Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
- flyonthewall2983
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
- Location: Indiana
- Contact:
- Ribs
- Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
Re: Christopher Nolan
Officially confirmed now. From Deadline:
It’s called Dunkirk, and Mark Rylance, Kenneth Branagh and Tom Hardy will be part of an ensemble made up largely of unknowns. Pic will be shot on IMAX 65mm and 65mm large-format film.
- flyonthewall2983
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
- Location: Indiana
- Contact:
Re: Christopher Nolan
Wonder if they'll bump the release date. This doesn't sound like something a major studio would put out in the middle of July.
Good on him for making such a sudden left turn like this now.
Good on him for making such a sudden left turn like this now.
- Trees
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm
Re: Christopher Nolan
I'm generally kind of tired of WWII pictures, and this seems like an odd choice to make a heroic war picture about a retreat, but I have faith in Nolan and always look forward to his pictures.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: Christopher Nolan
You should familiarize yourself with the real life story-- everyone coming together to pull off Dunkirk was one of the most heroic acts in all of WWII and the degree of its success was a literal miracle. While waiting for Nolan's take, why not watch Mrs Miniver to see the caliber of great film Nolan will be competing with (though it's more of a B plot there)?
- colinr0380
- Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
- Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
There's also the 1958 Ealing film Dunkirk, and Atonement used the Dunkirk evacuation for its rather apt war metaphor.
It has always seemed as if, for Britain at least, the evacuation of Dunkirk helped make the eventual D-Day landings even more significant, as a return back to the beaches that had to be abandoned years before.
It has always seemed as if, for Britain at least, the evacuation of Dunkirk helped make the eventual D-Day landings even more significant, as a return back to the beaches that had to be abandoned years before.
- ellipsis7
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:56 pm
- Location: Dublin
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
A third of a million or so troops of the British Expeditonary Force were succesfully evacuated from Dunkirk back to the UK mainly by a flotilla of small craft, avoiding capture and possible national capitulation, forming the core of a strengthened and enlarged armed force that was then built up for the fight back that culminated in the D-Day Normandy landings...
-
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 9:21 am
Re: Christopher Nolan
Having just come across "Mrs Miniver" while reading Mark Harris's great book "Five Came Back" I agree it's a really great film. Will be interesting to see Nolan's take. Saw on Deadline today that Tom Hardy is in talks to join the cast.domino harvey wrote:why not watch Mrs Miniver to see the caliber of great film Nolan will be competing with (though it's more of a B plot there)?
- Dylan
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
In addition to Mrs. Miniver, there's also Henri Verneuil's 1964 Weekend at Dunkirk, starring Jean-Paul Belmondo and Catherine Spaak. It's pretty good and beautifully shot, but to date its never received an English-friendly home video release. If anybody's interested, you can read pretty much everything you could possibly want to know about it here.
- flyonthewall2983
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
- Location: Indiana
- Contact:
- FrauBlucher
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
- Location: Greenwich Village
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
I'm not sure how I feel about this. It looks great, but I'm all wared out.
- Luke M
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:21 pm
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
Yeah, if we're going to kill one sub-genre I'd pick WW2 flicks over comic book films.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
Heaven forbid we remember and depict true heroes over comic book ones
- tarpilot
- Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:48 am
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
While it's tempting to scold the world's real Steve Rogerses for their appreciation of shiny distillations of bold-lined propaganda, I think it's unfair to expect them to have read any thicker books on the subject.
- Roscoe
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: NYC
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
Looks like another fizzy witty romantic comedy diversion from Christopher Nolan, the 21st Century's Ernst Lubitsch!
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
I have to say, those shots are very compelling, but morally a bit alarming, recalling what I believe to be recurring problems with many war films that try to be anti-war films: an aesthetic that seems to arrange a physical beauty around some horrific sights (one that's harder to take in the context of a very controlled and staged production rather than, say, a documentary or journalistic film), and one wonders if the very real terror felt by those killed in Dunkirk will be turned into visceral entertainment that's similar to a polished horror film.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
Yes, Nolan must honor the brave sacrifices and calls to duty of these fighting men who faced insurmountable odds by making an anti-war film criticizing their complicity in such foolishness
- The Narrator Returns
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:35 pm
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
I don't know about you guys, but I think I can deal with a little moral dodginess when it means I get some Hoyte van Hoytema cinematography in exchange.
- swo17
- Bloodthirsty Butcher
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
- Location: SLC, UT
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
I hope he at least honors them with some kind of cool sci-fi twist ending.domino harvey wrote:Yes, Nolan must honor the brave sacrifices and calls to duty of these fighting men who faced insurmountable odds by making an anti-war film criticizing their complicity in such foolishness
- carmilla mircalla
- Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 9:47 pm
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
how do you feel about the opening sequence in Private Ryan? technical aspects aside but morally. I always felt as I got older that Spielberg had effectively turned what was supposed to be the feel of the "horror of war" into cheap exploitation. I wonder just how many people were shocked by the violence vs how many people thought it was cool to see such graphicness in the sense that it was an attempt at realism. The big problem with the latter is that part of that person is still thinking the violence is impressive no matter in what way. This is how I feel all the violence in Private Ryan works against it.hearthesilence wrote:I have to say, those shots are very compelling, but morally a bit alarming, recalling what I believe to be recurring problems with many war films that try to be anti-war films: an aesthetic that seems to arrange a physical beauty around some horrific sights (one that's harder to take in the context of a very controlled and staged production rather than, say, a documentary or journalistic film), and one wonders if the very real terror felt by those killed in Dunkirk will be turned into visceral entertainment that's similar to a polished horror film.
I'm sure Spielberg had the thought many times during filming. I would not doubt an inch he thought the effects were "cool".
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
Morgan Freeman's narration at the end: "...and then, seventy-plus years later, bright electronic devices would enable people from across the globe to remotely connect to each other so they can bitch about how a film depicting the service of these men was too beautiful, because war should look bad like poor people"swo17 wrote:I hope he at least honors them with some kind of cool sci-fi twist ending.domino harvey wrote:Yes, Nolan must honor the brave sacrifices and calls to duty of these fighting men who faced insurmountable odds by making an anti-war film criticizing their complicity in such foolishness
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
That's a preposterous response-nothing I wrote is remotely close to criticizing those killed, much less accuse them of "complicity."domino harvey wrote:Yes, Nolan must honor the brave sacrifices and calls to duty of these fighting men who faced insurmountable odds by making an anti-war film criticizing their complicity in such foolishness
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
I saw it during its initial theatrical run in 1998. It felt like a video game, or finding out all the ways someone could be killed in combat and checking them off one by one.carmilla mircalla wrote:how do you feel about the opening sequence in Private Ryan? technical aspects aside but morally. I always felt as I got older that Spielberg had effectively turned what was supposed to be the feel of the "horror of war" into cheap exploitation. I wonder just how many people were shocked by the violence vs how many people thought it was cool to see such graphicness in the sense that it was an attempt at realism. The big problem with the latter is that part of that person is still thinking the violence is impressive no matter in what way. This is how I feel all the violence in Private Ryan works against it.
I'm sure Spielberg had the thought many times during filming. I would not doubt an inch he thought the effects were "cool".
I remember reading about a press conference with Tom Hanks and Spielberg where Hanks was quoted as saying that he hoped this type of film would be viewed by a younger person (I think a high school student - this was ages ago so my memory's hazy) and make him think twice about how he viewed violence. Then within a year (after I had seen it), DreamWorks (with Spielberg's creative participation no less) begins a series of first-person video games called Medal of Honor, essentially a pre-cursor to Call of Duty. I saw this, immediately remembered Spielberg and Hanks' solemn press conference, and just shook my head.
Another misinterpretation of what I said, though this one is more understandable. I had a long day, so will have to pick this up later, but really quick, I think The Thin Red Line is a masterpiece, and there's no shortage of people who would call that film "beautiful." But that only proves what a generic description "beautiful" really is - it's not really an accurate reflection of what's on screen. A bad film like Pearl Harbor was a beautiful production, but a very slick and shallow one, with moments that felt like high priced TV commercials, not poetry.domino harvey wrote:"...depicting the service of these men was too beautiful, because war should look bad like poor people"
-
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:50 pm
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
I wholeheartedly agree. In both SPR and 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 Listcarmilla mircalla wrote:how do you feel about the opening sequence in Private Ryan? technical aspects aside but morally. I always felt as I got older that Spielberg had effectively turned what was supposed to be the feel of the "horror of war" into cheap exploitation. I wonder just how many people were shocked by the violence vs how many people thought it was cool to see such graphicness in the sense that it was an attempt at realism. The big problem with the latter is that part of that person is still thinking the violence is impressive no matter in what way. This is how I feel all the violence in Private Ryan works against it.
I'm sure Spielberg had the thought many times during filming. I would not doubt an inch he thought the effects were "cool".
- Roscoe
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: NYC
Re: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017)
My take on SAVING PRIVATE RYAN was always that it was torn apart by the conflict between wanting to be a Serious Depiction of the Horror of War and being a really bitchin war movie with guns and tanks and planes and stuff. It settles for a really ugly self-righteousness, with that finger-wagging "Earn This!" because war is the handiest guilt trip of them all.
As for DUNKIRK, whatever. Nolan's bogus High Solemnity is as choking as Spielberg's, but without the energy that Spielberg manages to infuse into his work. DUNKIRK looks to be another bloated Nolanathon of gloom and CGI all to send us the message that War Is Bad. I'll avoid it.
As for DUNKIRK, whatever. Nolan's bogus High Solemnity is as choking as Spielberg's, but without the energy that Spielberg manages to infuse into his work. DUNKIRK looks to be another bloated Nolanathon of gloom and CGI all to send us the message that War Is Bad. I'll avoid it.