Dunkirk is the 2017 Christopher Nolan masterpiece centered during the WWII Dunkirk evacuation. With 400,000 men stuck on Dunkirk surrounded by German forces, Dunkrik aims to show the full picture of the attempt at their retrieval, with three possible options, the first; via air, the second; via land or the third; via sea. Although one big story, this film is split clearly into three parts. air, land and sea – each has an opportunity to succeed and we follow all of them. We follow Tom Hardy’s “Farrier”, the attempt of retrieval from the sky, Mark Rylance’s “Mr Dawson” attempting via sea and Fionn Whitehead’s “Tommy” stuck on land. Whilst Christopher Nolan tries to balance all three of these, it is hard considering both air and sea are trying to save them from land. Nevertheless, Nolan makes it work and what makes this a masterpiece is the portal, this isn’t any normal war film, there is hardly any dialogue in this film meaning quite a lot is left down to the actors and director. Whilst, this film is great and more importantly for me – different, I give it a 8 out of 10, because, although I am very happy to give it the phrase “masterpiece” I don’t think it warrants the phrase “classic“. I gave Dunkirk an A-
This is Nolan’s first film since the disappointing Interstellar released in 2014, and Nolan definitely does something different – I love different and I loved this film. It is not for everyone’s taste – believe me, it is not, but if you are willing to open your mind and give it a go, then I think you’ll like it too. I don’t think it is the best film, or the best Nolan film but I do think it is Nolan’s best performance in a film.
Now, by “performance” I mean as there is no dialogue – Nolan’s vision is at the forefront, when you strip everything away there is no where to hide, nothing to cover the cracks, I know that sounds cliche but, when there is no dialogue it has to be clearer, everything from how Hardy’s character feels when he doesn’t see his comrade’s parachute, to how Tommy feels when Harry Styles’ character accuses that guy, to how Mark Rylance’s character feels about needing to help, because of Nolan’s vision it all works and for that Nolan has to up for an Oscar, because I think his direction is what really made this film work.
However, because everything was stripped away it did leave the issues I had with it clearer to be seen, I would have loved maybe more perspectives – I didn’t really care for Tom Hardy’s character apart from the fact it was Tom Hardy, I would have liked to see maybe another perspective, another person on land or sea just because it would have given a better balanced story because (as I said) it was hard to differentiate between the three sides when land is the most important. And as I was saying more perspectives could have been this film a classic.
The only other thing is the characters, I think it is was intentional but I couldn’t remember any names of the characters. I have had to search them because I couldn’t remember any. Whilst the directors performance was fantastic, so to was the characters, each and every actor was good and their characters all gave strong performances – even Harry Styles. I loved how nothing was said but yet somehow everything was said