|
Saw it in IMAX. This movie felt like a fine dish, prepared by an expert chef using all the freshest ingredients.... except that the chef forgot one of the major ones. Would it have killed the movie, titled "Dunkirk", to explain the viewers not intimately familiar with the Western front, what the heck was the evacuation even all about? Why did it happen. Why do they have to leave. Why do they have so little support. What was the reasoning in the upper echelons. Even, what year it took place? I expected the movie to at least take the time to frame the events historically, rather than "here's a whole lot of soldiers being shot and drowned". It's fine if they wanted to keep it low key and through the eyes of a common soldier, but in that case I would've liked to see some character development. I'm not sure we even learned the main character's name. Since there was also little guts or action, then I couldn't help but feel a bit indifferent about the whole thing. It was like an extremely well made generic TV movie. Little to remember this movie by, other than some cool IMAX moments and sound mix. Certainly the weakest film by Nolan that I've seen.
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 04:03 |
|