Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#26 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Sat Aug 06, 2016 9:07 am

For me, I now see if these kinds of films put a human face and character to the enemy. When talking about Ridley Scott's Black Hawk Down, domino himself pointed out what he felt were racist overtones in terms of this, and while I see it I can't agree with it entirely. Scott himself may have realized this when making Kingdom of Heaven, which has almost a complete balance of this and is a better film for it.

Both Saving Private Ryan and The Thin Red Line (which Nolan cited as one of his top 10 Criterions a few years back) have this too. Whether or not Nolan takes this high route, this will probably be bound to garner the same response his movies usually do. Maybe now that he's done with Batman, the fanboys will have less of a fervor for this but his work is no doubt polarizing to people online from what I see. Even here, obviously.

User avatar
barryconvex
billy..biff..scooter....tommy
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:08 pm
Location: NYC

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#27 Post by barryconvex » Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:52 pm

...Schindler's List Spielberg seems to take a morbid glee in constructing more and more extravagant and memorable ways to kill people. He turns the death of his supposed heroes and innocents into punchlines more often than not. It's really appalling in Schindler's List
Morbid glee? Because he showed how brutally his people suffered without pulling any punches? That's morbid glee? And how exactly are the killings in SL extravagant and memorable? This isn't War Of The Worlds. People are graphically shot in the head and that might be disturbing, maybe more disturbing to some coming from the director of E.T. but considering the subject matter he's taken on i don't find anything particularly extravagant or memorable about his methods here. More like raw and dirty. SL is a masterpiece. It's not without it's problems but they're not among any that you've mentioned.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#28 Post by FrauBlucher » Mon Oct 31, 2016 7:38 am


User avatar
GaryC
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:56 pm
Location: Aldershot, Hampshire, UK

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#29 Post by GaryC » Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:08 am

In 35mm and 70mm, and also 15/70 IMAX. The film was shot in a mixture of 65mm and 15/70. So I'll be seeing it in 15/70 IMAX, which means a choice of two venues in London. I wouldn't be surprised if the Odeon Leicester Square and possibly the Picturehouse Central have this in 70mm too.

User avatar
Alphonse Tram
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#30 Post by Alphonse Tram » Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:30 am

I'm pretty sure NFT1 at BFI southbank will be screening this, especially as the BFI have recently moved more towards screening runs of new releases.

User avatar
GaryC
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:56 pm
Location: Aldershot, Hampshire, UK

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#31 Post by GaryC » Mon Oct 31, 2016 10:45 am

Alphonse Tram wrote:I'm pretty sure NFT1 at BFI southbank will be screening this, especially as the BFI have recently moved more towards screening runs of new releases.
They could show it there in 70mm too. I doubt they will show it on its first run though, as the films they show as first runs are arthouse or independent releases or reissues, not major commercial movies like this.

User avatar
Alphonse Tram
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#32 Post by Alphonse Tram » Mon Oct 31, 2016 12:15 pm

GaryC wrote:
Alphonse Tram wrote:I'm pretty sure NFT1 at BFI southbank will be screening this, especially as the BFI have recently moved more towards screening runs of new releases.
They could show it there in 70mm too. I doubt they will show it on its first run though, as the films they show as first runs are arthouse or independent releases or reissues, not major commercial movies like this.
I won't be surprised if they do, they've been showing some fairly mainstream stuff these days.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#33 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:23 am


JabbaTheSlut
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:37 am
Location: Down there

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#34 Post by JabbaTheSlut » Wed Dec 14, 2016 2:04 pm

Looking good! Especially van Hoytema's cinematography.

gfxtwin
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:22 pm
Location: Austin

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#35 Post by gfxtwin » Fri Dec 16, 2016 1:54 am

As someone who grew up watching gore porn Fangoria-approved horror movies and is far from being easily shocked by violence, I absolutely disagree that Spielberg isn't effectively communicating the horror of violence in his heavier films (Jurassic Park and War of the Worlds not so much, for obvious reasons). Very few movies can get a reaction from me with depictions of violence that is genuinely strong enough to break the spell of seeing it as a special effect or plot device. SPR is one, SL another, and aside from that, all that comes to mind is Badlands (the unease and nausea resulting from the intentionally indifferent context framing the violence and the hyperreal indifference of the character's attitudes towards it), and Game of Thrones. Maybe a few others, maybe several others I haven't seen yet.

To see a director with as much heart as Spielberg, something that comes through in his films, take on that subject matter (not to mention following up ET and Hook with SL and SPR) inherently creates a context of gravitas where you can't help but feel deeply about what is happening on screen. For me, at least. And there's speculation that he takes glee in showing violence in movies like SL and SPR? The fuck? Thoughts like this are to be taken seriously even with common knowledge of how often he broke down on set while making SL? Come the fuck on, man. That interpretation has no truth to it whatsoever.
Last edited by gfxtwin on Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:16 am, edited 5 times in total.

gfxtwin
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:22 pm
Location: Austin

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#36 Post by gfxtwin » Fri Dec 16, 2016 1:57 am

Regarding Dunkirk, I'm not sold just yet. Nolan's movies until now have been so inventive (Dark Knight Trilogy aside, even though I love it as well), so I'm interested in whether his take on the WW2 genre will be truly special or at best just another very good war movie.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#37 Post by mfunk9786 » Fri Dec 16, 2016 2:17 am

Or, you know, bad - it could be that too

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#38 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Fri Dec 16, 2016 4:04 am

Rated PG apparently

gfxtwin
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:22 pm
Location: Austin

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#39 Post by gfxtwin » Fri Dec 16, 2016 9:25 am

mfunk9786 wrote:Or, you know, bad - it could be that too
And at worst, bad. :p

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#40 Post by Big Ben » Fri Dec 16, 2016 9:49 am

The opening to Saving Private Ryan is the only good part in my opinion. I think the rest of the film is peak Hollywood poo. I much, much prefer The Thin Red Line. Nolan has actually mentioned the latter as an influence so I'm hoping Dunkirk is more Thin Red Line than it is Saving Private Ryan.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#41 Post by captveg » Fri Dec 16, 2016 5:35 pm

flyonthewall2983 wrote:Rated PG apparently
According to filmratings.com, that rating is for the prologue only at this point.

User avatar
GaryC
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:56 pm
Location: Aldershot, Hampshire, UK

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#42 Post by GaryC » Mon Dec 19, 2016 4:17 pm

A six-minute preview of Dunkirk is showing in front of 15/70 prints of Rogue One, or at least is at the BFI IMAX in London...and it rather shows up the difference between shot-and-projected-15/70 and digitally-captured (even at 6.5K resolution) on an IMAX Print.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#43 Post by domino harvey » Thu Mar 16, 2017 10:34 am

The feature has been rated PG-13. Unbelievably this has already prompted mini-thinkpieces. Are we never safe?

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#44 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:11 am

domino harvey wrote:The feature has been rated PG-13. Unbelievably this has already prompted mini-thinkpieces. Are we never safe?
Don't forget about the real tragedy here

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#45 Post by Ribs » Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:19 am

This is a hilarious controversy considering Nolan's not made an R-rated film since Insomnia

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#46 Post by domino harvey » Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:32 am

mfunk9786 wrote:
domino harvey wrote:The feature has been rated PG-13. Unbelievably this has already prompted mini-thinkpieces. Are we never safe?
Don't forget about the real tragedy here
Okay, that's legit funny, love it

User avatar
xoconostle
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 3:43 pm
Location: USA

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#47 Post by xoconostle » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:15 pm

Ribs wrote:This is a hilarious controversy considering Nolan's not made an R-rated film since Insomnia
The fact that people are upset about Nolan's rating preference seems to imply that these people believe any war film requires sufficient gore and profanity to warrant a more prohibitive rating. This is absurd given the number of very fine war dramas that don't carry an "R" rating. I'd argue that if the film has the historical and philosophical merit the director is presumably aiming for, the PG rating would enable more young people to see it and thus be as edified as entertained.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#48 Post by captveg » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:16 pm

Congrats to Nolan on making the first non-rated R WW2 film! What a groundbreaker.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#49 Post by domino harvey » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:22 pm

His Batman movies feel like they're R-rated, I don't know why the fanboys were okay with those but are upset now

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)

#50 Post by Mr Sausage » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:58 pm

The ratings board in Ontario rated Saving Private Ryan a 14A (our PG-13) on the grounds that there was enough merit in seeing the historical reality of war that younger kids should not be deprived of the opportunity. I thought then and still think now that that was a commendable decision. I don't know about the MPAA, but they may well have taken the context into consideration and allowed more violence here than they would have for a movie with a less weighty context.

Not that it ought to matter what rating the movie has.

Post Reply