying just off screen, not see it.

In closing go see this movie and when your children are of age show them movies like this and let them understand what happened all these years ago. It is hard to imagine that this really was one of the major turning points of the war and has given way for you and me to be where we are right now. No one knows exactly why Hitler chose to not annihilate the British Army and hold back for three days some even believe he wanted peace with Britain but whatever occurred many sacrifices where made at Dunkirk and it is the job of every film maker and company to do these sorts of films justice (we’re all sick of Hollywood bs) and I can gladly say this certainly was a Victory.

5/5 pounds

*historical fact leaflets dropped made good toilet paper for soldiers something we all take for granted now … Expand

23 of 47 users found this helpful2324

All this user's reviews

9

TheApplegnomeJul 21, 2017

This is an experience like no other. Powerful imagery and emotional symbolism made one almost weep, because the scope of this war-epic is phenomenally crafted. It’s a dark film for sure, but it serves as a glimpse of light over and over, withThis is an experience like no other. Powerful imagery and emotional symbolism made one almost weep, because the scope of this war-epic is phenomenally crafted. It’s a dark film for sure, but it serves as a glimpse of light over and over, with a forever returning theme of truthfulness to humanity. This, combined with the realism and empathetic feel to the setting that C Nolan masterfully has achieved – will make even the dullest being emotional.

Dunkirk is very different from Nolan’s previous achievements, mainly due to the very lack of character inside through dialogs. But, amazingly, we can still relate and understand their thinking through the surreal events and clever filmmaking. The scope is real. You feel the seriousness. You feel trapped, just like the young soldiers. This is done almost without any dialogs. The silence between the characters says it all. The ones that stand out from the pack of men are Commander Bolton, Mr. Dawson and Tommy; this is where most of the focus lies and where we get most character depth. The non-linear structure helped with this, it almost trapped the audience in a loop with different perspectives on the event of Dunkirk. And the whole movie is all about the event, not the specific characters. You feel like you’re in it so you care for the situation and the characters, even though you might not remember their names fully. All of this is very rare and not often seen on film. It really works in the film’s favor, and yes even more inside to characters could never hurt a film like this one. But this isn’t a flaw in this film. To relate to characters in this extent with so little talking – is an Oscar-worthy achievement.

To follow these characters in Dunkirk is an exhausting and adrenaline-packed experience with realistic action that you will not question. The realism is stunningly shaped. It might be one of my most surreal film experiences ever. Hans Zimmer’s score boosted the experience by tenfold, it got this “ticking” feel to it, almost like a heart beating faster and faster throughout the film – Zimmer is a propulsive force that never stops to amaze. The camerawork is just as stunning; you fly like an aircraft and feel the full gravity of the situation! It’s a smooth, stylish and artistic direction from C Nolan and ‘Interstellar’ cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema.

Some minor flaws do exist. The action is at a few places very identical as to what already has been seen in previous scenes, so it took the “wow-feel” down a bit. Some individuals will without any doubt attack the “too realistic” WW2 feel, because it’s not bold enough for them. But to create this movie isn’t about being bold. It’s about creating something real. And it is, very!

It’s an epic experience filled with realism but also small acts of heroism, kindness and forgiveness. Dunkirk is as action-packed as ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’, and stunningly realistic as ‘Saving Private Ryan’ but with a bigger slam to it. It reveals the true nature of war, the men behind it and what the bigger picture of it can be.
Dunkirk is a visual and emotional experience that will take the gasp out of you. Period.

Personal rating: 92/100 
Critical rating: 96/100… Expand

21 of 43 users found this helpful2122

All this user's reviews

0

moviestalkerJul 23, 2017

Here's a short guide how to win an academy award: Step 1) Make a movie about the second World War (because nobody ever had *that* idea) Step 2) ???, Step 3: Profit.

28 of 58 users found this helpful2830

All this user's reviews

10

FranzHcriticJul 21, 2017

Christopher Nolan has surpassed himself with what I can almost say is a masterpiece. Even with its little dialogue, I found myself captivated from the time the movie started till the credits rolled. With the visuals, acting, and raw realism,Christopher Nolan has surpassed himself with what I can almost say is a masterpiece. Even with its little dialogue, I found myself captivated from the time the movie started till the credits rolled. With the visuals, acting, and raw realism, 'Dunkirk' may be one of the best, if not the best, film of 2017.… Expand

27 of 56 users found this helpful2729

All this user's reviews

9

EpicLadySpongeJul 21, 2017

Is this even possible for a movie to score this high nowadays because I believe Dunkirk broke the record for possibly best movie of the year if other movies being released on this year aren't as powerful or memorable as this movie right here.Is this even possible for a movie to score this high nowadays because I believe Dunkirk broke the record for possibly best movie of the year if other movies being released on this year aren't as powerful or memorable as this movie right here. No seriously, how am I supposed to find flaws in this amazingly-made movie? This remark on history is stronger and more powerful than I thought it would be.… Expand

23 of 48 users found this helpful2325

All this user's reviews

0

marco34laJul 22, 2017

I'm sorry, this movie was a piece of crap. There's no story, barely any dialogue, no character development, but it does have big AUDIO SCORE THAT BLASTS SO LOUD YOUR WANT TO SCREAM. There were apprx 25 people at the showing I just saw here inI'm sorry, this movie was a piece of crap. There's no story, barely any dialogue, no character development, but it does have big AUDIO SCORE THAT BLASTS SO LOUD YOUR WANT TO SCREAM. There were apprx 25 people at the showing I just saw here in Los Angeles and over the course of the 90 mins... 4 people WALKED OUT.… Expand

37 of 79 users found this helpful3742

All this user's reviews

10

johnem95Jul 21, 2017

"Dunkirk" earns the title of "masterpiece". It's a masterclass in suspense, a history lesson, and an inspiring story of heroism all rolled into one perfect package. See it on the biggest screen possible.

22 of 47 users found this helpful2225

All this user's reviews

5

Roy_HobbsJul 21, 2017

After reading the reviews, I had high expectations for this film, but in the end was completely underwhelmed. It wasn't bad, but certainly not as good as what I had expected. Overall, I found the fractured way the story was told, dialogueAfter reading the reviews, I had high expectations for this film, but in the end was completely underwhelmed. It wasn't bad, but certainly not as good as what I had expected. Overall, I found the fractured way the story was told, dialogue that I couldn't always decipher and an on-going struggle (this was probably just me) to figure out who was who (many of the characters were similar looking to me) took away from my overall enjoyment of this film.… Expand

26 of 56 users found this helpful2630

All this user's reviews

9

JyroJyroJul 24, 2017

Dunkirk is a viceral masterpiece. The lack of character development and narrative is essential for inferencing the sheer scale of the situation. This isn't a story about individuals... this is a story about a narrowly avoided catastrophicDunkirk is a viceral masterpiece. The lack of character development and narrative is essential for inferencing the sheer scale of the situation. This isn't a story about individuals... this is a story about a narrowly avoided catastrophic military disaster. It is the chronology that is pure genius, although we should be accustomed to that with Christopher Nolan's work - and the music & sound design is awesome; barrages of deafening gunfire and plane fly-overs are followed almost immediately by near-silent expanses of hopelessness. Has to be seen in IMAX to be fully appreciated.… Expand

24 of 52 users found this helpful2428

All this user's reviews

5

numcrun2Jul 21, 2017

Don't believe the hype. I saw it in Imax and a lot of the dialogue was indecipherable (Rex Reed makes the same point). There is surprisingly little dialogue and a lot of unnecessary time shifting. There are some decent action scenes sure, butDon't believe the hype. I saw it in Imax and a lot of the dialogue was indecipherable (Rex Reed makes the same point). There is surprisingly little dialogue and a lot of unnecessary time shifting. There are some decent action scenes sure, but the plot is a bit thin (yes I know it's a true story) and it's just OK overall. Rex Reed's review very closely matched my own views.… Expand

23 of 53 users found this helpful2330

All this user's reviews

5

mahcussmahtJul 21, 2017

Like if the history channel had an unlimited budget to make a historical recreation. There are no characters - the people are just scenery. There's not much story or plot. It's epic and beautifully shot, but I genuinely feel it's beingLike if the history channel had an unlimited budget to make a historical recreation. There are no characters - the people are just scenery. There's not much story or plot. It's epic and beautifully shot, but I genuinely feel it's being overrated. As a film, it's sort of dull. As a historical recreation, it's solid.… Expand

19 of 47 users found this helpful1928

All this user's reviews

0

Vl_czJul 21, 2017

This is a film about Nolan, but not about war. Operator work and sound are very good, but the story is very boring, and the characters are not interesting.
Dunkirk is the worst film of Nolan. Better once again review the "Saving Private Ryan"

35 of 87 users found this helpful3552

All this user's reviews

10

zlatanmazuidiJul 21, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. it is the best movie of this sdecade and to the comment of numcrun 2 , rex reed is only jealous, nothing else, you know if you are so intelligent, then you have to be a director, ( and i suppose, that your movie would have a a rating of 10(metacritic-critics rating) and would have no content contrary to this movie, which is the next Platoon, Apocalpyse Now, Full metal jacket of our generation. If you would have read Joseph Conrad's book, you would no longer write such comments(as also the other jealous guys here).… Expand

18 of 45 users found this helpful1827

All this user's reviews

2

zachlenDec 26, 2017

How is it possible for critics to sit through a film and not question what they are seeing that makes zero sense. Wearing a life jacket in water will keep one from sinking. Not according to Christopher Nolan . We see ,as did critics ,hundredsHow is it possible for critics to sit through a film and not question what they are seeing that makes zero sense. Wearing a life jacket in water will keep one from sinking. Not according to Christopher Nolan . We see ,as did critics ,hundreds of soldiers under water wearing life vests. That in of its self is an impossibility. There were also scenes that went fron day to night,back to day. This happened more times to count.Why do people feel the need to agree with todays critics instead of THINKING for themselves.… Expand

9 of 9 users found this helpful90

All this user's reviews

2

AidinKianyMar 11, 2018

so boring.no story. no character. if it was for another director i vote 6 but for nolan it was awful. mr nolan, i suggest you to watch your previous movies again so you understand why this one disappoints us.
differences always cant be good.so boring.no story. no character. if it was for another director i vote 6 but for nolan it was awful. mr nolan, i suggest you to watch your previous movies again so you understand why this one disappoints us.
differences always cant be good.
at least not in this one.… Expand

8 of 8 users found this helpful80

All this user's reviews

2

s053714Jan 27, 2018

I can't understand why so many people liked this movie. While the production values were good, they seemed to have forgotten things like a plot and character development, and maybe a little enlightening dialog. It was very uninvolving andI can't understand why so many people liked this movie. While the production values were good, they seemed to have forgotten things like a plot and character development, and maybe a little enlightening dialog. It was very uninvolving and ultimately quite dull.… Expand

7 of 7 users found this helpful70

All this user's reviews

3

MaxPayneIsGodFeb 25, 2018

I understand the historical significance of this event, but as a movie? What a snore fest, this is a war movie not an after school special, not a single drop of blood spilled and the disjointed timeline is an overt way of admitting that thereI understand the historical significance of this event, but as a movie? What a snore fest, this is a war movie not an after school special, not a single drop of blood spilled and the disjointed timeline is an overt way of admitting that there is absolutely zero story. Give me Saving Private Ryan any day.… Expand

5 of 5 users found this helpful50

All this user's reviews

1

rlw1955May 15, 2018

Soldiers lined up on a pier waiting to board a ship that’s taking wounded only. Officer states we are like fish in a barrel as you look back down the pier towards the beach as hundreds of non wounded are standing in line. A look on the beachSoldiers lined up on a pier waiting to board a ship that’s taking wounded only. Officer states we are like fish in a barrel as you look back down the pier towards the beach as hundreds of non wounded are standing in line. A look on the beach shows dozens of lines of men standing out in the open all in neat rows waiting on ships that aren’t there. German planes strafing and bombing the beach all the while you have a town right behind with all types of empty buildings where you could be taking shelter and be out of sight. Men taking fire in a beached ship and out of 300,000 men not one group got together to recon for the firing Germans. Not sure if this movie was actually trying to convey how terrible this situation was for the stranded at Dunkirk or to make the British military leadership look like buffoons. This movie was way overhyped. Not the worst movie I have ever watched but it could have been much more than what it was.… Expand

5 of 5 users found this helpful50

All this user's reviews

0

erikmc12Jun 7, 2018

A theosophical war movie: Nature is a clock... Nolan is god, and the soldiers... his puppets; 'igne natura renovatur integra'... sacrifice is necessary, but peace will come with the new world order...

4 of 4 users found this helpful40

All this user's reviews

2

lucasquaresmaJan 6, 2018

Eutinha achado o filme bom quando terminei de assistir, apesar de arrastado no meio. Porém, depois percebi que não gostei: Achei um filme de guerra avulso, pretensioso (escorado total em fotografia e som), emocionalmente vazio (não senti nadaEutinha achado o filme bom quando terminei de assistir, apesar de arrastado no meio. Porém, depois percebi que não gostei: Achei um filme de guerra avulso, pretensioso (escorado total em fotografia e som), emocionalmente vazio (não senti nada pelo soldados). Sinceramente um filme esquecível.… Expand

4 of 4 users found this helpful40

All this user's reviews

0

ShermaAug 20, 2018

This movie is terrible, totally bloodless, thousands of British and French soldiers on the beach getting bombed and straffed by the Luftwaffe and yet there are no bodies no blood no dismemberment, hardly any bodies on the beach. No germanThis movie is terrible, totally bloodless, thousands of British and French soldiers on the beach getting bombed and straffed by the Luftwaffe and yet there are no bodies no blood no dismemberment, hardly any bodies on the beach. No german soldiers to be seen just an invisible enemy apart from some CGI warplanes. Dunkirk didn't try to depict the true horrors of war. Totally the opposite of Saving private Ryan, Hacksaw ridge etc.
Christopher Nolan wanted a suspense film, and not a war film as such, and yet this is a failure too, as I had no empathy with any of the characters weather they lived or died. Hans Zimmer is a great music composer, however the music was supposed to add some intensity and suspense to the film and yet I just found it annoying as it was constant throughout. The only shock and horror I found regarding this film are the positive reviews. This film is for snowflakes and people who suffer from a very nervous disposition.… Expand

4 of 4 users found this helpful40

All this user's reviews

4

AxelskullDec 4, 2018

I wouldn't really call this a film but I'd say it was an interesting experience. The story follows a few characters that are completely forgettable and they each have their own little storylines that are also forgettable. I watched this inI wouldn't really call this a film but I'd say it was an interesting experience. The story follows a few characters that are completely forgettable and they each have their own little storylines that are also forgettable. I watched this in IMAX and the sound and photography were great and very immersive. For the first 20 minutes. Then the gunshots and noise just hurt your ears. I'd say unless you're watching it in imax don't bother with it.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

5

HotelCentralFeb 7, 2018

What a shame that filmmakers of a former age wasted time and effort inventing characters and composing dialog and developing stories, when all they really had to do is patch together a few action scenes, instruct their thespians to ad lib aWhat a shame that filmmakers of a former age wasted time and effort inventing characters and composing dialog and developing stories, when all they really had to do is patch together a few action scenes, instruct their thespians to ad lib a few grunts or shouts, and call it a movie!

I mean, really, there is no story here. It's a series of anecdotes. It's a Studs Terkel oral history with newsreel footage substituted for words.

Watch this if you must. Myself, I'll re-watch a film with characters and story, such as Mrs. Miniver (1942).… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

4

JabboMar 7, 2018

I knew the basic story of Dunkirk, and was very excited to see a movie that expanded and detailed what happened at that historic event. I was severely disappointed that none of this occurred. The plot was bare bones, the character developmentI knew the basic story of Dunkirk, and was very excited to see a movie that expanded and detailed what happened at that historic event. I was severely disappointed that none of this occurred. The plot was bare bones, the character development non-existant, and in spite of the exemplary production values, it was a total letdown.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

3

Slovenly_MuseAug 31, 2018

A film that has nothing to say about the events of Dunkirk, war in general, or the people affected by it. The time-shifting device is needlessly confusing, and serves no narrative purpose but to give you something to think about, since theA film that has nothing to say about the events of Dunkirk, war in general, or the people affected by it. The time-shifting device is needlessly confusing, and serves no narrative purpose but to give you something to think about, since the story and characters won't.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

3

Astor_May 25, 2018

I have never been a fan of war films. If the plot is good enough, I would still give it a go. This film took itself too seriously. It feels like a historical book. No notable interesting characters. I could not get into this. Sorry.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

3

abm0Dec 9, 2018

Not much happens here. Very slow movie with very little to say. Its most prominent feature is the overly dramatic and ominous music that stands out in the excessive slow scenes with not much happening except soldiers shuffling about. StartedNot much happens here. Very slow movie with very little to say. Its most prominent feature is the overly dramatic and ominous music that stands out in the excessive slow scenes with not much happening except soldiers shuffling about. Started skipping ahead after 30 minutes out of impatience. I thought this was at least a shocking reminder of the horrors of war but it fails to be even that. It's just bland and half-empty and mostly pointless. Same content could have easily been presented in a 1-hour cut, and it'd have been be easier to watch - less of a waste of time.

Also, it joins the likes of Transformers 2 and Snowpiercer etc. in being the victim of a certain psychopathology going around in Hollywood that makes their editors impoverish the colors of the movie and make them all revolve around Teal and Orange (many things that should be grey are actually greenish/teal, even white shirts have a teal hue to them; anything wooden or warm-color textile will be a shade of orange; hardly any blue or magenta or true red or true yellow to be found anywhere). I thought the Teal and Orange insanity might be dying out, but it seems not - Hollywood is still holding on to this idiocy.

I watched this on HBO, so I had complete control over the sound volume the whole time. I guess that nullified the most impressive part of the movie: the unnecessarily loud soundtrack (to where even some veterans commented that the movie might have been louder than the actual war). But the Industry can pat itself on the back, I guess: once again it has fabricated another "blockbuster" for itself, complete with paid-for favorable reviews and awards.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

WorldofLuckyFeb 3, 2018

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overhyped, and ultimately a disappointment.

It is great to see a World War II movie come out this year. It is even better that it isn't American centric. I love my country, but we have made it this idea we won World War II by ourselves which isn't the case.

The movie has some pretty spots, taking the story of three groups that intertwine. The first group about British Spitfires (fighter planes) trying to give some cover, and engaging with German air force. Resulting in Tom Hardy having the only interesting action in the movie.

The second story about a small civilian ship as part of the armada of civilians coming to rescue the trapped soldiers and the story that unfolds when they pick up a soldier from a sunk ship.

Finally the third story is about two soldiers trying to survive on the beach, and wait for the rescue coming from the civilian ships.

It was interesting that all three stories occurred over different period of time but ended together. The fighters story was within an hour, the ship within a few hours, and the soldiers within a couple of days. I think this could work in other movies, and I suspect this will spark a lot of copycats for that style. We will hate this just as much as other niche storytelling styles within a few years.

The problem is there is actually very little story. It is hard to see that because the story keeps jumping around, but when you step back the story itself lacks anything. I have seen documentaries on Dunkirk that had more story. I don't know if there was never a full story, or if maybe the story got lost when Nolan was trying to break it up to fight the weird timing, but either way it is pretty barren.

I cared nothing about the soldiers at all, Nolan provided nothing for the audience to care about. Tom Hardy was interesting, but that was because of him, not because the story gave him anything. The only story I felt a little compelling was about the civilian ship, its crew of two teens and an older man and how they handle picking up a survivor. Even this story though was lacking on details and when you step back you wonder where the other half of the story went.

I will admit the possibility that the hype was so big that my expectations may be too high. I was told huge action sequences, and I didn't see that. This isn't Saving Private Ryan, or The Battle of Britain even. It was fairly boring for me, and I can really like slow movies. The movie has a short run time, but I was still looking at the clock before it was over.

The good: It is an interesting way to tell a story, and it is nice to see a non-American based World War II movie.

The bad: The pacing was slow, very little action or story, and very overhyped.

This is a movie I would recommend if you are a die hard World War II fan, but even then wait until it hits Netflix.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

6

TB1284fbFeb 4, 2018

Although the picture of the movie was phenomenal, the movie wasn't phenomenal. I thought it was good but didn't live up to the hype that everyone was saying. I didn't think the characters were really developed like they should have. They wereAlthough the picture of the movie was phenomenal, the movie wasn't phenomenal. I thought it was good but didn't live up to the hype that everyone was saying. I didn't think the characters were really developed like they should have. They were really just jumping from scene to scene on different events going on and didn't seem like the movie was really going anywhere. The acting was pretty good for the most part but the dialogue was the issue. Certain times in the movie there would be scenes where it had you on the edge of your seat so it was exciting in some parts.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

2

CharlibabesAug 18, 2018

Utterly disappointing and totally bewildered at the reviews - clearly made for, and watched by, the snowflake generation who have no historical knowledge! Shameful lack of historical context, where were the stories of the many many civiliansUtterly disappointing and totally bewildered at the reviews - clearly made for, and watched by, the snowflake generation who have no historical knowledge! Shameful lack of historical context, where were the stories of the many many civilians who answered the call and rescued the hundreds of thousands of soldiers? Come to that where were the hundreds of thousands of soldiers? Where were the boats so laden there was no room to squeeze another man on? Where were the boats, the thousands of aircraft?

Underwhelmed, even angered, goodness on only knows what still living survivors thought!… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

2

msg78Sep 15, 2018

Absolute rubbish. It's so boring I almost fell asleep but the worst thing of all is the constant background music. It never stops and once you notice it's there it's all you can think about.