Spoilers ahead.
'Dunkirk'
A war film that deals with the war without the Hollywood glow and veneer that plagues far too many efforts of recent years and is actually, pleasingly, devoid of any "for the sake of it" gore and blood. Although that doesn't mean that it shirks away from the horror of conflict in any way.
'Dunkirk' deals with the evacuation of the British Expiditionary Force from France in 1940, after a disastrous British and French campaign to defeat the German Army on Frnech soil, initiated by the former's declaration of war on the latter eight months previously. The British and French Armies (plus others like the Belgians) proved unable to deal with the Germans as they steamrolled through France in just six weeks. Something that proved impossible to do in the whole of WWI.
None of that history is really needed to enjoy the film although I feel, like with most war films, a certain understanding is useful (if somewhat unnecessary) to flesh out the events on the screen. But all one needs to know here is that the Allies have been defeated and the British are looking for a way out. The miles and miles of beaches at Dunkirk fortuitously proved to be it.
Chirstopher Nolan's film does extremely well to capture the dejected spirits of the men as they trickle down through the beachfront property to the sandy shoreline and form orderly (and terribly British) queues, while they patiently wait for a transport (any transport) to arrive and take them back to Blighty. The images of these queues are matched by period photographs and that attentiveness is what makes 'Dunkirk' a great success, at least the in the "Mole" section of the film, which is one of three timelines that the story is split across. The Mole (another name for a pier) takes place over the course of the week, whereas The Air is over one hour and The Sea is a day's journey. All sections are intertwined in a back and forth timeline, with the The Air being the weakest contribution.
The Mole unfolds largely from the viewpoint of a British soldier, an unnamed private, ably handled by Harry Styles (A singer from boy band One Direction, who I was blissfully unaware of). Styles does well to capture the fear, confusion, dread and humiliation of the average "Tommy" in a largely "dialogue-less" role. Something that isn't easy to do. He acts as our eyes as he passively observes the situations and people who make up the souls trying to escape the portion of the beach he finds himself on. The Mole is the meat of the film upon which the other two sections are hung and contains the more harrowing of scenes. These are chilling scenes of men drowning in steel hulls as the ship they're stranded on becomes their horribly echoey tomb.
The Sea deals with the "little armada" of civilian boats that was requisitioned by the Royal Navy, because they didn't want to commit the bulk of the Navy to rescure mission. It focuses on pleasure boater, Mr. Dawson, his son Peter and his friend George, who take it upon themselves to head to Dunkirk to see if they can aid the evacuation. This is based on true accounts of hundreds of boat owners who sailed south in the last days of May 1940 in an admirable, if foolhardy, crusade of sorts. Mild mannered Mr. Dawson is very well played by Mark Rylance who's understated performance contrasts with the horrors unfolding in the water around his little boat.
The Air focuses on a Spitfire sortie across the channel and their task to deal with the Luftwaffe attacks on the evacuation effort. Tom Hardy is second in a vic of three, lead vocally by Michael Caine. This section is laudable for its use of period aircraft, in the case of the Spitfire MkI and does well to get a post war Spanish made Buchon into the air to act as a Bf109E. Elsewhere there's also a post war Spanish Heinkel playing its part as a target for Hardy's far too good pilot. It's Hardy's unrealistic ability to destroy everything with a Balkenkreuz on it that forms the only real mis-step in the film. Also on a bad note is the film's portrayal of the Germans, who act as suicidal maniacs. While the film went to great lengths to get details correct, it's depiction of Luftwaffe tactics is a mess. 109's linger in turning fights with Spitfires and the film's only German bomber goes around on a bombing run, practically offering themselves as targets. Anyone who's familiar with the air war in WWII will be rolling their eyes, which is a shame because the filmmakers get so much correct elsewhere.
However, the above criticisms will only be spotted by a handful of people and while it knocks points off, it doesn't destroy the film altogether. It's still hard not to be disapointed about Hardy's "Greatest Spitfire Pilot of all Time" caricature.
Another criticism would be the lack of use of CGI to augment to air battles. Although some CGI was used to enhance the Stuka remote control models. While I believe Nolan's refusal to do a sweeping vista of a beach full of humdreds of thousands of men was a wise one (as there were never that number on any of the beaches at one time), the limited air war feels extremely anemic. It's correct that the Luftwaffe confined its attacks to mere pin prick harrasment, in lieu of an all out attempt to destroy the BEF, but it's doubtful that any Heinkel crew would be flying into enemy territory alone as is depicted in the film. Those scenes are, of course, victims of the lack of physically available aircraft. But, they could easilly have been fleshed out with computer generated ones to inject a bit more realism. I believe there could have been a ballance attempted, instead of a flat out refusal.
Elsewhere, Nolan correctly refuses to make the film reliant on an "characters". The fact of the matter being that in real military units, the men rarely got to know one another very well. Men were transfered in and out of units, killed, wounded and captured, that you tended not to know anybody for too long. It would have been a mistake to make the film a squad based cliche with the accompanying Screen Writing 101 "characters", that so many war films do. While this can be troublesome for some viewers, I found it to be another feather in its cap. A cap which possesses quite a large number of feathers, it has to be said. Another of which is Hans Zimmer's spectacular, yet wholly unassuming score. Almost totally devoid of bombast, it's low bass pounding does wonders to increase the sense of dread and tension of the scenes unfolding on the screen. It's an expert example of what a cinematic score should do. It aids the film, without overwhelming it. In one or two places, it swells to unconvincing heights, such as its pinching of Elgar's 'Nimrod', as Hardy lands his out of fuel Spitfre on the beach. But, 99% of the time it aural support is absolutely bang on.
Despite its shortcomings, 'Dunkirk' is a war film that will largely please people who have studied the war, as I have for more years than I'll mention here. It's emotional, without being forced. It's horrifying in places, without being obsessed about it. It's reasonably factual, without being dull. For me, it joins a small number of war films that can be called great and Christopher Nolan et al deserve all the praise they get.
8/10
|
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam. [click for more]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by EvilNed
Bookmarks