A drawn out, pretentious, boring film? I think you just described most of Nolan's works. *knee slap*

I too thought it was boring. I think he was trying to be way too artsy and it just didn't work for me, but I know I'm in the minority. Also, first imax movie for me and I really couldn't tell a difference other than the screen was squar instead of rectangular.

Movie was great, crafted masterfully with one of th3 best use of time. Not sure how people are wrong for having an opinion....stupid thing to say really. 

From the sound of it, you either don't know history (the movie is about Dunkirk- are you sure you had the right expectations?) or you went in expecting a totally different genre of movie.

You realize that the Dunkirk evacuation was one of the early disasters in the war, and that the Germans suffered very few losses, right? The whole point of Dunkirk was to protect the 400,000 French and British soldiers left stranded after catastrophic strategic mistakes that allowed the Germans to surround them. This is not a story of victory, but of avoiding complete defeat. Apart from the 70,000 French who got slaughtered or captured, Britain was admirably able to save the vast majority of those soldiers - minus the equipment and artillery units left behind. Had these soldiers been caught, the war might have ended early with a German victory. All this well before USA even got involved in this war.

Furthermore, this review is offensive in its language. You are not a reviewer, nor a film critic. Stick to your day job, if you have one.

I think I was talking shit about having a PG-13 war movie these days in another thread about the direction the director wanted to go with it. It must be really toned down. The director was saying something he wanted to involve a story more than actual fighting. You can have a story and have blood and guts also.  Saving Private Ryan probably shits all over this movie.

If you're saying that someone else is wrong in their subjective opinion of whether they think a movie is good or not, doesn't really sound like you're just giving your personal opinion. It makes it seem like you are trying to establish an objective fact that this movie is bad.

For example, if I say I think the color blue is a attractive color, that is a personal opinion. If you say that you think blue is an unattractive color, that is an opinion. If you tell me that I'm wrong in thinking blue is an attractive color that seems like you are getting outside of the realm of opinion, but entering into facts. 

OP got Blitzkrieged... /thread.

It is definitely my least favorite Nolan film. It lacked depth, especially the characters. The beginning was a bit boring too. The very last ending shot was weird too.

But I kinda liked it after they went into the ship and wait for flood. The sound plus action shots were done beautifully.

7/10. Expected more from Nolan since he's my savior in these days full of superhero cross-over movies and 3D gimmicks. But overall not a bad movie.

Certainly no hurt locker, that was a bore fest.

Its wall to wall action, not a great deal of dialogue, very well filmed, the score is amazing (hans zimmer is amazing)... the only complaint I would have is that the music can be a bit too much (loud) at times...

Its one of the first movies I've ever seen where the music is literally from start to finish.

8/10. One of the best war movies for a long time, and felt like he had taken some pointers from Battle of Britain.

Legitimate complaint. A far cry from the Mel Gibson Mad Max.