Dunkirk - movie review

Dunkirk

Plot: Allied soldiers from Belgium, the British Empire and France are surrounded by the German army and evacuated during a fierce battle in World War II.
Cast: Fionn Whitehead, Tom Glynn-Carney, Jack Lowden
Director: Christopher Nolan
Certificate: 12A (sustained threat, intense sequences, moderate violence, strong language)
Runtime: 1hr 46 mins
Release Date: Friday 21st July 2017

At this point, can we just already say that Christopher Nolan is one of the greatest directors to have ever graced us with his talent and presence? There are only a few directors that I avidly get excited to see what they have in store for us. Nolan leads the way because I'm yet to see him make a film that is anything less than incredible. J.J. Abrams is among the group simply because of his talent in revitalizing two of my favourite sci-fi series' of all time and coming up with fresh and ingenious filmic ideas. And of course, we have the greats like Steven Spielberg and Quentin Tarantino. Nolan, to me, is a director who can balance extremely personal stories and slide them into the most epic of proportions. Films like Memento, Inception and The Dark Knight trilogy are pillars in how cinema has adapted to the modern age but for me, it was Interstellar that blew my mind. I still contend that Interstellar is up there as one of the greatest films ever created and nothing can deter me otherwise. For Nolan's most recent outing, he has tackled a genre that I have been wanting him to helm for a while now - war. To be more specific, a very true and realistic war story. And as per usual for Nolan, he doesn't disappoint.

Without giving too much away, Nolan has crafted an entirely unique war film that stands head and shoulders above conventionality. There are notable elements that one would not automatically assume would work inside the confines of a war film but through Nolan's impeccable writing and directing, Dunkirk is certainly his most unique film to date and that's saying something considering he made a two and a half hour epic about Leonardo DiCaprio going into people's dreams to plant an idea. One aspect that makes Dunkirk stand apart from other epic war films like Saving Private Ryan, Apocalypse Now and Platoon is the films ability to not focus on a single character all that much. If you're reading this without seeing the film, you're probably thinking to yourself "That's a terrible idea. How am I supposed to care for the individuals when there's little focus on them?" but fear not because in Nolan we trust. Nolan subverts the traditional belief that for every war film we must have one key protagonist that we follow as they embark on their hero's journey. Instead, he creates a level playing field for all. There isn't one character who is given extra screen time nor an in-depth backstory to allow the audience to gain a better understanding for the characters. Nolan's intention is to ensure that the soldiers are all equally respected and connected to. I felt that same towards Harry Styles as I did towards Tom Hardy. Not a single character stood out more than anyone else which is fantastic to see in this day and age. This is a remarkable achievement in the ability of character development and some of the best balancing acts done by a human being that rumours are suggesting that Cirque Du Soleil are currently in talks to hire Nolan as a new act. Despite there being a slight distance towards the individuals themselves, which only causes a brief moment of confusion, Nolan is more interested in painting the event as a whole. By singling people out, it acts more as a disservice to others who were just as important. The film is called Dunkirk, not Soldier #23 Trapped In Dunkirk.

Similar to no individual characters standing out (so much so, I don't think they are even named) the performances are also phenomenal across the board. Not a single actor is dull or uninvested in the role they're given. This is a film that isn't trying to cater for awards consideration for the performances (although I can imagine Dunkirk receiving a few technical nominations). The actors are respectful in their performances but there are a select few who give truly remarkable showcases in acting along with a handful of excellent debuts. Actors like Mark Rylance, Tom Hardy, Cillian Murphy and Kenneth Branagh are masters of their trade so it should come as no surprise to see them giving it their all. Rylance is a perfect fit to work alongside Nolan and his time spent as a fisherman boat captain who is sent to rescue the soldiers in Dunkirk is heartfelt and commanding. It's in his story that we are able to see the wider effects of war and the types of bravery humans can showcase other than serving on the front line. Tom Hardy is also fantastic in a role that gives him very little to say. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that he has about twenty lines of dialogue in total. Most of his screentime is spent in the cockpit of a Spitfire in silence as he partakes in dogfights against German planes. This is yet another case of Tom Hardy giving a masterclass in eyeball acting. As for Kenneth Branagh and Cillian Murphy, these performances remind us how lucky we are to have them. Both of them give very understated and professional performances of soldiers who are trapped in a helpless situation. Branagh plays a British general who is in charge of organising the Dunkirk evacuations and Murphy depicts The Shivering Soldier, a soldier picked up by Mark Rylance and his crew, who starts suffering from extreme PTSD. There are a few newcomers who are sure to find fame after Dunkirk as well. Firstly, Fionn Whitehead (who serves as, if you wanted to say for arguments sake, the main protagonist) is sensational as a young soldier whose sole ambition is to go home no matter the cost. Much of his performance is limited to acting in silence but this poses no threat to Whitehead. The other newcomer (at least to the acting world) that pulls off a gigantic surprise is One Direction's own Harry Styles. Going in, I was expecting to be critical of Styles because I was unsure if his casting was just a ploy to gain commercial success from all the Directioners who'd clamour to see this film. More fool I because Harry Styles can well and truly act. This is a terrific debut and who knows, if this hiatus from the band continues indefinitely, Hollywood will always be there for you Harry.

FACT: Christopher Nolan actually rode in the Spitfire shown in the movie in order to get a sense of the aerial feel of the fighter plane; with the purpose being to help him shoot and provide an authentically realistic experience of the dogfights for the audience.

There are countless reasons to respect Christopher Nolan and what he has done for film but one thing that I think most overlook when discussing his work, is his ability to create tension. I'd go so far as to say that he has inherited the mantle of Alfred Hitchcock as the new master of intensity. From the moment when the ship took off in Interstellar, my hands never relinquished their grip from the armrests. For Dunkirk, my armrest was likely non-existent as the credits rolled. It should come as no surprise that this is one of the most intense cinematic experiences in the past few years. Dunkirk takes you out of your seat and puts you in the action and leaves you helplessly stranded like the soldiers were at the time. Parts of it are very painful to watch as you are stuck to witness young men die and suffer all for the sole reason of wanting to go home. Whilst it might not drift into the same violence that is depicted in war films such as Saving Private Ryan and Hacksaw Ridge, the horror and brutality is suggested instead. The terror comes in the moments left off-screen. Nolan manages to find tension in the smallest of moments rather than have sections of the film drift into nothingness seeing as there isn't a focus on detailed characterisation. From gritting your teeth as to whether or not a Spitfire's landing wheels will deploy to biting your fingernails as a group of soldiers hide inside an abandoned fishing vessel as German soldiers incidentally begin to use it as target practice, Nolan ensures that the audience investment is at 100% for the entire runtime and not a percentage less. The investment is also necessary because Nolan is up to his old tricks by messing with time once again. First, there was Memento, a film in which half of it is played in reverse. Then came Inception, a film in which the deeper you go into someone's dreams, the slower time moves. He then expanded his use of time by combining it with gravity for Interstellar. For Dunkirk, Nolan returns to his nonlinear storytelling that arguably made his career.

Throughout Dunkirk, we are witnessing three stories playing out over three separate periods of time. Fionn Whitehead is trapped on the Dunkirk beaches that lasts for around a week. Mark Rylance is on his way to help the trapped soldiers as one of the civilian vessels in an arc that lasts for a day and Tom Hardy features as a Spitfire pilot protecting the sky both over the Channel and Dunkirk in a storyline that lasts for an hour. Initially, this is a disarming tactic used by Nolan and I imagine it won't be for everyone but as you settle into it, his technique of shifting time back and forth parallels perfectly to the chaos that Dunkirk was itself. Day blurs into night. Minutes linger into hours. The whole movie seemingly breezes past but at the same time, you feel as if you've been there for weeks. This is just another reason as to why no other director could have made this film half as well as Nolan has. There is simply no one with the same gifted mindset that has the skill to think these brilliant storytelling devices and put them to work. It's also a pleasure to see the beautiful practical effects in work here (so much so that many of the extras on the beach are cardboard cutouts instead of CGI creations). There is nothing more satisfying that knowing that the Spitfires you see hurtling through the sky, dipping and diving and the gigantic battleships are real. There's no denying that if visual effects were used, it would look vastly different however, simply knowing that everything you see is real adds an authenticity to the proceedings. As Mark Rylance says in the film, there is nothing sweeter than hearing the roar of a Spitfire engine. And it wouldn't be a Christopher Nolan film if Hans Zimmer wasn't in charge of the score and dare I say, this may be up there with some of his best work. Zimmer's score blends beautifully into the film and becomes a character within itself. By incorporating the ticking from Nolan's own pocket watch, Zimmer manages to create a sense of impending terror as the score and film builds to one shocking moment after another. There is also the fact that, if memory serves, the score never stops. It is always there, meaning that the clock is constantly ticking signifying a never-ending barrage of obstacles stopping our soldiers from returning home. The most important thing this film could do was to pay respect to those involved in the Dunkirk crisis and for those that didn't know the extent of this event, like myself, educate. Nolan has achieved that in spades.

To say this is Nolan's most unique film to date is a statement that I do not say lightly but it is accurate. The way he plays with time, puts the real life situation ahead of character development and pushes the use of practical effects makes Dunkirk a certified masterclass in directing. The performances are all sublime and Zimmer's score will stay with you as you leave. At the time of posting, Dunkirk has been released for some time now but if you have yet to see it or are on the fence, do your utmost to experience this. It's an immersive and unrelenting journey that puts you at the forefront of one of the most terrifying moments in human history. It's a film that needs to be seen to be believed.

My Verdict: 9.5/10

What did you think of Dunkirk? What is the most intense war film? Sound off in the comments below.

If you like what you've seen here don't forget to share this with everyone you know, comment below and check out my other reviews. Thanks for reading!!