Hey everyone, I got to interview Christopher Nolan last week. I'm a big fan of his movies, and the way he usually uses time and structure in them, and because Dunkirk has a fairly unique approach I thought it would be interesting to hear more about why he approached the subject matter in that way and what effect he wished to create. I only got five minutes or so, but I think his answer is still pretty interesting. - Krupa
Your video, presumably. Good for you. He’s quite used to answering questions about his decisions. Comes in handy with the studios. But why is his uniqueness so rare? I wish he had a *little* competition.
Even his weaker films are still really good. I consider Interstellar and TDKR to be one his lower tier works, but those are still very solid movies in my mind.
Yesid Jaimes Interstellar for me is a little emotionally convoluted. The movie for me fails to have a consistently realistic characters and that whole love thing with Anne Hathaway was terrible. Still a solid though.
Alot people don´t like Interstellar but it´s one of my favourite movies of all time. It´s a bit more depressing than i would have liked but near the end and that ending it´s just... But i can see why people don´t like it as much.
I like movie genius like this man, not something any person can just do. Wow these guys can really bring the glory out of a movie, remarkable. These guys are astonishing.
The reason why I feel Dunkirk is so bloody brilliant , is that even if you do not understand the timelines and how they are related, you would still enjoy it as much if you assume the movie proceeds in a linear way. The brilliance of Inception and Interstellar still there, just subtle this time as its a war movie!
Saw this movie on IMAX... and I have to say that this is a cinematic masterpiece! I was unfortunate not to experience Interstellar in the cinema, which i still regret till this day, but I cant think of any other movie that would have me glued to my chair the entire time like Dunkirk did. The visuals made it seem like you were right there within the action.
This is the only movie of this man that I just couldn't get into. It did have a beautiful ending though. I am sure it is a great movie, but sonething didn't click for me personally. All that said, I still believe in Nolan and am crazy excited for whatever he does next.
Christopher Nolan's weakest movie. Is The Dark Knight Rises. And I still think that's a fantastic film. Just shows you how brilliant this guy is at making movies.
Funny thing is I think that one made the most money in the first weekend out of all of his films. Also, that one has a much higher rating than most of his movies on IMDb lol. It's one of his best
Kate Ground usually the aircraft are just all cgi in modern films, its plainly obvious and annoying. But there is the risk of damaging the few that are left irl
Kate Ground It isn't true actually... They used two large scale radio controlled replicas to film the crash scenes. Apart from that, the aerial cinematography used authentic aircraft.
agreed, watched in 4dx which i thought would be a bit of a gimmick....but to see such a spectacle and with the effects, was outstanding, the dogfighting was intense
What next would Christopher Nolan be doing? IMO a. a drama like there will be blood b. A psychological/horror movie c. james bond movie (which i dont think he should do) d. Continuation with THE SPACE ODYSSEY, probably 2061 or 3001 by Arthur Clarke e. a sci-fi philosophical movie, probably like stalker.
what did ign think of dunkirk? well since the camera cannot be controlled and there is no ai as for trico, itll probably score as a masterpiece like last guardian should have.
I get what Nolan is trying to do with the three timeline telling three different stories, but in my humble opinion it's not executed well enough in the film itself. The most glaring example being during the scene of 'The Mole' segment that took place during night time, intercutting with 'The Sea' and 'The Air' segments that both take place during day time. Granted, Nolan had to tell all three stories all at once in order for all three of them to be equally developed, but the numerous transitions between the three time periods is (again, in my opinion) hurting the pace of the film. One minute we're focusing on the plight of the soldiers on the beach, the next we're back to the family on the boat, and the next we're up there with the pilots. I feel like the movie should've just focus on only one out of the three segments, or at least just two of them, not all three at the same time. Yes, Nolan is probably the best person around when it comes to using 'Time' as a main theme. Most of his movies have characters all race agaisnt time. But I personally think he pulled off the theme better in his previous movies. Take Inception, for example. It too has many scenes that take place between different time periods when characters are inside the dreams, but in that movie, we're following the same story, from one group's POV. Interstellar take place in two time periods between Cooper's space segment, and his daughter's Earth segment, but the two periods have transitions that are done well enough for it not to detract from the film's pacing. For me, Dunkirk has not done that well enough. That being said, almost everything else in the film is top-notch. Nolan is the master of creating suspense in his scenes. Hans Zimmer's music also helps this magnificently, and the visuals are stunning as always. The only problem I have is the film's structure as I mentioned. Dunkirk is a very well done film, but in my opinion it's not his best work.
The focus is good, I agree. All three stories received equal focus and development, but it comes from the confusing transitions that I have a problem with. They cut back and forth between the three stories that take place in three different time, and I sometimes have trouble figuring out which exact time the stories are concurrent with each other. Maybe that's a problem on my path, but yeah, the film could've use better transitions. :) I usually have no trouble following previous Nolan films, but somehow the editing in this one confused the heck out of me lol.
I was about to mention the way time was depicted here, and yes, unlike Interstellar where it was understandable, as well as Inception, although being ambiguous on almost every level. I even went on to think there was some kind of solstice or something just to keep myself focused on the story. but i try to see if the entire time structure is something they deliberately went through when doing the cinematography and editing because it has to say something as to what Nolan has done based on his previous films.
Totes1829 I thought I was the only one that didnt enjoy this movie like everyone else. Not that great espically after watching hacksaw ridge the night before.
I agree with y'all, I thought it was spectacular from a visual standpoint. At time I was genuinely terrified at the the he depicted war. However, I was never really drawn in until the very end and I don't think that justified watching the previous hour and fifteen minutes.
I get where he is coming from on why he wanted to structure the film this way, but at the same time, it was very jarring while watching it. I feel like it's a better movie the second time around once you know how the story is told, because on my first viewing I just felt like the movie was all over the place and unfocused. I did enjoy it however, and I'm forgiving on it's messy structure considering it was going for a different type of movie, but it still hindered my enjoyment of it upon first viewing.
THIS MOVIE WAS AMAZING. Honestly, Nolan should start a series with this movie, he could make one of The Battle of Britain, Pearl Harbor, D-Day! That'd be awesome. The suspense of this movie was too real and I was always on edge. Great, great film.
I feel I'm really in the minority, I liked Dunkirk enough to say it was decent, but I really felt like Nolan failed to devolp any characters in this movie. They are all blank slates. I understand they just needed to be perspectives, but I felt little to no compassion for any of these people in this film, and the suspense wasn't as high because of that.
In that department, you're in the majority. However that was not his intent. He wanted to put you in the war and see yourself on that beach. You're surrounded by people you've never known and you don't know what to think of them, just like war itself.
The fact that you said "Nolan failed to develop any characters in this movie" proves that you haven't understand the movie at all. The whole event is the character. The movie tries to show you the Operation not through the individual's POV. It shows you how it felt in real time, when no one understands what the hell is happening and it's full of chaos. It's the exact opposite of films like 1917, which is also a masterpiece.
I watched this movie yesterday. Slow, tedious, way overrated and sadly ignoring the most intriguing part of this episode of ww2: why the germans didn't massacre the allied army. If you're looking for large scale recreation of battles, emotional acting or a deep, complex script... go look elsewhere. Soundtrack is way behind the best scores from Zimmer. Photography is good tho.
I've seen every Nolan movie and I never understood the hype for this guy. Watched Dunkirk last night and I'm being generous giving it a 7/10. I look back at most of his movies and they are so inconsistent in quality and story and I notice amateur mistakes in a lot of them and I wonder how most people don't pick up on them. I don't get why some people ride this guys nuts so hard. Because he resurrected the Batman franchise? I don't know... 🤔🤔🤔
He always uses the first take because film is very expensive Also, he doesn't like to use green screens. There were no green screens used in interstellar/dunkirk. Also, he doesn't like to use CGI that much. The men on the beaches that were furthest away were actually paper cutouts of people lol. And he shoots his movies with the highest quality cameras in the world. He put an IMAX film camera in the cockpit of a spitfire. The hype is from everyone who knows how he makes his films
Honestly as a 16 year old male i saw this movie and did not enjoy it, the storyline and explanation was almost nonexistent and there was rarely any entertaining action, me and my friend both were confused and bored very quickly
One of the worst movies i have ever seen in my life. I saw i yesterday. Its all shooting and killing random people. Yes "random" because you don feel with the characters since the move don't focus on characters. Sure i get that the "event is the character" and not the individuals but clearly its not working. Boring movie as hell. I saw it just because its a Nolan movie (like most of us) and regret it. I surely hope this kind of movie won't be a "thing" and everyone makes it like this :) Oh, and the music? Where was the music in the movie? I love Zimmermans music. There were barely any music at all only shooting sound from the guns and some sound to build tension just before the shooting "thing".
Yeah, it was a very different film for Nolan - and I respect him for branching out. But some of the pacing and editing was a little awkward. I think people just excuse it because it's Nolan. But I still think he's one of the greatest, and I look forward to his next film.
Is because we not used to saw a very realistic film that doesnt have time to tell every character background story, dunkirk is a masterpiece and this is the war film that ive been looking my entire life
Erwann Guitton They said that they aren't making the soundtrack to be heard by the people, but that they are making the soundtrack for the moments in the movie. They are meant to be played during the scene to add tension. That means that they are CREATED for the scene's tension and intensity and not to please the ears of people. It's to add effect. That means that the soundtrack wouldnt be made to be listened to, and thus it won't be made to be better than others
its a war movie.....all war movies are survival movies.....this is a great war movie.....ive never seen any other that made me feel so in touch with what it must have been like every day of ww2
+Sandhy Basta I think it is a war movie but it's not the fake type of war movies we're used to seeing where one connects with a character, there's body parts all around and what not. I thought it was great for what it was.
Brits and baguettes running for life. Story is just not for movie. Every ship from UK came down to pickup army. Woow. There are better battles not yet put on movie screen
Hey everyone,
I got to interview Christopher Nolan last week. I'm a big fan of his movies, and the way he usually uses time and structure in them, and because Dunkirk has a fairly unique approach I thought it would be interesting to hear more about why he approached the subject matter in that way and what effect he wished to create.
I only got five minutes or so, but I think his answer is still pretty interesting.
- Krupa
Me too, its cool you got to meet him, Krupa. hope you guys are doing ok :)
Excellent question! Great job Krupa. Really interesting.
Your video, presumably. Good for you. He’s quite used to answering questions about his decisions. Comes in handy with the studios. But why is his uniqueness so rare? I wish he had a *little* competition.
Saw this movie yesterday. What a masterpiece of film-making!
Shaunak Deshpande yeah I saw it in IMAX best movie and sad
Shaunak Deshpande yep
Rahim Sharif Prestige , Memento
Mohamed Nasri written by Jonathan
1. One week
2. One day
3. One hour
KEP what?
you will understand when you watch the film
Yeah. You'll understand it. I seen it last night. Very intense and Harry Styles did an amazing job and had the most dramatic scenes. He was amazing
Melissa Webster yeah I expected him to be good but he really exceeded my expectations. He should really consider acting more
1. Land
2. Sea
3. Air
Does this man ever make a bad movie? Good movie after good movie after great movie after masterpiece after great movie. What a genius.
Even his weaker films are still really good. I consider Interstellar and TDKR to be one his lower tier works, but those are still very solid movies in my mind.
Not all his films are amazing every director has a few not so good films,he's had a pretty good track record so far though
Yesid Jaimes Interstellar for me is a little emotionally convoluted. The movie for me fails to have a consistently realistic characters and that whole love thing with Anne Hathaway was terrible. Still a solid though.
Alot people don´t like Interstellar but it´s one of my favourite movies of all time. It´s a bit more depressing than i would have liked but near the end and that ending it´s just... But i can see why people don´t like it as much.
Of course. I was just generalizing to mention what a genius he is. Not alot of directors have such a good filmography.
One of the best directors of this generation. Love all of this masterpieces!
PSVR World Mmmm... Debatable.
Very much so in film. Everyone has different tastes.
I don't even think he's a top 5 director working today. Just my opinion though.
And I'd say he's the best director ever, different tastes.
Eddie Cardwell everyone has different tastes he is one of my all time favourite directors.
Does anyone like the type of trench coat outfits they wore back then?
Dunkirk was captivating from start to finish. Cannot recommend it enough.
L B why was it hard to watch or something?
Harrison Burke no he means he cant recommend it enough times so basicall he means its good
the Bandit omg I read that wrong! 😂
Harrison Burke same I thought it said can't recommend it 'though'
Hugh Jass what the hell me too
I like movie genius like this man, not something any person can just do. Wow these guys can really bring the glory out of a movie, remarkable. These guys are astonishing.
My favourite director. What a genius
The reason why I feel Dunkirk is so bloody brilliant , is that even if you do not understand the timelines and how they are related, you would still enjoy it as much if you assume the movie proceeds in a linear way. The brilliance of Inception and Interstellar still there, just subtle this time as its a war movie!
Saw this movie on IMAX... and I have to say that this is a cinematic masterpiece! I was unfortunate not to experience Interstellar in the cinema, which i still regret till this day, but I cant think of any other movie that would have me glued to my chair the entire time like Dunkirk did. The visuals made it seem like you were right there within the action.
The greatest director working today, not one single bad film and Dunkirk was simply amazing and my favourite of his, an extraordinary masterpiece
Krupa is the best interviewer and reviewer. He asks the best questions. IGN let him to do all movie reviews!!
This is the only movie of this man that I just couldn't get into. It did have a beautiful ending though. I am sure it is a great movie, but sonething didn't click for me personally. All that said, I still believe in Nolan and am crazy excited for whatever he does next.
Christopher Nolan's weakest movie. Is The Dark Knight Rises. And I still think that's a fantastic film. Just shows you how brilliant this guy is at making movies.
Funny thing is I think that one made the most money in the first weekend out of all of his films. Also, that one has a much higher rating than most of his movies on IMDb lol. It's one of his best
@@Mistygio true
This will have the best ww2 dogfighting since battle of Britain back in 1969, shows how far in between good war films are
Only issue is they crashed and destroyed a ww2 aircraft during filming and there are not many of its type flying still
Kate Ground usually the aircraft are just all cgi in modern films, its plainly obvious and annoying. But there is the risk of damaging the few that are left irl
Kate Ground It isn't true actually... They used two large scale radio controlled replicas to film the crash scenes. Apart from that, the aerial cinematography used authentic aircraft.
Nolan used Michael Caine's voice as the Spitfire flight leader and Caine was a Spitfire squadron leader in Battle of Britain
agreed, watched in 4dx which i thought would be a bit of a gimmick....but to see such a spectacle and with the effects, was outstanding, the dogfighting was intense
What next would Christopher Nolan be doing? IMO
a. a drama like there will be blood
b. A psychological/horror movie
c. james bond movie (which i dont think he should do)
d. Continuation with THE SPACE ODYSSEY, probably 2061 or 3001 by Arthur Clarke
e. a sci-fi philosophical movie, probably like stalker.
One of the best movies of this year
I loved the intensity of the music
VISIONARY!!!! nuff said
Nolan the 🐐
In nolan i trust also jj abrams and matt reeves
0:31 Chris said “generals in rooms pushing things around on maps.” Subtitles didn’t work for me.
Good angle of questioning, five minutes well-spent.
what did ign think of dunkirk? well since the camera cannot be controlled and there is no ai as for trico, itll probably score as a masterpiece like last guardian should have.
Best movie I've seen this year bar none !!!!
Legend has it that to this date he is still trying to go poop
I watched this movie yesterday. And i'm so scared in every scene..
christopher nolan is the ultimate director
Very refreshing to find a director like Nolan who doesn't treat the audience like Idiots like Michael Bay.
Watched this last night on imax and it really is something special. Fantastic film, Nolan is a genius,
It's a masterpiece 🙏
I'm very happy to have used my $ towards this masterpiece of art and cinema
Constantly innovating cinema is wearing Nolan out!!!
I get what Nolan is trying to do with the three timeline telling three different stories, but in my humble opinion it's not executed well enough in the film itself. The most glaring example being during the scene of 'The Mole' segment that took place during night time, intercutting with 'The Sea' and 'The Air' segments that both take place during day time. Granted, Nolan had to tell all three stories all at once in order for all three of them to be equally developed, but the numerous transitions between the three time periods is (again, in my opinion) hurting the pace of the film. One minute we're focusing on the plight of the soldiers on the beach, the next we're back to the family on the boat, and the next we're up there with the pilots. I feel like the movie should've just focus on only one out of the three segments, or at least just two of them, not all three at the same time.
Yes, Nolan is probably the best person around when it comes to using 'Time' as a main theme. Most of his movies have characters all race agaisnt time. But I personally think he pulled off the theme better in his previous movies. Take Inception, for example. It too has many scenes that take place between different time periods when characters are inside the dreams, but in that movie, we're following the same story, from one group's POV. Interstellar take place in two time periods between Cooper's space segment, and his daughter's Earth segment, but the two periods have transitions that are done well enough for it not to detract from the film's pacing. For me, Dunkirk has not done that well enough.
That being said, almost everything else in the film is top-notch. Nolan is the master of creating suspense in his scenes. Hans Zimmer's music also helps this magnificently, and the visuals are stunning as always. The only problem I have is the film's structure as I mentioned. Dunkirk is a very well done film, but in my opinion it's not his best work.
Willy2537 I thought the focus on the three was brilliant xD But that's my opinion
The focus is good, I agree. All three stories received equal focus and development, but it comes from the confusing transitions that I have a problem with. They cut back and forth between the three stories that take place in three different time, and I sometimes have trouble figuring out which exact time the stories are concurrent with each other. Maybe that's a problem on my path, but yeah, the film could've use better transitions. :)
I usually have no trouble following previous Nolan films, but somehow the editing in this one confused the heck out of me lol.
I like the three stories combined a lot in my opinion. However I agree it wasn't his best film. Dark Knight is still #1 on my list.
Willy2537 100% agree.
I was about to mention the way time was depicted here, and yes, unlike Interstellar where it was understandable, as well as Inception, although being ambiguous on almost every level. I even went on to think there was some kind of solstice or something just to keep myself focused on the story. but i try to see if the entire time structure is something they deliberately went through when doing the cinematography and editing because it has to say something as to what Nolan has done based on his previous films.
I didn't even understand most of the movie, why did hardy burn his plain at the end?
to keep the germans from capturing and using it
j c couldn't he refule it later?
@@uditvyas1 Where?
I love Chris Nolan. But I'll be honest this film didn't wow me like I thought it would. Still very good just not incredible.
Totes1829 I thought I was the only one that didnt enjoy this movie like everyone else. Not that great espically after watching hacksaw ridge the night before.
I agree with y'all, I thought it was spectacular from a visual standpoint. At time I was genuinely terrified at the the he depicted war. However, I was never really drawn in until the very end and I don't think that justified watching the previous hour and fifteen minutes.
my wife fell asleep! this movie is very overrated I was disappointed by dunkirk👎
You didn't see it in 70mm IMAX did you
its a visual and sound movie. no character development and twist. Inception still nolan's best
Watching this tomorrow 😃😃😃
partycool02 why?
If you don't like Dunkirk then watch Adam Sandler
Masterpiece
How much people watched it hmm please tell me and how is it
I get where he is coming from on why he wanted to structure the film this way, but at the same time, it was very jarring while watching it. I feel like it's a better movie the second time around once you know how the story is told, because on my first viewing I just felt like the movie was all over the place and unfocused. I did enjoy it however, and I'm forgiving on it's messy structure considering it was going for a different type of movie, but it still hindered my enjoyment of it upon first viewing.
ed1rko17 Exactly how I feel word for word
THIS MOVIE WAS AMAZING. Honestly, Nolan should start a series with this movie, he could make one of The Battle of Britain, Pearl Harbor, D-Day! That'd be awesome. The suspense of this movie was too real and I was always on edge. Great, great film.
"Spitfire pilot has about an hour of flying time"
Spitfires have a flying time of over 5 hours.
Not what he meant
movie will gonna Oscar !
I thought it was boring
insanedrummer89 ...
Christopher Nolan looks like Tarantino in the thumbnail
Good movie, not a big fan of its bgm.
I feel pitty for the people who dont like this masterpiece
I feel I'm really in the minority, I liked Dunkirk enough to say it was decent, but I really felt like Nolan failed to devolp any characters in this movie. They are all blank slates. I understand they just needed to be perspectives, but I felt little to no compassion for any of these people in this film, and the suspense wasn't as high because of that.
In that department, you're in the majority. However that was not his intent. He wanted to put you in the war and see yourself on that beach. You're surrounded by people you've never known and you don't know what to think of them, just like war itself.
77winkster character development was obviously not the focal point of this movie
The fact that you said "Nolan failed to develop any characters in this movie" proves that you haven't understand the movie at all. The whole event is the character. The movie tries to show you the Operation not through the individual's POV. It shows you how it felt in real time, when no one understands what the hell is happening and it's full of chaos. It's the exact opposite of films like 1917, which is also a masterpiece.
It's unique for people who only watch braindead superhero movies
Salty troll is salty
HrTjernobyl yup
What's your favorite film? Monsters Inc?
For people who watch superhero movies, this is their 4th Nolan movie
True
I watched this movie yesterday. Slow, tedious, way overrated and sadly ignoring the most intriguing part of this episode of ww2: why the germans didn't massacre the allied army. If you're looking for large scale recreation of battles, emotional acting or a deep, complex script... go look elsewhere. Soundtrack is way behind the best scores from Zimmer. Photography is good tho.
Haha cool
one of the worst movies I have ever seen
Nope
Jesus Christ in filmmaking
You don't watch a lot of film do ya? 😋
I've seen every Nolan movie and I never understood the hype for this guy. Watched Dunkirk last night and I'm being generous giving it a 7/10.
I look back at most of his movies and they are so inconsistent in quality and story and I notice amateur mistakes in a lot of them and I wonder how most people don't pick up on them. I don't get why some people ride this guys nuts so hard. Because he resurrected the Batman franchise? I don't know... 🤔🤔🤔
SenorPredo - 70 here where I live is a C.
He always uses the first take because film is very expensive
Also, he doesn't like to use green screens. There were no green screens used in interstellar/dunkirk.
Also, he doesn't like to use CGI that much. The men on the beaches that were furthest away were actually paper cutouts of people lol. And he shoots his movies with the highest quality cameras in the world.
He put an IMAX film camera in the cockpit of a spitfire.
The hype is from everyone who knows how he makes his films
Gio Galvez actually, pretty sure green screens were used in Interstellar for some of the landing craft sequences.
What were some of the amateur mistakes you noticed?
Honestly as a 16 year old male i saw this movie and did not enjoy it, the storyline and explanation was almost nonexistent and there was rarely any entertaining action, me and my friend both were confused and bored very quickly
Jack McF Typical
One of the worst movies i have ever seen in my life. I saw i yesterday. Its all shooting and killing random people. Yes "random" because you don feel with the characters since the move don't focus on characters. Sure i get that the "event is the character" and not the individuals but clearly its not working. Boring movie as hell. I saw it just because its a Nolan movie (like most of us) and regret it. I surely hope this kind of movie won't be a "thing" and everyone makes it like this :)
Oh, and the music? Where was the music in the movie? I love Zimmermans music. There were barely any music at all only shooting sound from the guns and some sound to build tension just before the shooting "thing".
Nolan>Spielberg
Always been a fan of Nolan.
But I gotta say that I do not like Dunkirk :/
same here
The first film for Christopher Nolan that I found it kinda meh
shadowstorm 313 I agree. Add to that the sound/score to the movie was incredibly loud. I could hardly understand what people were saying.
Agreed. I think once the hype dies down, people will realize that. It was just a little sloppy, but still a good film. Just not a Nolan level of good.
+Stephen Z. Ridley like I can watch Inception multiple times and never get bored but Dunkirk worth watching once maybe twice.
Yeah, it was a very different film for Nolan - and I respect him for branching out. But some of the pacing and editing was a little awkward. I think people just excuse it because it's Nolan. But I still think he's one of the greatest, and I look forward to his next film.
Is because we not used to saw a very realistic film that doesnt have time to tell every character background story, dunkirk is a masterpiece and this is the war film that ive been looking my entire life
The music was bad for a Zimmer track.
Erwann Guitton They said that they aren't making the soundtrack to be heard by the people, but that they are making the soundtrack for the moments in the movie. They are meant to be played during the scene to add tension. That means that they are CREATED for the scene's tension and intensity and not to please the ears of people. It's to add effect. That means that the soundtrack wouldnt be made to be listened to, and thus it won't be made to be better than others
Wrong
good movie but not so good war movie
Sandhy Basta it's not a war movie. It's a survival movie.
dedsec -/ yeah but people keep telling me is a war movie and that insane
its a war movie.....all war movies are survival movies.....this is a great war movie.....ive never seen any other that made me feel so in touch with what it must have been like every day of ww2
To the contrary, this is action 24/7 but it's just done incredibly.
+Sandhy Basta I think it is a war movie but it's not the fake type of war movies we're used to seeing where one connects with a character, there's body parts all around and what not. I thought it was great for what it was.
First
Dominc Chew fail
Yass
overrated
this movie is about sound and visual but does not transcend anything so yeah overrated big time. Nolan is overrated as well.
Brits and baguettes running for life. Story is just not for movie. Every ship from UK came down to pickup army. Woow. There are better battles not yet put on movie screen
Rusty Dogghammer The evacuation saved the world from Naziism.
Thomas Eastmond No, America did.
Third
DONT WATCH THIS MOVIE
*watch this movie (Comment has been corrected)
God I love the Spitfire its such a beautiful aircraft cannot wait to go see this Nolan is one of if not the best so sure he will do Dunkirk justice