By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Critics and Moviegoers are so wrong about Dunkirk- Boring Snorefest that only keeps you awake because you expect a Nolan movie to be awesome- Sooo many spoilers!!!

Lawlight said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
"Did you love him in Mad Max when the director barely had him talk?"

Oh god, please tell me you're not one of *those* guys. The ones who complain because Mad Max isn't the main focus in a Mad Max movie?

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

not really. Mel Gibson was better than Hardy though



Around the Network
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Lawlight said:

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

not really. Mel Gibson was better than Hardy though

Yes, really. Mad Max is grunting ape who can't do much now apparently.



Lawlight said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

not really. Mel Gibson was better than Hardy though

Yes, really. Mad Max is grunting ape who can't do much now apparently.

Well, I think you're wrong, you think i'm wrong, so who's really wrong? 



It might be overrated but since there is nothing worth watching coming out in August it should have pretty good legs.



I loved it. I love more of the three overarching stories that come together in the end. The movie is called DUNKIRK, not Don at Dunkirk. The title IS the movie, and it's honestly the only time I've heard people complain about a movie giving what its title implies. I remember when people complained about the recent Godzilla movie because the story sucked and there was no Godzilla for most of the movie. Dunkirk is the only thing that is present in the movie called Dunkirk, giving characters a backseat to show the overall helplessness and problems with the situation at hand, relegating the story of Escaping Dunkirk through 3.5 mini stories, and of course, people complain there's no story to it and the characters sucked.

Dunkirk gives exactly what the history books implied, along with plenty of action. There are NO major people from the battle itself, so it's understandable there's no clear story of struggle. Each of the few people represent the many that fought. The soldiers showed the helpless individuals on the beach, willing to do anything to get back home (and who could blame them?). The three pilots represent the many in the Royal Air Force fighting against the Gerrys who were going to town on the helpless boats/servicemen. The generals showed they had no power over their men, and they were basically at the mercy of their own people. And the family represented the thousands of civilians willing to do anything to keep their home safe. It encapsulated perfectly what was probably the most Influential historical event in the past 100 years. If we lost, the world as we know it, would not exist.

It's more of a think about it movie, and after doing that, it is probably my 3rd favorite movie I've seen in theaters.



Around the Network
TH3-D0S3R said:
The three pilots represent the many in the Royal Air Force fighting against the Gerrys who were going to town on the helpless boats/servicemen.

I know the Germans harassed them during the battle but isn't it common knowledge that Germans held semi restraint.  Sure they were stretched thin, exhausted, etc... but they could have still went in there with the Panzers and probably wrecked shop.  Fact is they halted when perhaps they should have just pushed them into the sea before any rescue could have happened.  Basically the only reason why so many were able to flee was due to mistakes within the German high command.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-07-24/why-the-germans-blew-it-at-dunkirk



Hiku said:

From the trailers Dunkirk looks boring to me. I'm sure there will be interesting segments in it, but I don't think it's for everyone.
Yesterday I was in the mood for some mindless fun action, not a history documentary, so I watched this shitty Resident Evil film:


And I probably enjoyed it more than I would Dunkirk, even though I'd probably consider Dunkirk the better film.

Pretty random comparison! Though I haven't seen Vendetta myself, I watched one of them and I wasn't all that impressed.



http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=230563&page=1

Said it already in your topic



 

NNID : ShenlongDK
PSN : DarkLong213

I completely disagree. I thought it was fantastic. I saw it in IMAX, though, which makes a huge difference for a movie like this bc of the sound. Dunkirk was one of the most visceral experiences I've had from a movie, and a large part of that was due to the sound. In IMAX, the sound blew me away. I strongly recommend seeing this in IMAX if you're gonna see it.

My only 2 gripes were 1. the timeline created some confusion until u realized what was going on and 2. It was very difficult to hear the dialogue.



Not gonna judge till I see the movie, but not surprised at its reviews.

Critics absolutely adore and love Christopher Nolan and Tom Hardy.
Anything they make or star in is praised beyond recognition. Hell as you said, Tom Hardy doesn't even have to speak and he is given an Oscar in their minds. Reminds me of that chick that is playing Miss Marvel. The internet went crazy like she is the greatest actress in teh entire world. Only thing I've seen her in was Skull Island and she did nothing in that movie to stand out from any other actress.

So color me cautiously skeptical on this movie being a 96% or whatever high 90% it probably holds. Beyond Nolan and Hardy, from day 1 the movie screamed Oscar bait to me, and I never enjoy them.