Dunkirk - The thunder & terror of war on film

Christopher Nolan is arguably one of the most fascinating directors of recent history. An old fashioned die hard film enthusiast with a passion for practical and in-camera effects, along with a strong narrative emphasis on emotion vs duty, wherein stoic professionalism is the highest virtue ever and those who embody that are brought down by emotional response, he is the kind of director who really works well with specific material. Case in point, his greatest film "Inception", a story about dreams and the subconscious mind, not only serves as a wonderful show case for practical and in-camera effects, but also perfectly embodies Nolan's personal philosophy. Thus the film is not only perfectly entertaining but is also not afraid to be smart. By contrast, his film "Interstellar", a story about intergalactic travel and the notion of love being the most quantifiable force in the Universe, was way out of his comfort zone. Add on the fact that Nolan went so out of his way to avoid using digital effects that none of the planets visited in the film looked remotely interesting. Anyone who has seen "Interstellar" can immediately tell that it was originally and obviously meant for Steven Spielberg.

Now, this is not to say that Nolan is a one note director. It's just to say that his general style is really best served in specific kinds of stories that can range from any number of genres. Fortunately, his new film "Dunkirk" is right up there in his wheel house.

For those of you who may not be familiar with this specific part of history, "Dunkirk" is the story of a battle and evacuation that occurred during World War II. Allied forces consisting of British and French soldiers retreated to the shores of Dunkirk, a coast in northern France, to await rescue. The soldiers found themselves stranded on the Beach, As there were simply not enough ships to carry away the troops nor enough smaller boats to get close to the shore. Combine that with enemy soldiers closing in on the allies and enemy fighter planes bombing the shore as well as the rescue boats and it's no wonder why what happens next is considered one of the greatest events in World War II history. Because of the lack of available military boats, British civilians were called into action and asked to sail to Dunkirk in order to rescue the soldiers. This event rescued over 300,000 allied soldiers.

Nolan's take on the events is not only done with taste but also has some of his well crafted signatures on it. Another part of Nolan's signature style is his sense of time. Nolan likes to tell events in a story out of order, as best showcased in his first big film "Memento". Although, in that films case, it made sense. Seeing as how that was the story of a man with short term memory problems, the jumbled and reversed sequence of events better served that films story. In the case of "Dunkirk", it also works in the films favor. The film doesn't really have a real protagonist as it has at least three "main" characters who are centered around the three different locations of the film. The first main character named Tommy, played by Fionn Whitehead, is a British soldier stranded on the beach who does everything he can to survive. The second main character named Mr. Dawson, played by Mark Rylance, is a former soldier on his way to Dunkirk on his private boat with his two sons. Along the way he picks up a lone survivor from a shipwreck known only as the Shivering Soldier, played by Cillian Murphy, who is suffering from shell shock and refuses to go back to Dunkirk. The third and final main character is a British fighter pilot named Farrier, played by Tom Hardy, (who is still difficult to understand), who flies over the Ocean trying to take down the enemy planes.

These three characters are the center pieces of the main event. Each area of the story takes place over a different amount of time, The events on land take place over the course of one week, the events on the Ocean take place over the course of one day, and the events in the air take place over the course of one hour. All three fit together and can be easy to miss if you're not paying attention. The film establishes this difference in time at the very beginning and does a pretty good job at keeping the events in order. It feels distorted just enough so that it becomes a challenge to keep track of things but not enough that it ever becomes incoherent. I suspect the intention was to show case the distortion of time that the soldiers likely felt as they all waited out the bombs and shootings as they tried to survive.

Speaking of distortion, this films MVP (Most Valuable Player) is, without question, the music. Composed by Hans Zimmer, the music is not only haunting and beautiful, but it also never lets up. It uses a series of orchestral and electronic sounds to create a constant state of tension. Throughout the entire runtime I felt the music as it hit every key scene and every quiet moment with a sense of urgency. This is something that most other filmmakers try to create using cheap tricks such as loud noises, shaky cam and rapid fire editing. None of which are present in this film.

Speaking of the camera, it is worth noting that I saw this film in IMAX, and I am totally confident in saying that this film is best seen in the format. Nolan loves, I repeat, LOVES, shooting his films in IMAX. The large format along side the more intense sound quality enhances the experience of this film dramatically. Unlike 3D or D-Box, IMAX is not a gimmick. It is a beautiful alternative format that creates very crisp and epic visuals. Something that this film defiantly needed. The format is not perfect. Because of the larger frame of film, it is really obvious when shots are out of focus. Fortunately, the team operating the cameras on this film were top of the line.

Even so, amongst all of these technological achievements, what I think truly sets this film apart, is the fact that it managed to convey the tension and hell of war without getting gory. Now, that is not to say that war films shouldn't be graphic, as I am of the firm opinion that war should never be watered down when it is put to film. Case in point, "Hacksaw Ridge" was the best war movie of last year. However, "Dunkirk" still manages to showcase the damage of war onto people without indulging in the graphic effects of it. People do die in this film and some people are physically, emotionally and psychologically scared. No one walks away from this event clean. It is the most tasteful war film I can remember seeing in recent years.

If this is playing near you, especially in IMAX, please go see it. It is a masterpiece in every way and deserves to be seen on the big screen. Just be sure to prepare yourself for the tension and maybe do something relaxing for a bit afterwards. You will need it.

Ladies & Gentleman, I am TheNorm, telling you when Hollywood gets things wrong, and when they get things right. Thank you for reading.