Dunkirk lifts Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick status

[Goat Boy]

I really think he should watch it again!

[Penk!]

I saw Dunkirk today and it was superb.

I think I should start by saying that I've never been convinced by Nolan before: I think, like Jeemo, that he fills his films with thin pseudo-intellectual waffle, high-octane concepts designed to make him look smart within safe Hollywood parameters. I've usually enjoyed watching his films but found them far too easy to pick holes in, or too baggy or over-the-top.

What I've always thought he could do, though, is direct exciting scenes and Dunkirk cuts out the twaddle in order to deliver a magnificent cinema experience. Like Dougie said about 2001, this one needs to be seen on the big screen. It's not a standard Hollywood blockbuster or indeed a standard war film; it's a 100-minute film of tension, suspense and spectacle without convoluted plotting or star showboating.

I'll dip into spoiler mode for this as I feel it's best to go into it not knowing too many of the details beforehand, but for those who've seen the film or do want to know a bit more:

The film simply shows the evacuation of the beaches without heading elsewhere for context or exposition. There are three separate threads:
a couple of young soldiers on the beach, played by unknown actors Fionn Whitehead and Aneurin Barnard; a civilian boat, captained by Mark Rylance, along with his teenage son and a friend, requisitioned to head over the Channel and help evacuate soldiers; and a trio of Spitfires, one piloted by Tom Hardy, heading across to engage the enemy. We simply see what is going on from those three perspectives - although the scenes on the beach sometimes cut to the men in charge there, with Kenneth Branagh as the navy commander - and there are no scenes of people sitting around chatting, no romantic entanglements, no pitched battles on the streets. There is none of the blood and gore you expect from a war film and there is no time for sentiment. As reviews have suggested, there is little dialogue beyond that which naturally occurs in the moment; there are almost no Germans seen onscreen. The officers we see, Branagh and the others, are just as in the dark as the rest of the men and there is no moralising and no blaming, there are no men behind desks in suits consigning people to their doom: everyone here just wants to get home.
The cinematography and Hans Zimmer's incredible ambient score - it feels like part of the action rather than a soundtrack - push things along and after an initial half-hour in which I was struggling to get involved, due to the lack of strong characters to identify with (only on Rylance's boat does any kind of sentiment crop up, and that does seem like a weak link), things start to come together and towards the end I realised that I was gripped. There are some incredible scenes on a large scale, with thousands of men crowding the beach and pier, and some on an intense small scale: soldiers flailing underwater when their ship is torpedoed.
The three threads do eventually converge which gives it, finally, a kind of satisfying resolution but it's ordered chaos. Nolan and his team do a great job of making this into cinema that feels at once immediate and panicked yet epic and awe-inspiring: despite the massive scale of a lot of it, it doesn't feel overblown but instead intimate and intense.
I don't know if it puts Nolan on a Kubrick level, as Kubrick is a giant of cinema who made a number of legendary classics. But this, whatever posterity says about Nolan's other work, will be up there.

[Jimbly]

The amazing story of Scatman Crothers.

He broke down in tears after Kubrick insisted on 40 takes of the scene where Torrance kills him. "What do you want me to do, Mr Kubrick?" He was 69 years old.
Kubrick had wanted to do more but Jack Nicholson convinced him to call it quits.

Crothers' next film is Eastwood's Bronco Billy. After the first take of his first scene Eastwood says, "OK. That'll do." Crothers broke down in tears of gratitude (or relief).

See, this thing of directors/actors doing 20 or 40 takes, I find it hard to believe that'd down to perfectionism. Rather, deep down, they don't have a fucking clue what they want and are too proud to admit it. I don't care how talented they are.

Noted.

It would take some sort of numbskull to think that Kubrick didn't know exactly what he wanted........oh right

[Dr Markus]

The amazing story of Scatman Crothers.

He broke down in tears after Kubrick insisted on 40 takes of the scene where Torrance kills him. "What do you want me to do, Mr Kubrick?" He was 69 years old.
Kubrick had wanted to do more but Jack Nicholson convinced him to call it quits.

Crothers' next film is Eastwood's Bronco Billy. After the first take of his first scene Eastwood says, "OK. That'll do." Crothers broke down in tears of gratitude (or relief).

See, this thing of directors/actors doing 20 or 40 takes, I find it hard to believe that'd down to perfectionism. Rather, deep down, they don't have a fucking clue what they want and are too proud to admit it. I don't care how talented they are.

Noted.

Good boy.

[...]

The second time was by far and away the worst experience I( remember in a cinema that didn't involve physical illness

Don't you just hate it when you pay to see a movie you loathe for a second time and then end up having to buy tickets for all your aliases before you can get in...

[Davey the Fat Boy]

2001 is a great film, but it is purely cinematic in a way that you either appreciate or you dont. Silly to try and convince anyone. I don't think you NEED to see it on a big screen, but it certainly helps you to take it in on an experiential level.

I like a few of Nolan's films. But the ones I've seen were pretty locked into a more narrative-driven style. Perhaps he breaks free of that with his new film, and the liberation is prompting the comparisons. I'm intrigued by that. But yeah...I don't think the comparison is one that is going to do anything but set unrealistic expectations.

[The Prof]

I enjoyed it.
Although from the first scene you got the impression that The Germans were only a few feet away from the beach, held back by half a dozen French soldiers behind sandbags. In fact they were miles away and had stopped advancing for reasons which are still debated.
I think at one point they were trying to tell Cillian Murphy's character's back story but that got a bit confused and then we kept jumping between night and day.
Mark Rylance only seems to have one character. A steady, knowing middle-aged man that remains totally unflustered throughout. Cromwell in a small boat, really.

[Dr Markus]

Going to see this tomorrow night. Looking forward to it.

[Dr Markus]

Fucking superb, you couldn't take your eyes off the screen. It just shredded your nerves from near start to finish. Nolan used every trick in the book too to achieve this. From the sound track, to story ploys, to sounds of the film itself. His thing with time didn't really work. You kinda forgot what he was trying to do with it after 5 minutes, and it didn't really come in to play in terms of story telling until the end. Acting was spot on, I really wish Rylance was in more films, he's just amazing. Harry Styles held his own in a part a lot bigger than I thought it would be.. Tom hardy brought some humor, that I just probably found funny, with his almost comedic stiff upper lip of accepting when the shit hit the fan.

All in all, Nolan does it again for me.

[...]

Fucking superb, you couldn't take your eyes off the screen. It just shredded your nerves from near start to finish. Nolan used every trick in the book too to achieve this. From the sound track, to story ploys, to sounds of the film itself. His thing with time didn't really work. You kinda forgot what he was trying to do with it after 5 minutes, and it didn't really come in to play in terms of story telling until the end. Acting was spot on, I really wish Rylance was in more films, he's just amazing. Harry Styles held his own in a part a lot bigger than I thought it would be.. Tom hardy brought some humor, that I just probably found funny, with his almost comedic stiff upper lip of accepting when the shit hit the fan.

All in all, Nolan does it again for me.

Thanks for not giving away the ending!

[Dr Markus]

Fucking superb, you couldn't take your eyes off the screen. It just shredded your nerves from near start to finish. Nolan used every trick in the book too to achieve this. From the sound track, to story ploys, to sounds of the film itself. His thing with time didn't really work. You kinda forgot what he was trying to do with it after 5 minutes, and it didn't really come in to play in terms of story telling until the end. Acting was spot on, I really wish Rylance was in more films, he's just amazing. Harry Styles held his own in a part a lot bigger than I thought it would be.. Tom hardy brought some humor, that I just probably found funny, with his almost comedic stiff upper lip of accepting when the shit hit the fan.

All in all, Nolan does it again for me.

Thanks for not giving away the ending!

No problem, it's a bit of an anticlimax.

[Jimbly]

Took the wee guy to see Dunkirk today. A chance to get away from all the heavy stuff going on at the moment. I went in wanting to lose myself in a film for a few hours and not have to think about other stuff. I wanted to like it if not love it. I wanted Nolan to win me over.

Likes. it looked fantastic at times, some of the cinematography was wonderful.

didn't likes. 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.

[Jimbly]

The wee guy said it was alright.

[Tactful Cactus]

I loved it. No idea how Kubrickian is it was but it was absolutely gripping, tense, euphoric, terrifying. It had some minor flaws but who cares, it was amazing.

[Jimbly]

I loved it. No idea how Kubrickian is it was but it was absolutely gripping, tense, euphoric, terrifying. It had some minor flaws but who cares, it was amazing.

What was amazing about it?

[WG Kaspar]

Bombs and shit

[Tactful Cactus]

What was amazing about it?

Rhetorical? The films popularity seems to annoy you a bit, there's nothing I can say that'll change your mind.

[Jimbly]

What was amazing about it?

Rhetorical? The films popularity seems to annoy you a bit, there's nothing I can say that'll change your mind.

no genuine question. I don't understand the acclaim it's getting. I'm not looking to have my mind changed, I'd like to know what I don't get about it that other people are.

[Tactful Cactus]

I'd like to know what I don't get about it that other people are.

Its all subjective Jeemo. I loved the music, you hated the music. I loved the minimalism, you hated the minimalism etc etc...Its not the film you wanted to see. Plain and simple.

[Jimbly]

I'd like to know what I don't get about it that other people are.

Its all subjective Jeemo. I loved the music, you hated the music. I loved the minimalism, you hated the minimalism etc etc...Its not the film you wanted to see. Plain and simple.

I get that it is subjective. I paid money to see it, so went in wanting to like it. it was a film I wanted to see. Thanks for answering.