Dunkirk

Christopher Nolan is a director known for his mind-bending, thought-provoking, often 2+ hour films. 

With Dunkirk, we see an example of him testing himself with a new genre: wartime. Here's a landscape in which he cannot add science fiction, or reveal some great twist, but instead must stick to history and how it happened. 

When I first heard Nolan was doing a World War II film, as a passionate Nolan-ite, I was immediately disappointed. I'd looked to Nolan for my unforgettable, mind-blowing trips to the theater: The Dark Knight (and yes, Rises too), Inception (still my favorite movie ever), and Interstellar (the second time, once I understood the science). Moving to World War II seemed like a step in a direction that had already been done (quite fantastically) by other directors. 

I'm at a point in my movie-going career that I should really have learned to never doubt Christopher Nolan.

Dunkirk ends up being an intense, visceral trip to the theaters where backstory and characterization all take a back seat to something much more primal: 

Survival.

Not to mention it features some of the best time management -- there's a bit of a pun in there -- of any film I've ever seen, showing us a lean and mean Nolan that we've rarely been witness too. 

One of the best parts of Dunkirk is that it's a confined "battle" and one that I previously had no knowledge of at all. This is earlier in WWII, even before Pearl Harbor, and the Germans have essentially trapped the British and French against the English Channel. Across that is home for the British and escape for the French, but the Germans press closer each hour. This leaves 400,000 troops stranded on a beach, trying to get home, with a government that isn't sure how much effort to put into saving them should they need to save resources to defend their homeland. How this particular story of World War II has escaped me for so long, I'm not sure, but it's an incredibly powerful one; less about the battles and horrors of war and more about survival and keeping hope. Britain eventually calls on civilian boats to travel to Dunkirk to transport soldiers because they can better navigate the shallow waters of the beach. Soldiers were desperate to get home so, as the tagline states, home came for them. 

For continuation of story purposes, Nolan brought back ALL the extras from
the Gotham City street war in Dark Knight Rises

One Direction's newest
members and album cover

If this sounds all fairly straight forward, it is. On paper. But if you know anything about Nolan it's that he likes to challenge himself, his storytelling approach, and his audience. I'd rather keep my readers blind going into the film so I won't outright reveal the way in which the story is told, but leave it to Christopher Nolan to do something unique with the war genre. What I will reveal is that the method in which the story is told adds SO MUCH to the feeling of being "in the thick of it" and keeps the film moving at such a brisk pace, it'll leave you breathless. Above almost all else, Dunkirk is an example of impeccable time management where every scene and every scene's length are expertly crafted for maximum efficiency. The amount of content Nolan fits into a 106 minutes is staggering, yet he gives gorgeous shots plenty of time to breathe and resonate with the audience. In terms of editing, it's an absolute masterpiece. 

Our characters in this tale don't get fleshed out much, but that was never the point. Nolan wants to transport you and make you feel the stress and terror they felt rather than have you connect emotionally with them. If that sounds like a cop-out, it's not. It's deliberate and you'll be able to tell by the minimal dialogue throughout. Even still we get great, subdued performances from Mark Rylance, Bane...er...Tom Hardy, Kenneth Branagh, and Fionn Whitehead, among others. Harry Styles is awful though and....I kid, I kid! Styles performs really well and portrays a scared, innocent soldier with professionalism. 

Perhaps the most important aspect to Dunkirk's success is its technical prowess in nearly every facet. The cinematography is stunning and unforgettable, particularly when we're up in the air with Hardy. On more than one occasion I felt myself leaning with the movie as the planes swayed from side to side and I imagine it would be enough to make other's nauseous. I saw the film in 70mm which was a delight, and I immediately want to go back and see it in IMAX as I imagine that it's even louder and bigger via that platform. Speaking of loud, Dunkirk gets monstrously loud and the sound editing is top notch. Bombs rattle the theater as if you're there and gunshots are deafening, almost begging for hearing protection for the audience. In the background is the tick-tock of another Hans Zimmer masterpiece who takes inspiration from his own Dark Knight and Inception themes and puts them at great use here. Zimmer and Nolan are like peanut butter and jelly, mac n cheese, cookies and milk, whatever analogy you want to use. It's hard to imagine one without the other anymore and, more importantly, they bring out the best in each other. This entire review I've been listening to the Dunkirk OS and, while I don't think it's Zimmer's absolute best -- that's still likely a tie between Interstellar and Inception -- it does exactly what it came for by adding a frantic, ticking pacing to an already swift film.

Who knew that Bane could fly a plane so effortlessly!

In the great pantheon of Nolan films, of which there are a lot, I wouldn't say that Dunkirk is my personal favorite. I'm not sure anything could ever top Inception for me and The Dark Knight really was/is a phenomenon. But from a pure filmmaking perspective, Dunkirk is sans flaws unless you get incredibly nitpicky. It's Nolan at some of his technical best and most efficient and it will likely sear into your brain as if you were actually there. Exactly how he intended it.

In Nolan (and Zimmer) We Trust. 

CONS

• Much like Gravity, I kinda/sorta worry about how this one will translate to a home theater as opposed to IMAX
• A couple of scenes that I couldn't quite follow the actions happening on screen

PROS

• A masterstroke of time management in more ways than one. The way Nolan puts us into different perspectives is astonishing and feels unique to the genre
• That includes some near-perfect pacing and editing
• You get thrown into the survivalist nature of the film fast and it feels simultaneously like the longest and shortest film of your life, in a good way
• Even with little dialogue, these are some solid performances from everyone
• As one of Nolan's shortest films yet, it means that every piece making it to the screen (i.e. dialogue, image, sound, etc.) is important
• Loud as all hell. It's a thunderous film that will rattle your teeth
• Unforgettable cinematography. Nolan let's some images linger for maximum effect and the camera work in the sky during dogfights is like nothing you've ever seen before. Best seen in 70mm and/or IMAX
• An incredible TRUE story. Can't believe I didn't know about Dunkirk before, but I sure as hell won't forget it now 
• Another masterpiece from Zimmer. He and Nolan together are Hollywood's best combo and they make each other better
• Intense, in-your-face, and gripping. It's a powerful film that's also a technical achievement

Rath's Review Score | 10/10 - Instant Classic