Spoiler He was just a local boy who helped out on the boat, and he was supposed to stay on the dock, but once he untied the rope and he jumped on board and it was too late to send him back. I think that whole death was just supposed to show the finicky and absurd whims of wartime, and the effects on surviving solders. I agree it was oddly handled, compared to everything else, as was them unloading, like, canisters of film from the boat before they left w' life jackets for Dunkirk -- WTF?
Yes, agree with your comments. Actually, I think that was probably the weakest part of the movie. I liked the storylines in this order: 1. Air - well, it was just the most on the edge of your seat exciting 2. Mole - biggest story in there, solid action 3. Sea - to the extent it was that rescue boat. I think the whole Sea storyline could be something entirely different. Like not to be the person who cares about it that much, but there were some rescue boats that included a woman... that would have been an interesting perspective to add.
Huge Nolan fan. Was disappointed. Seemed like a waste of his amazing storytelling ability. Here's the plot (spoilers): Get on the boat! Get off the boat! Get on the boat! Plane fight. Get off the boat! Plane fight. Get on the boat! Go home. The end.
Well there wasn't much of any characters oerspective. So just inclusion if they were actually historically there. But that's not the main point. My main point was I thought that storyline was pretty weird. Like why do all the civilians have no emotions basically?
I'm glad someone finally raised this point. Nolan wanted to creat a classic war movie. Some of you may have noticed some of the granularity of the video output along the sides when watching this. This was done intentionally to give that feel. Audio was done in the same lines. You almost don't need to understand any of the dialogue.
Finally saw it and felt like eternity to click onto this thread. Bravo Mr. Nolan. Bravo, The only way I could describe this movie would be INTENSE! So many unsung war heroes in battle and Nolan portrayed that beautifully in Tom Hardy, civilian sailors, the Naval captain/sergeant/lieutenant or whatever he was on the pier who waited for the French("Im glad your army and Im navy.") Man what a powerful movie. The muffled dialogue(I didnt think it was that bad tbh) is in all of Nolans movies but this is the only one I didnt have a problem with it, as some have pointed out in war, you are bracing for death and hoping for a miraculous survival, so much noise is tuned out realisticly. Such a beautifully shot movie. Longest Ive ever held a piss for in a theater; then at the same time the 1 1/2 hours seem to have gone by so fast with everything going on. 9.75/10. Would have received a perfect 10/10 if there was more diversity in gender and races.
Which characters dialogue could you not understand? Bane's performance was great and calm exactly like a pilot. Scarecrow barely had any lines, Harry Styles accent was pretty thick but I remember his characters motivations and lines. I'm just curious what got past you because to be fair I am very familiar with english accents from radio shows.
Had a very Inception-like feel with the time jumps and scene jumps to crescendo together. I'm proud that I watched that entire movie and didn't know which guy was Harry Styles.
it's because of his incredible acting skills. people are saying it is the reason daniel day lewis retired. can't compete if styles decides to take over cinema
I wish the land storyline was more on land..like more of the beginning with him in the city dodging bullets with his troops getting pushed back to the water. he was in the sea more than land it felt.
I know it was a true story and all but it bored the hell out of me. When I see a big budget movie advertised for eight months, literally every three commercials was Dunkirk, I expected some script embellishment. Some character information. When it started going back and fourth and old dude and the homies pulled Cylian off the the sub I was thinking Memento so it's my own unrealistic expectations that I guess I set in my mind going in and the media hyping it. But it gets straight to the point, this is going to be a great film to show in history class. I was just expecting a story and the story was "Germany wants France, the French retreat". I'm just not understanding how that's the topic of a major motion picture, it was not entertaining at all and that's why everywhere you see a critique of this thing is prefaced with "cinematography" its boring, and its a shitty war film if I were French I'd never want that **** to get out. But what do I know I liked Batman vs Superman
what about when the spitfire pilot landing in front of the boat. The fact he used a camera with massive film put us right in the cockpit without weird wide angle distortions. It was terrifying. I'm not sure how you could do that without having the other part of the story with Sandman being resolved. Cutting out of that even more would have been difficult to keep the effect. I bring it up because that was the part where I was very thankful for it. I wanted to see that part first hand.
The British don't express their emotions well. Trust me, I'm British. I personally thought there was a lot of emotion portrayed. The most common complaint I've heard is that there is no love story or a female perspective, but there is. England is the "girl" everyone is trying to get home to. Just look at how the admiral looks longingly across the sea towards England as he says you can almost see home.
