Today’s quick review: Dunkirk. As the British army prepares to evacuate from Dunkirk in World War II, a pair of British soldiers struggle to get off the beach and into a rescue ship. Meanwhile, a civilian boat with a small crew sets sail from England to help with the evacuation. And in the skies overhead, a trio of fighter pilots attempt to fend off the German bombers long enough for the ships to get clear.
Dunkirk is a war movie from writer and director Christopher Nolan. Dunkirk depicts one of the crucial battles of World War II, in which hundreds of thousands of allied British and French troops raced to evacuate from Dunkirk to avoid being overrun by the German army. The movie offers a tense, visceral look at the events of the battle from three perspectives. Dunkirk’s craftsmanship and sense of scale make it a very strong film.
Dunkirk takes an unconventional approach to storytelling. The three plot threads each start at different points in time and proceed from there. The stories progress at different rates, and they eventually reach a point where they overlap, showing the same events from different perspectives. This conceit can make the movie confusing to watch, but it leads to some interesting payoff as details from the first pass through a scene become important when it is revisited.
Dunkirk’s other attributes also separate it from both typical war movies and Christopher Nolan’s other work. Unlike Inception or The Dark Knight, Dunkirk has no intricate, orchestrated plot to chew on. Instead, the complexity comes from a myriad of smaller events that fit together in subtle ways. The mystery of the movie lies in its storytelling and in the chaos of the events it depicts, not in complicated schemes or revelations.
Unusually for a war movie, Dunkirk is a very reactive film. The movie captures a pivotal retreat rather than a bold advance, and the action takes place away from the main fighting. The only main characters in the film who get to fight back are the fighter pilots; the rest must do the best they can in the face of bombs, torpedoes, and enemy fire. As such, Dunkirk’s focus is on a different kind of heroism: survival and courage in the face of terrible odds.
In spite of the one-sided nature of the battle, Dunkirk makes for an effective action movie. The dogfights are impressive and thrilling without feeling artificial. The soldiers’ attempts to escape the beach are consistently tense and unpredictable. Danger arrives without warning or hesitation, dashing hopes with brutal efficiency. As a result, the film’s victories are hard-won and meaningful, even when helped along by chance.
For all its strengths, Dunkirk has a few drawbacks that may dampen some viewers’ experiences. The chief drawback is that the film can be difficult to watch. The nonlinear storytelling takes effort to follow, and the problem is exacerbated by characters who look similar, are rarely named, and occupy crowded environments. The constant tension, the noise of battle, and the organic plot also may not appeal to everyone.
Watch Dunkirk if you are a fan of well-crafted movies. Its action, historical setting, and craftsmanship are enough to make Dunkirk a worthwhile watch even for those who are not normally fans of war movies. However, those who are expecting either a Christopher Nolan plot or a gung ho action movie may want to give it a pass. Skip it if you are uncomfortable with life-or-death situations or loud noises.
8.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for tense action, unconventional storytelling, and a masterful tone.