Dunkirk

lots of movies about ww2 lately. i wonder if that means anything... 

  On 7/24/2017 at 4:23 PM, Kavinsky said:

It cant be better then Inception or Interstellar (also because of the story) , i´m huge into cinema but these two have special place in my heart.

It isn't better than Interstellar, at least for me. The subject of Dunkirk, fascinating though it is, is less interesting than the themes explored in Interstellar.

  On 7/24/2017 at 1:12 PM, Squee said:

Ok, maybe the score annoyed me because I was watching it in IMAX and it was so fucking loud and insisting. There was never a quiet moment.

All his past few films have been like that. I remember seeing Inception and thinking that the audience was basically being battered into submission. I'm sure it is done on purpose, to overcome or distract you from a film's shortcomings.

  On 7/24/2017 at 8:51 PM, xox said:

lots of movies about ww2 lately. i wonder if that means anything... 

war propaganda.

won 2 tickets , going to see the movie  in 2 days so curious , i think i´m going to shit myself out of expectation.

Easily C-Nolo's best film to date.

  On 7/24/2017 at 8:58 PM, fumi said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 1:12 PM, Squee said:

Ok, maybe the score annoyed me because I was watching it in IMAX and it was so fucking loud and insisting. There was never a quiet moment.

 

All his past few films have been like that. I remember seeing Inception and thinking that the audience was basically being battered into submission. I'm sure it is done on purpose, to overcome or distract you from a film's shortcomings.

 

@ 2:28

I actually loved the relentless music and pacing. The movie is more an immersive experience vs getting to know characters and going deep into storylines. 

  On 7/24/2017 at 9:03 PM, transmisiones ferox said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 8:51 PM, xox said:

lots of movies about ww2 lately. i wonder if that means anything...

war propaganda.

basically. total snooze. nothing happens for an hour and a half

so glad i don't pay for this shit

http://www.dailywire...ead-john-nolte#

USA Today Complains About Lack of 'Women' and 'No Lead Actors of Color' in Movie 'Dunkirk'

Lol

  On 7/24/2017 at 9:03 PM, transmisiones ferox said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 8:51 PM, xox said:

lots of movies about ww2 lately. i wonder if that means anything... 

 

war propaganda.

 

I think some of it has to do with the fact that the generation that fought WW2 is at the cusp of completely being gone.

American Sniper was propaganda, or at least Hollywood appeasement. WW2 is almost an escapist topic at this point - something a bit easier to digest by injecting good vs. evil, actual direct combat heroics and exploits, and the war was so expansive there's plenty to mine from it plot wise. It was still the most brutal and godawful war in human history. There's nothing that isn't inherently disturbing and depressing in terms of warfare now that can be made into a film: the idea of a "soldier" of the past - an individual fighting for some ideal - is essentially dead. Hell even Top Gun was so distorted and exaggerated greatly from actual modern air combat (i.e. no dog-fighting, BVR missle use, etc.) in order to make it a Hollywood blockbuster and that was 30 years ago.

  On 7/26/2017 at 7:49 AM, Dpek said:

http://www.dailywire...ead-john-nolte#

USA Today Complains About Lack of 'Women' and 'No Lead Actors of Color' in Movie 'Dunkirk'

https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/

  On 7/26/2017 at 3:20 PM, joshuatx said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 9:03 PM, transmisiones ferox said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 8:51 PM, xox said:

lots of movies about ww2 lately. i wonder if that means anything...

war propaganda.

I think some of it has to do with the fact that the generation that fought WW2 is at the cusp of completely being gone.

 

American Sniper was propaganda, or at least Hollywood appeasement. WW2 is almost an escapist topic at this point - something a bit easier to digest by injecting good vs. evil, actual direct combat heroics and exploits, and the war was so expansive there's plenty to mine from it plot wise. It was still the most brutal and godawful war in human history. There's nothing that isn't inherently disturbing and depressing in terms of warfare now that can be made into a film: the idea of a "soldier" of the past - an individual fighting for some ideal - is essentially dead. Hell even Top Gun was so distorted and exaggerated greatly from actual modern air combat (i.e. no dog-fighting, BVR missle use, etc.) in order to make it a Hollywood blockbuster and that was 30 years ago.

Dunkirk is the least glamorous Hollywood depiction of ww2 I can remember.

  On 7/26/2017 at 3:45 PM, Amen Warrior said:

 

  On 7/26/2017 at 3:20 PM, joshuatx said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 9:03 PM, transmisiones ferox said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 8:51 PM, xox said:

lots of movies about ww2 lately. i wonder if that means anything...

war propaganda.

I think some of it has to do with the fact that the generation that fought WW2 is at the cusp of completely being gone.

 

American Sniper was propaganda, or at least Hollywood appeasement. WW2 is almost an escapist topic at this point - something a bit easier to digest by injecting good vs. evil, actual direct combat heroics and exploits, and the war was so expansive there's plenty to mine from it plot wise. It was still the most brutal and godawful war in human history. There's nothing that isn't inherently disturbing and depressing in terms of warfare now that can be made into a film: the idea of a "soldier" of the past - an individual fighting for some ideal - is essentially dead. Hell even Top Gun was so distorted and exaggerated greatly from actual modern

(i.e. no dog-fighting, BVR missle use, etc.) in order to make it a Hollywood blockbuster and that was 30 years ago.

Dunkirk is the least glamorous Hollywood depiction of ww2 I can remember.

?

it's non-stop "do your part" with incredibly low stakes. the only thing that made it remotely tense was the senseless cross-cutting and constant winding up by zimmer. just came across as lone survivor for the high brow crowd. 

fyi i'd consider myself a nolan fan generally but this did absolutely nothing for me. 

My mate LOVES anything to do with war etc but i could tell he was unimpressed with this film...

Which makes me wonder if it is worth bothering with...

oh and afterwards we went to the pub next to the theatre and got a cocktail and dinner and every tv had a commercial for dunkirk cross promoted with some free2play shit game called world of warships which was really just the nail in the coffin

  On 7/26/2017 at 4:41 PM, juiceciuj said:

 

  On 7/26/2017 at 3:45 PM, Amen Warrior said:

 

  On 7/26/2017 at 3:20 PM, joshuatx said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 9:03 PM, transmisiones ferox said:

 

  On 7/24/2017 at 8:51 PM, xox said:

lots of movies about ww2 lately. i wonder if that means anything...

war propaganda.

I think some of it has to do with the fact that the generation that fought WW2 is at the cusp of completely being gone.

 

American Sniper was propaganda, or at least Hollywood appeasement. WW2 is almost an escapist topic at this point - something a bit easier to digest by injecting good vs. evil, actual direct combat heroics and exploits, and the war was so expansive there's plenty to mine from it plot wise. It was still the most brutal and godawful war in human history. There's nothing that isn't inherently disturbing and depressing in terms of warfare now that can be made into a film: the idea of a "soldier" of the past - an individual fighting for some ideal - is essentially dead. Hell even Top Gun was so distorted and exaggerated greatly from actual modern

(i.e. no dog-fighting, BVR missle use, etc.) in order to make it a Hollywood blockbuster and that was 30 years ago.

Dunkirk is the least glamorous Hollywood depiction of ww2 I can remember.

?

 

it's non-stop "do your part" with incredibly low stakes. the only thing that made it remotely tense was the senseless cross-cutting and constant winding up by zimmer. just came across as lone survivor for the high brow crowd. 

 

fyi i'd consider myself a nolan fan generally but this did absolutely nothing for me. 

 

I'd weigh in but I haven't seen it. Atonement actually had a very visceral (albeit stylized) portrayal of Dunkirk and I imagine this movie is in that vein but with, you know, all the beautiful dramatics of Hurricanes and Spitfires dog-fighting with Messerschmidts. 

http://globalnews.ca/video/rd/1008158275568/

I haven't seen the film, but I have it on good word that roughly 40% of the combatants were transgender.

  On 7/26/2017 at 7:59 PM, Gocab said:

I haven't seen the film, but I have it on good word that roughly 40% of the combatants were transgender.

big win for diversity! click here to share on upworthy

I thought it was very good and will now seriously judge every subjective statement of the people who said "nothing happens for 90 minutes" like... come on guys how shallow are you

remember that guy that was shooting up at the planes when they were getting bombed and you just knew he was going to get blown up 30 minutes before he did but boy did he get blown up

Its production value is through the roof - top notch all sectors including the director. But some choices simply make it a very narrow experience. You can feel very tense and into it, if you immerse yourself in the camera, acting, tempo, Zimmer's relentless building for a drop - but as soon as you don't invest yourself into it, there's nothing there. Enemy is basically non-existent (a clever choice on paper maybe). You just know that a plane and bombs will pop up every 10 minutes and fuck up the situation. There is just nothing outside of the frame, it is a pure experience, that starts, endures and then finishes, epic of course, but with nothing to think about after it. 

please explain to me what i didn't see in that movie that was there.

because i'm pretty sure there was nothing there