Hi, it's nice to get back to having internet and going to the cinemas, after two weeks with neither in Wales, and because I'm lazy, the next meteor was never even put up, but I do need to do a movie review, to diversify my material, and hey, I saw Dunkirk again yesterday, so let's do that.
Dunkirk is a rare kind of film; it wastes no time at all in its introduction, putting you right there at Dunkirk, with the Germans picking off Brits in the streets and the Luftwaffe raining hell on the beach, it's a remarkably effective opening that sets the scene very nicely, as it establishes a sense of omnipresent tension, and one of abject terror, as the German dive bombers scream over the beach, having heard that siren sound in cartoons for my entire life, I didn't think it could be scary, until I saw this film, it's loud, it's frightening, and it's fantastic sound design. Speaking of fantastic sound, Hans Zimmer did the music for this film, naturally, and it's some of the best music I've ever heard from him, seriously, Dunkirk has some of the most effective music I've ever heard, in keeping with the film, it's loud, intense, and in Hans Zimmer fashion, it's epic. A genius touch is the ticking, which accompanies the film's most effective tracks, and is an incredibly subtle yet chilling way of building the tension, as time ticks by, and the enemy gets closer and closer, that ticking is more than a simple mechanical sound in Dunkirk, it's a constant, foreboding presence, a reminder of the impending doom hanging over Dunkirk. So it's got a great soundtrack and some scary dive bombers, but what else does Dunkirk have to offer, how about being pretty brutal for a 12A, because it is. It being a 12A, it's obviously no Saving Private Ryan or Hacksaw Ridge, in that there is no intense graphic imagery, Shit, Wonder Woman was more graphic than this in its depiction of World War 1. Where Dunkirk is every bit as brutal as a film like Hacksaw Ridge however is in the psychological aspect; as explored in the Sea story line with Cillian Murphy and Mark Rylance, and in the utter desperation of the soldiers in the Mole story line, as they try again and again to get off the beach. The film also never gives you a chance to relax, as the stories move at such a good pace, and the tension is never eased, leaving you constantly on edge for the next dive bombing or torpedo, it's literally an a hour and 40 minutes of non-stop anxiety, and despite wanting to scamper away and hide for that entire runtime, you don't want it to end either, because the film is so good at what it does. What else the film does well is tell its stories in a non conventional manner; with three stories, The Mole, taking place over a week, The Sea, taking place over a day, and The Air, taking place over an hour, these stories all weave into each other at several points, but are told non-linearly, as the film cuts from story to story, sometimes showing the same events from multiple perspectives, this could go really wrong, but in Dunkirk it doesn't, if you're paying attention, the narrative isn't hard to piece together, and that's all the film wants, because when you're paying attention, it can really let you have it with the anxiety, knowing it has your full attention, it feeds into the tension wonderfully. The three stories also vary in their atmosphere, with The Mole and The Sea feeding on foreboding and drama, while The Air is perhaps the most exciting story, giving us some excellent dogfights. Those dogfights however aren't fun, in fact the film treats them almost like games of chess, they're slow, but as the upper hand goes back and forth constantly, it's completely gripping, and the film isn't excessive, there are no big fiery explosions, explosions are meaty and powerful, when planes get taken out, far from becoming fire balls, they smoke and smoulder, slamming into the ocean with a concussive thud, it's beautiful stuff.
Adding to the beauty is that those planes are real; it's clear a lot of effort was taken to make Dunkirk as authentic as possible, and as such, for the production they used real boats, and for the dogfights, real planes, it's remarkable that so much effort was put into it really, when CG exists, but the film is so much better for it, as with the real boats and planes comes a realism that you simply can't get even with the best CG effects, it makes those dogfights so much more enjoyable because it's not fake. Where CG has been used, it's so well hidden that you can't see it over the real Spitfires, and the in air filming of Tom Hardy and Jack Lowden as those Spitfire's pilots, there's just an integrity to it that only a master director could achieve. The Dogfights are badass, and fortunately, the film has more badassery to offer, The Mole delivers the most intense scenes in the film, with the dive bombers over the beach, an oxygen depriving nightmare with a torpedo, and an arsehole clenching sequence in a grounded fishing boat, while The Sea ramps up the drama, as disaster hits a mariner and his son. There is however something I've seen a few people call a problem in this film, and that's characterisation. The apparent issue is that the film doesn't give any of its characters any significant development, and that much is true, but I don't think it's a flaw, and here's why. Something I adore is the film's opening, no build up at all, putting you right in the middle of it, to do character development before that would compromise the effectiveness of the opening, if The Mole's main guy first had a scene talking about a nice girl back home, or if he did at any point in the film, that would have dragged out the film, and Dunkirk, narrative and pacing wise, is bloody perfect, adding in an exposition scene to build a character would have slowed this film down. The same applies to the rest of the cast, if Tom Hardy was chatting about his life at home, would that really have been better than him taking down German fighters like he's Poe Dameron or something, especially when The Air is the most time sensitive story in the film. What characterisation the film does have is largely limited to The Sea, as we learn more about Mark Rylance's motivations for going to Dunkirk, and there's a great scene with Barry Keoghan talking about being in the paper. But Dunkirk knows what it's doing, it's not a film about any one or two people, it's a film about Dunkirk first and foremost, and that's where it commits itself; focusing on the event, the spectacle, rather than needlessly bogging itself down with character development when the characters are not the point. It reminds me of Godzilla in that respect, that film was criticised for a lack of Godzilla, when that was very much the intention, Dunkirk is a film about the event, rather than the characters, much as Godzilla was about the event more than it was about Ford Brody or Godzilla particularly. This sets Dunkirk apart from other films like it, it's not conventional; it tells multiple stories non-linearly, it's has very little character development, because rather than it being a story about a guy like Hacksaw Ridge for example, it's a story about an event, and it's a great story.
Dunkirk is special to me, yes the film's characters are weak, but I can look past that, I'm too busy being consumed by how good the rest of the film is. Dunkirk is beautiful, vicious, tense, and psychologically distressing, it has some of the best music and sound design I've ever heard, and some stunningly intense moments that get your heart racing like few other films can. Dunkirk is not as psychological or philosophical as some of Nolan's other films, but it doesn't need to be, it just needs to be what it is, which is one of the most anxious hour and 40 minutes I've ever experienced in a cinema, and like I said earlier, despite being on the edge of your seat the whole time, and the runtime being perfect, you don't want it to end, because it's so good. Dunkirk is one of my favourite films so far this year, and it's an absolute must watch.
No comments:
Post a Comment