Dunkirk

Score:  A+

Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring Fionn Whitehead, Mark Rylance, Tom Hardy
Running time: 106 minutes
Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Dunkirk is a riveting war thriller like none other, a spectacular success from one of today's finest filmmakers.  There may not be much Hollywood star power here, but the film sucks the audience in to the intimate survival stories of the evacuation at Dunkirk in WWII.  Nolan's trademark narrative trickery pulls events on land, at sea, and in the air into a powerful cinematic symphony that is not to be missed.  An instant classic that must be seen on the big screen.


Soon after the Nazis unleashed their blitzkrieg on France in 1940, the stunned Allied forces of Britain, France and others found themselves retreating to the coast.  In no time, 400,000 troops were surrounded at Dunkirk on the English Channel - just a few agonizing miles away from England.  With the Nazis prepared to deal a deathblow to the Allied cause, desperate efforts on land, in the air and at sea went underway to save as many of the troops as possible.  A private named Tommy (Whitehead) manages to make it to the beach, only to find vast lines of troops awaiting evacuation.  He soon discovers the daunting challenges of both getting offshore - and then staying afloat.  Meanwhile, boats of all kinds are launched from Britain, including civilians like Mr. Dawson (Rylance), braving U-boat and bomber attacks while sailing straight into danger.  And a trio of RAF pilots also fly toward Dunkirk, doing what they can to protect those being evacuated.  While the short-term battle has already been lost, the situation at Dunkirk could still be either an irrecoverable loss - or an invaluable morale boost for the beleaguered peoples of the free world.

Dunkirk has a strong cast with a few familiar faces and a number of newcomers who prove up to the task.  Leading the way is one of the new faces, young Fionn Whitehead as Tommy, a British Army private.  The film has very little dialogue, and Tommy gets even less to say than most, but he does an excellent job of, above all, being a realistic, terrified yet courageous, surrogate for putting the audience right into the action at Dunkirk beach.  We know virtually nothing about Tommy, except that he's trying to survive, and that's enough.  His young army peers, particularly two companions, do similarly well.  More familiar to moviegoers is Mark Rylance, playing a civilian taking his small boat to help evacuate.  Rylance has a few powerful yet brief and simple lines, but mostly he is just quietly determined while also fearful for the two boys helping him.  Tom Hardy gets the final major role as a fighter pilot.  Although you can see nothing but his face (similar to his role in the inventive Locke), his acting combined with brilliant directing produce surprising nuance and depth.  Cillian Murphy as a shell-shocked survivor and Kenneth Branagh as a naval commander also bring the goods in smaller roles.

Dunkirk is a masterpiece; at once one of the best war films I've ever seen and one of Christopher Nolan's best, and both a thrilling blockbuster and an Oscar-worthy work of art.  There is much to laud, and I'll start with the technical.  While the subject matter here is new for director Nolan, his style of filmmaking is both clearly present and very appropriate for the proceedings.  It's in even the little things like the sound of gunfire, bombing, and strafing aircraft: loud, gruff, like a pack of hounds' vicious, intimate attack.  And it's also in the big picture; anyone familiar with Nolan's work knows he likes to toy with the timeline.  Here, he frames events on the beach over a week; those at sea over a day; and those in the air in just an hour.  Each area gets longer, uninterrupted action early on to get established, but as the danger mounts - and they draw closer to each other - the edits get faster and drive the action to its climax.  The action itself is superb, so effectively drawing the audience into the war.  Poor Tommy and his mates are literally sitting ducks, whether on the beach or on massive naval warships; the Channel, potentially their savior, is also often just as deadly as the Nazis' bullets and bombs.  The aerial dogfighting with Hardy and co. is spectacular - not for gee whiz (and unrealistic) effects but for dizzying, agonizingly precision and tense showdowns.  Much more frequent, though, is the dread of waiting: audience and film characters know that the enemy is lurking always, yet we're never shown an actual Nazi - only the death and destruction they deal out.

A primary criticism of Nolan's films - and I've often agreed - is that he struggles to effectively connect on an emotional level.  I would argue that he addressed that well with Interstellar, but he definitely also does so here.  As mentioned, there is very little dialogue (apparently the script was only half as long as usual), and there is absolutely no backstory for any of the characters.  Instead, it's all about the now: surviving and escaping.  Everything in the film is devoted to this immediacy, and in its desperation, it is just as (if not more so) effective than building characters traditionally.  Both large, historical stakes and moment-to-moment personal ones are more than enough to generate plenty of interest and empathy.  This is far from a sentimental film, but events naturally lead to several incredibly powerful moments, such as when a fleet of civilian ships approach the Dunkirk beach, and when the exhausted, demoralized troops are greeted back home to a heroes' welcome.  This, then, leads to a final important point: Dunkirk is not a typical war film in showing the good guys' courage and feats in destroying the enemy.  It is about the horrors of war, yes, but even more so about the tremendous courage, sacrifice, brotherhood, and force of will that it can bring out in humanity to deal with it.  The lines between military and civilian are blurred into one epic, human struggle for survival.

***

Dunkirk ranks right up there with Saving Private Ryan in tremendous war filmmaking.  Although they both are set during World War II, they are otherwise very different films.  Everything seemed to fall into place just right with this film.  I couldn't picture Nolan doing a traditional war scenario, and Dunkirk is certainly one of a kind.  Yet it offered tremendous challenges, not least of which being that the story is one of a major loss - survival, too, but essentially the surrendering of continental Europe to Hitler.  Nolan knew that such a story needed no extra traditional dramatic "padding", and instead put his extraordinary (perhaps unsurpassed) technical filmmaking skills to work to capture a web of intimate survival stories that get drawn together in a complex yet fine way that he is quite familiar with.  Add superb work from the actors, set designers, producers, music composer, cinematographer, etc. etc. etc... and you have an instant classic.  A must-see - and in the theater! - be sure not to miss out.




By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=51683157