Dunkirk Review

     The talent pool of cinema's current directors is something to be admired. Some of the greatest filmmakers to ever live are out there right now making movies. Wes Anderson, Jeff Nichols, Kathryn Bigelow, Richard Linklater, and Denis Villeneuve just to name a few; but if you were to ask every cinefile in the world who the best director currently working is, I feel like Christopher Nolan would get the most votes. The British director Nolan made his directorial debut in 1998 with the well received "Following." But Nolan first made waves with the critically acclaimed "Memento" in 2000, which would go on to be called one of the best films of the decade by many media outlets. And in 2008 he became the director to watch with "The Dark Knight," which is widely considered to be the best comic book movie of all time. And with 2010's mind bending sci-fi thriller "Inception," he became a film legend. Since then Nolan hasn't been at his best, with the often criticized (but still praised) "The Dark Knight Rises" and "Interstellar;" but when it was announced that Nolan would be making a film about one of the most important moments of World War 2, I was immediately interested. "Dunkirk" is like no movie Nolan has tackled before, and the result might be the finest film of his already illustrious career.

     The Battle and Evacuation of Dunkirk was a British military operation that took place May 26- June 4, 1940. With several hundred thousand British soldiers trapped on the French beach with German soldiers moving in, all hope seemed lost. With Germans controlling the air, land, and sea around Dunkirk, the UK had trouble sending in support out of fear of losing valuable resources. In a last ditch effort they recruit civilian boats to try and pick up the stranded. The film follows a few different storylines at the tail end of the evacuation, turning into one of the most thrilling war movies ever made.

     Since the very first reviews for this film were released, I heard more than a few critics call it a masterpiece and one of the best war movies of all time; so going into the theater I had high expectations, and they were vastly surpassed. "Dunkirk" is a cinematic triumph, and one of the most impressive films I've seen in years. A little over half way through 2017, and we may have finally found what will be the best film of the year. First off, all the credit in the world has to go to director Christopher Nolan. Nolan direction is powerful to say the least; he has complete control over every little thing and has an incredible eye for detail. The way he directs even makes the calm scenes tense and thrilling, and at no point during the entire run time was I anywhere close to bored. Nolan is the type of director who loves the classic, and you can see it with "Dunkirk." This movie feels very old-school, both in the approach and scope; reminiscent of films like "The Hateful Eight," "Dunkirk" feels like a love letter to movies of yesteryear; which is only solidified by Nolan's choice to primarily use practical effects, including thousands of extras and boats/planes that were at the Dunkirk Evacuation. One thing that may upset some when walking out of this movie is that it's not like the war movies we've seen in the past few years; it's not an action movie. One thing that I've never liked about war movies is that many dramatize and romanticize war, "Dunkirk" does not. While there are some thrilling air battles, this is a movie about war and not the battles. More recent war movies like "Lone Survivor," "American Sniper," and "Hacksaw Ridge" often took terrible situations, and turned them into action movies for only the sake of entertainment. But "Dunkirk" comes off as a respectful adaptation of one of the most terrifying moments of WW2. Nolan did a great job with script, being respectful, but being constantly exciting. And as with every Nolan movie, it is truly beautiful. The cinematography is stunning; and with the choice to film in 65 mm (projected on 70 mm film), Nolan captures some of the most beautiful scenes I've seen in years. And the last thing I'll gush about over Nolan is his use of silence and sound. Very little is said in this movie, other than the ambient noises it's mostly silent. Characters only speak when necessary, which is a brave choice on the film's part that I respect. Most movies feel the need to pad the silence, to have characters talk just for the sake of noise. Not in "Dunkirk," and I respect that. The only real issue I have with the film is the story; not so much the story itself, but how it tells it. The problem is that the film shows us several storylines, but they aren't happening at the same time. In doing so the plot is hard to follow at times, and it takes a bit for you to be able to put the pieces together. Despite this issue, it doesn't change my opinion on the movie. "Dunkirk" is something special, something exceptional. It is the type of picture that bridges the gap from blockbuster to tour de force. Coupled with stellar performances from the whole cast and a beautiful score from Hanz Zimmer, and you have the makings for the best movie of the year. "Dunkirk" is impressive, a rare cinematic treat; one that should be seen, and admired, in the theater. Even with so many great movies under his belt, "Dunkirk" may be Christopher Nolan's finest hour.

Pros: Powerful direction from Christopher Nolan, stellar performances from the entire cast, stunning cinematography, beautiful score from Hans Zimmer, incredibly tense and thrilling, never boring, respectful adaptation of real life event, well written screenplay, exceptional use of sound and silence, impressive practical effects and production design, exciting air battles, feels old-school.

Cons: Story can be hard to follow at times.

5/5 Stars