Page 7 • Dunkirk - Chris Nolan • Non-Gaming • Film • Eurogamer.net

Deleted user 29 July 2017 00:42:48

Piers_Morgan wrote:
He promotes British culture above accepting foreign culture and he wants tighter immigration.

He couldn't care less about british culture. He was on some radio program arguing if we increase corporation tax everyone will leave.

At best he's an alcoholic standing up for moneyed people perversly by appealing to patriots, at worst he's paid by russians.

Khanivor 29 Jul 2017 01:29:26 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

Youthist wrote:

Khanivor wrote:
Well calling folks racists and bigots hasn't exactly weakened their resolve and ushered in a new dawn of accepting and tolerant society and politics, has it?
I was responding to this point you were making not the half wits postings which deserve no response. What he says doesn't deserve commentary as he has proven over countless months of re-regs and bans / quits.

Please excuse my confusion as the point I was making didn't appear to show up in your post anywhere.

If his post deserves no response then how come...

Mola_Ram 29 Jul 2017 01:34:43 26,187 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 9 years ago

Man, it is so easy to wind people up here.

Syrette 29 Jul 2017 12:38:02 51,181 posts
Seen 11 minutes ago
Registered 19 years ago

@Mola_Ram

Hello Piers

Youthist 29 Jul 2017 13:14:16 14,723 posts
Seen 19 hours ago
Registered 16 years ago

Piers_Morgan wrote:
What point do you have to make youthist? You never express an opinion, a solution or anything positive. The only time you post is to be abusive and insulting. It doesn't really offend anyone. It doesn't offend me anyway. But what's the point? I can understand people getting angry at people take a different stance to your own position. But you don't have a position. You don't ever argue a point on an issue other than "waaaa this new guy is cunt. Ban him!!!". I genuinely feel sorry for you. Out of all the members here you seem the most empty, angry and devoid of any true personality. I really do wish you the best mate cos you appear to be in a very
dark place.

This new guy is a cunt - ban him

BreadBinLidHero 29 Jul 2017 13:15:45 10,801 posts
Seen 12 hours ago
Registered 12 years ago

Mola_Ram wrote:
Man, it is so easy to wind people up here.

FUCK YOU NO IT FUCKIBG ISNT YOU FUCKING FUCK FUCK

Youthist 29 Jul 2017 13:21:01 14,723 posts
Seen 19 hours ago
Registered 16 years ago

Anyhow Dunkirk - fucking shit right Ersr? Top critics told him to think so.

craigy Staff 29 Jul 2017 17:34:02 9,500 posts
Seen 3 hours ago
Registered 15 years ago

Piers_Morgan wrote:
Has youthist emo-quit or has he been banned?

He's been put on timeout for calling you a cunt. Zero tolerance for that.

aaron0288 29 Jul 2017 23:10:30 652 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 13 years ago

Anyway, back to the film...

I'm in the overhyped camp. Still a great experience in IMAX, but felt the lack of dialogue for the first 20 or so minutes was just weird and multiple timelines were unnecessary. Almost a bit pretentious. When all the timelines synced up near the end (or you just saw a previous scene from a different perspective), the film was cut like a damn trailer. Just kept cutting from one to the other and it ended up fucking me off. The endless gliding Spitfire was laughable at best and then it went full Hollywood cheese with shooting down the Stuka. I almost couldn't believe what I was seeing after all the hype. Felt really out of place to the rest of the film, which generally was very good. It's alright though, Nolan can do no wrong... I'm glad some on here had picked up on it as I hadn't seen it mentioned anywhere.

I enjoyed most of it though. Some of the shots were breathtaking and while the aerial scenes were no where near Battle of Britain good, they were the best I've seen since. The first shot we see (and hear!) of the three ship formation of Spitfires was almost worth the IMAX price alone. Enjoyed the Michael Caine cameo too! Once we'd got past the Hollywood Stuka scene, the cheering soldiers, Hardy (finally) landing and the helmets washed up on the beach with 'Nimrod' chiming in at the end really got to me. If anything, the film did its job of really putting you on that beach. I'd like to see it again as it certainly wasn't like anything I'd seen before.

Solid 8/10

JamboWayOh 29 Jul 2017 23:16:09 25,236 posts
Seen 27 minutes ago
Registered 8 years ago

I need to see this desperately, hopefully I'll get too soon, would you say Imax is a requirement?

Edited by JamboWayOh at 23:16:21 29-07-2017

up_the_ante 30 Jul 2017 00:39:34 1,574 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 14 years ago

@aaron0288 I'd agree with that review. Why tell a story where it's the lowly, irritating but realistic things like choppy waves and the gradient of the sand that stop thousands of men getting off the beach and then end it with an endlessly gliding spitfire that still manages to shoot the enemy down at the very last second? That felt out of place. I suppose he could of crawled along the wing, jumped on to the Stuka and shot him with his flare gun. Maybe Nolan ruled that out as being too far fetched? :lol:

aaron0288 30 Jul 2017 08:42:24 652 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 13 years ago

@up_the_ante Now that I'd like to see!

I wouldn't say it was as much a requirement as Interstellar, but certainly compared to anything else this year, yes, go see it in IMAX.

Edited by aaron0288 at 09:11:34 30-07-2017

Boriska 30 Jul 2017 09:00:05 1,015 posts
Seen 17 hours ago
Registered 8 years ago

aaron0288 wrote:
Anyway, back to the film...

...Solid 8/10

For me the lack of dialogue is a big part of what made it - I think a lot of modern films are needlessly complex, especially Nolan films and often overly driven by clunky, dialogue led exposition. Every now and then something comes along that cuts most of the fat and just goes straight for the throat and that's a treat for me. I get having a problem with the time lines but I thought it worked, overlapping the levels of intensity until they meet in a crescendo with all that mental music was excellent.

The plane gliding for about 35 minutes felt incongruous and a lot of the last 10-15 minutes sucked, it's weird going from this intense, visceral experience to being reminded you're watching a movie in a couple of cuts. Shame.

Edited by Boriska at 09:02:08 30-07-2017

Edited by Boriska at 09:02:42 30-07-2017

Edited by Boriska at 09:03:10 30-07-2017

aaron0288 30 Jul 2017 09:24:40 652 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 13 years ago

@Boriska I definitely agree with you re lack of dialogue in films, if done right, can add to it, but it didn't feel earned in this. It felt very obvious that Nolan had made a conscious decision to do it, as if he was screaming out to the audience "see what I'm doing here, it's different!". Didn't feel natural to me. Almost as if he took the comments about the dialogue/exposition for Inception and Interstellar to heart and went to the other extreme with this (on the dialogue part that is).

The12thMonkey 30 Jul 2017 09:34:51 598 posts
Seen 7 hours ago
Registered 17 years ago

Saw it yesterday. At the end, I thought Tom Hardy might turn the plane in land, glide all the way to Berlin and crash it onto Hitler's head.

Thought it was ok, didn't mind the lack of dialogue at the start.

jimnastics 30 Jul 2017 12:18:39 1,893 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 10 years ago

I don't get all of this "Hollywood" ending moaning... those guys were living Hollywood lives every time them went out. Far greater and crazier things actually happened than taking down one Stuka whilst gliding after running out of fuel. But whatever, any chance to shit on a good film I guess.

Syrette 30 Jul 2017 12:45:05 51,181 posts
Seen 11 minutes ago
Registered 19 years ago

Think people are exaggerating how long Hardy's Spitfire was gliding for.

Not-a-reviewer 30 Jul 2017 13:01:13 7,686 posts
Seen 4 days ago
Registered 7 years ago

The gliding seemed fine to me, it's like people don't know time can be non linear in film.

aaron0288 30 Jul 2017 13:55:25 652 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 13 years ago

@jimnastics oh come off it. I clearly stated I thought it was a very good film overall. For a film that was for the most part very grounded, I thought that particular bit was out of place and yes, too "Hollywood". May need a rethink on what you consider as shitting on something.

And yeah, at the altitude he was at already, that Spitfire, while designed to glide down if anything were to happen, with no engine whatsoever, would've dropped slightly quicker than it did. Maybe I shouldn't be looking at it that closely, but like I said, felt out of place. See no reason why the fuel could've lasted that little bit longer, he takes out the Stuka, then runs out and glides onto the beach.

Reviewer, thanks for letting me know films can be non linear, I was indeed unaware that could be the case.

Boriska 1 Aug 2017 09:01:05 1,015 posts
Seen 17 hours ago
Registered 8 years ago

Syrette wrote:
Think people are exaggerating how long Hardy's Spitfire was gliding for.

I timed it, 35 minutes exactly.

Deleted user 1 August 2017 23:09:21

Just seen this. Thought it was pretty dull.

Reminded me of a documentary with shots of planes fighting, people on the beach, planes in the air, but without any narration or dialogue.

Albeit a very well shot and acted documentary, but it was piss boring for the main.

Last two Nolan films have been poor imo. Loved everything before interstellar he did. This left me cold. I'd give it about a 6. There was nothing original at all, it does everything competently but nothing exceptionally.

Edited by MH-RobJenx at 23:11:00 01-08-2017

Khanivor 2 Aug 2017 00:33:29 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

Just back from seeing it. Really dug it. Got right sucked into it.

After an hour or so I realized I was watching a stylistic sequel to Memento. No doubt one of the reasons I enjoyed the film so much.

After reading comments of those moaning about the miracle glider I paid extra attention to that bit. And concluded the moaners are being silly. Either that or the way the timeline was edited glided right over their heads.

A really solid film. Then again, I've not seen a Nolan film I didn't like. Except Insomnia. That's fucking boring.

Edited by Khanivor at 00:33:46 02-08-2017

Khanivor 2 Aug 2017 00:35:34 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

Oh, and among many beautiful shots that last one of the Spitfire rolling to a stop on the beach was something else.

In fact, by the end of the film I was feeling quite homesick.

Derblington 2 Aug 2017 00:37:31 35,161 posts
Seen 22 hours ago
Registered 17 years ago

You're French?

Khanivor 2 Aug 2017 00:39:04 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

German

spindle9988 2 Aug 2017 08:36:31 5,222 posts
Seen 3 days ago
Registered 14 years ago

I'm French and English. Some of my ancestors left my other ancestors there.

Duffking 2 Aug 2017 10:05:53 16,964 posts
Seen 12 hours ago
Registered 15 years ago

Boriska wrote:

Syrette wrote:
Think people are exaggerating how long Hardy's Spitfire was gliding for.
I timed it, 35 minutes exactly.

What? He ran empty after he shot down the penultimate plane. It was like 5 minutes from the end of the film.

Dunkirk - Chris Nolan • Page 7