riffrocklives.com

General Category => TV/Movie Reviews => Topic started by: jmucke on July 19, 2017, 11:57:26 AM

Title: Dunkirk
Post by: jmucke on July 19, 2017, 11:57:26 AM
(https://www.bleedingcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/18198201_1305343799560849_1174691762453026571_n.png)

IMO Nolan is the best director doing big budget-movies right now and this is impeccable filmmaking. Tightly told (106 minutes) and not trying to be an epic which I think is smart since TV is the medium for a long narrative these days. Joe Wrights longshot in "Atonement" was an obvious inspiration and Nolans interweaving of different timelines (yes, he manages to do that in a WWII-movie) borders on showing off but eventually its a great movie. Will see it again in 70mm just to see if I spot a difference.
Title: Re: Dunkirk
Post by: EaterofBirds on August 02, 2017, 05:41:05 PM
I agree, this was tight and well done. Just saw the matinee earlier...Begs for the big screen, so would highly recommend seeing it before it leaves. if there is any CG, it's so subtle, if at all. Very reminiscent of Kubrick.
Title: Re: Dunkirk
Post by: juan11 on August 07, 2017, 02:07:53 AM
It was ok. There was about a dozen civilian boats shown, even in the widest shots, and suddenly, 350,000 people were off the beach.

Why did the pilot put down in the most retarded spot ever?  Fucking Hollywood.

The awesome parts were awesome. Total action flick.
Title: Re: Dunkirk
Post by: juan11 on August 07, 2017, 02:09:12 AM
(Saw in IMAX. Sound was unreal.)
Title: Re: Dunkirk
Post by: bbottom on August 07, 2017, 07:13:03 AM
I found it to be just ok. I felt as if the movie could've been much much better if Nolan didn't try edit it in his typical "Nolan" way. I didn't get the sense of total desperation that I believe that he was trying to convey.

I think that it also should've been much more violent and the stories with the soldiers on the boat and the old mans boat felt really forced.

Nolan made a good looking movie that, in my opinion, wasn't very good