Dunkirk—the Review

The Bangla colloquial for a movie is “boi” or book. It is not hard to figure out why, the appreciation of a film, for most, is predicated upon the story. Unless you are the film-school type, you are not really watching for shot composition, camera angle, scene transitions, lighting, and even though you often say “The film should have been better edited” to look wise on social media, without really understanding what film-editing is, what you actually mean is that the story didn’t catch you.

Christopher Nolan’s reputation as a superstar director is built upon his consistent mastery over the narrative. Whether it be putting the elements out-of-sequence (Memento), or nesting elements (Inception), or playing with time (Interstellar), or working on audience assumptions (Prestige), Nolan understands the power of the twist, the pace, the lines, and the character. You remember the beginning (or is it the end) of Memento, you wonder what happens to the totem in Inception, you shake your head at the resolution of the Prestige, and you definitely want to be the Joker.

In Dunkirk he does something strange even by Nolan’s standards. He lets the story go. That is the biggest and only twist of Dunkirk, and you realize that within minutes of the film opening. Unlike the war stories you have grown up to love, be it “Saving Private Ryan” or “Apocalypse Now” or “Platoon”, Dunkirk has very little story and a whole lot of war. You are dropped into the war zone, like a first-person-shooter, and then it is nothing but pure cinema, sights, sounds, and music, with very little in the way of narrative support. No characters to root for, no back-stories, just the screech of torpedoes, the roaring of Spitfires, the boom of ordnance, and huddled masses, waiting for deliverance or destruction. There is conflict though, a lot of it, but it is not the standard dramatic conflict, because no story remember, but between war, of steel and mortar and fire, and humanity, not bravery so much, but of humanity, in ways that are subtle and yet immensely poignant. There are characters, and people, of course, but nameless, without a past or a future, props for the story without a story, floating, flying and fighting in a cocoon of cold Kubrikian terror.

Which is why this is a film which will have widely varying reactions. For those whose enjoyment of a film depends on them anchoring to a story and a character arc, there is nothing to hang on to. No Marlon Brando, no Tom Hanks, no rousing tale of redemption or bravery, no politics, no love. Instead Dunkirk is directorial bravura , almost arrogant in its disdain for conventionalities, which depending on the way you swing, could either be taken to be self-indulgent hubris or supreme confidence in ability.

For me though this works. Spectacularly. Nolan redeems himself after the less than stellar “Interstellar”,  establishing himself as one of the most visionary directors alive.

Dunkirk was a miracle. So is this movie.




5 thoughts on “Dunkirk—the Review

  1. Agreed. I especially liked how he separated the action that is taking place on land and in sky, each having it’s own perspective.

  2. Great review! I love the way he swivels from coast to coast and from one space to another! I think Nolan’s mastery as you rightly pointed out is doing it differently every time!

  3. Well written review! I haven’t seen the film yet owing to the huge let-down Interstellar was for me, but now it seems like a must-watch.

  4. Barin Bhowmick July 24, 2017 — 2:13 pm

    Superb movie. Among mainstream movies that have now popularized the “immersive” style this will definitely stand out. Although, at the risk of voicing an unpopular opinion, both ‘Gravity’ and ‘The Impossible’ worked better for me as survival stories. 2nd unpopular opinion – i did not like the overuse of organ music by Hans Zimmer to create those audio tensions on screen. Those subjective opinions apart, this is perhaps the best movie I have seen in a while.

  5. Great review. Terrific film.

    Something that struck me in particular – the three different timelines (of different lengths) merging into a single point near the end was a neat cinematic trick, can’t remember having seen it done exactly like that before.

Have An Opinion? Type Away

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close