Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

..and why not?
User avatar
borofan
Posts: 3045
Joined: 29 Jul 2003, 21:17
Location: Lost in translation

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby borofan » 08 Aug 2017, 17:24

fueryIre wrote:Whoever said you need to see 2001 on the big screen is bang on the money though. Even a 55" HD TV doesn't begin to do it justice.


I saw 2001 on the huge curved Cinerama screen at the Media Museum's Pictureville screen in Bradford. Utterly magnificent.
We're usually skipping around the function room in our long-johns by now...

User avatar
The Great Defector
Posts: 16070
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 18:16

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby The Great Defector » 08 Aug 2017, 17:30

borofan wrote:
fueryIre wrote:Whoever said you need to see 2001 on the big screen is bang on the money though. Even a 55" HD TV doesn't begin to do it justice.


I saw 2001 on the huge curved Cinerama screen at the Media Museum's Pictureville screen in Bradford. Utterly magnificent.

The screen or the film?
Drama Queenie wrote:You are a chauvinist of the quaintest kind. About as threatening as Jack Duckworth, you are a harmless relic of that cherished era when things were 'different'. Now get back to drawing a moustache on that page three model

User avatar
fire and fueryIre
Posts: 8749
Joined: 04 May 2011, 02:57
Location: Accredited BCB Pain in the Arse

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby fire and fueryIre » 09 Aug 2017, 09:47

The Great Defector wrote:
He did. Fucking lonely experience being a fighter pilot. I should have felt more sympathy for Hardy's character but his put on stiff upper lip voice made it impossible. I just have images of bane in 40's England, being a witty at a party dressed to the nines, with his bane mask on.



It's ironic given his role as an airman in Dunkirk and the accusations of inaudible speech that have dogged his career that TH got his first acting job in this Carling Black Label TVC from a few years back. Watch right to the end and see if you can spot him!

Image

User avatar
joels344
Posts: 764
Joined: 17 Dec 2016, 17:37
Contact:

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby joels344 » 05 Sep 2017, 00:38

I thought I had posted in this thread earlier, but I guess not.

I saw it once in 70mm, and was utterly blown away by its cinematic craft. Then I saw it again, this time in 35mm, and gained an ever greater appreciation for it in my second viewing. I'd say Dunkirk is the masterpiece Nolan has been wanting to direct since his career began.

User avatar
Tactful Cactus
Posts: 17965
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 14:21
Location: by your window

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby Tactful Cactus » 05 Sep 2017, 13:30

joels344 wrote:Then I saw it again, this time in 35mm, and gained an ever greater appreciation for it in my second viewing.


Kermode said the same thing. Is 35mm letterbox yes? Would it not feel restrictive after watching the 70mm version?

I might go see it again before it disappears from cinemas, delighted it made so much money - projected to gross $200m

User avatar
The Great Defector
Posts: 16070
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 18:16

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby The Great Defector » 05 Sep 2017, 13:34

Tactful Cactus wrote:
joels344 wrote:Then I saw it again, this time in 35mm, and gained an ever greater appreciation for it in my second viewing.


Kermode said the same thing. Is 35mm letterbox yes? Would it not feel restrictive after watching the 70mm version?



Some directors use that to create a claustrophobic or trapped feel, which considering the main-ish character wanted to escape home, would be a good device to use. Or maybe, and probably the real answer, he thought it looked cool.
Drama Queenie wrote:You are a chauvinist of the quaintest kind. About as threatening as Jack Duckworth, you are a harmless relic of that cherished era when things were 'different'. Now get back to drawing a moustache on that page three model

User avatar
joels344
Posts: 764
Joined: 17 Dec 2016, 17:37
Contact:

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby joels344 » 05 Sep 2017, 15:47

Tactful Cactus wrote:
joels344 wrote:Then I saw it again, this time in 35mm, and gained an ever greater appreciation for it in my second viewing.


Kermode said the same thing. Is 35mm letterbox yes? Would it not feel restrictive after watching the 70mm version?

I might go see it again before it disappears from cinemas, delighted it made so much money - projected to gross $200m


It felt restrictive after seeing it in 70mm, but I was mostly wanting to watch it in 35mm to see if the film still held up without its full grandeur.

User avatar
The Great Defector
Posts: 16070
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 18:16

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby The Great Defector » 05 Sep 2017, 22:38

joels344 wrote:I'd say Dunkirk is the masterpiece Nolan has been wanting to direct since his career began.



I thought something like interstellar would be, but you could be right.
Drama Queenie wrote:You are a chauvinist of the quaintest kind. About as threatening as Jack Duckworth, you are a harmless relic of that cherished era when things were 'different'. Now get back to drawing a moustache on that page three model

User avatar
Tactful Cactus
Posts: 17965
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 14:21
Location: by your window

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby Tactful Cactus » 06 Sep 2017, 13:08

joels344 wrote:It felt restrictive after seeing it in 70mm, but I was mostly wanting to watch it in 35mm to see if the film still held up without its full grandeur.


Thanks, I might skip the 35 and see it as 70mm again. Its certainly my favourite Nolan of the past 10 years.

User avatar
joels344
Posts: 764
Joined: 17 Dec 2016, 17:37
Contact:

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby joels344 » 06 Sep 2017, 17:10

The Great Defector wrote:
joels344 wrote:I'd say Dunkirk is the masterpiece Nolan has been wanting to direct since his career began.



I thought something like interstellar would be, but you could be right.


I felt Interstellar had the scope and ambition to be a masterpiece, but ended up collapsing in own its ambition and ideas in the long run. There was even a cringe-worthy moment towards the end of the film. Don't get me wrong, it's a brilliant film and among Nolan's finest achievements. However, I see Dunkirk as his most coherent, stripped-down, harrowing, visually stunning, and fluid film yet. I consider it a classic in the war cinema genre along with Come and See, Paths of Glory, Army of Shadows, The Thin Red Line, and Apocalypse Now. All those films are of course different in their approach to the genre, but that's one of the reasons why I'd place Dunkirk in that class of films. :)

User avatar
German Dave
Utter Cad
Posts: 50042
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby German Dave » 23 Sep 2017, 20:38

Jeemo wrote:No real story, flimsy characters, a fractured timeline for absolutely no real reason whatsoever, fidnt add to the drama, and the cliched music at the end was unforgivable. Any other director would've been presented with his arse for that.

so an average film at best.


I thought the three timelines approach worked really well. It made sense to tell the story of the troops over a week, the boat over a day and the Spitfires over an hour and I loved the way it came together towards the end. I don't actually recall the music being cheesy at the end - I thought the music was largely magnificent and really added to the tension. As for flimsy characters, I thought it really worked making them seem so insignificant in the face of such adversity.

Loved it. I left the cinema feeling strangely moved, in fact.
kewl klive wrote:A deluxe Sandinista! was pulled when only one outtake could be found.


User avatar
Jeemo
Posts: 20132
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 23:17
Location: ????

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby Jeemo » 23 Sep 2017, 22:09

Pat O'Banton wrote:
Jeemo wrote:No real story, flimsy characters, a fractured timeline for absolutely no real reason whatsoever, fidnt add to the drama, and the cliched music at the end was unforgivable. Any other director would've been presented with his arse for that.

so an average film at best.


I thought the three timelines approach worked really well. It made sense to tell the story of the troops over a week, the boat over a day and the Spitfires over an hour and I loved the way it came together towards the end. I don't actually recall the music being cheesy at the end - I thought the music was largely magnificent and really added to the tension. As for flimsy characters, I thought it really worked making them seem so insignificant in the face of such adversity.

Loved it. I left the cinema feeling strangely moved, in fact.


disagree with just about everything you said :-)
Image So Long Kid, Take A Bow.

User avatar
Toby
Arsehole all Erect
Posts: 21880
Joined: 28 Jul 2003, 23:13
Contact:

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby Toby » 23 Sep 2017, 23:16

Yeah me too. I was utterly unmoved by it.

It's no Come and See that's for sure.

User avatar
PENK
Midnight to Six Man
Posts: 33681
Joined: 07 Aug 2004, 20:12
Location: Stockholm

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby PENK » 24 Sep 2017, 08:02

And it isn't The Lady Vanishes, La Dolce Vita or Beethoven 2. So what?
Darkness_Fish wrote:One slight disappointment was that there turns out to be two cinemas in Bolton

User avatar
algroth
Posts: 4927
Joined: 04 Apr 2010, 03:12

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby algroth » 24 Sep 2017, 08:51

I don't think it aims nearly for the same as Come and See - it's a story of survival in war, sure, but the intentions here are very different, much more about humanist transcendence in the face of impossible odds than the way war changes people and scars them for life. I don't think one approach is necessarily worse than the other either. It would be more accurate to compare this with A Man Escapes if you wish to head that way, as Nolan also cited Bresson as an influence, but really I don't see why we need to make these comparisons either. It's a damn good film that stands on its own.

User avatar
German Dave
Utter Cad
Posts: 50042
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

Postby German Dave » 24 Sep 2017, 09:51

Toby wrote:Yeah me too. I was utterly unmoved by it.

It's no Come and See that's for sure.


It's not a patch on Pinocchio, I'll give you that.
kewl klive wrote:A deluxe Sandinista! was pulled when only one outtake could be found.