“Dunkirk” opens as hundreds of thousands of British and Allied troops are surrounded by enemy forces. Trapped on the beach with their backs to the sea they face an impossible situation as the enemy closes in.
By Saiham Kabir
Visually stunning however the movie was a bore to watch
By Cap of barn bread
The film really showed the reality, without getting bogged down with getting to know the cast and politics. Anyone that says this movie was bad is mad and should think before they write
Why the good reviews?? the 1958 Dunkirk staring the late great John Mills and Richard Attenborough is a far better film.
I just didn’t think it was realistic, an empty beach? every picture of dunkirk i have seen showed tons of equipment discarded on the beach. Didn’t the army and navy rescue thousands of troops, theres about 150 in this film! I have visited boats that went to rescue the army, i have visited more real dunkirk boats than were depicted in this film the navy had more than two destroyers! don’t think of this film showing dunkirk, its more a fictional film of a couple of men trying to get home.
Neither as good nor as bad as you might expect from reading these reviews.
I liked the three interwoven stories and the small frissons of delight when you realised that you are looking at the same scene from a another point of view were nice. Thankfully there was none of the fast cut/handheld camerawork that put me off the later Batman films. The switch from ultramarine soaked images to more realistic sea colours was a little jarring and I couldn't work out why it was used in some scenes and not others. The Channel has never looked so much like the Caribbean before!
I hadn't actually noticed the denuded beaches until reading these reviews but it's a good point.
I actually rather liked the score although it was a tad intrusive in the 'tension' scenes. Nice to hear Michael Caine's voice on the Spitfire radio too. I think the one major failing was that with the exception of Kenneth Branagh, I didn't like any of the main characters enough to care what happened to them and started to hope that the young soldier would actually drown as just desserts for breaking the rules to get off the beach
Overall not bad, both the wife and I enjoyed it and it was worth the money it cost to rent.
A Weird and surprisingly Poor Film
By Richie 1963
Can't really explain why this film was so poor in broken down segments as the whole thing was dire.
Do not rent.
Desperately, awfully bad.
I read the 1 star reviews then looked at the 5 star and thought, well, it was a big film of 2017, it must be OK for a Sunday night...
Big mistake.. It is desperate.
Terrible acting performances from the big names, although the script (which was awful) left them nothing to work with anyway. The storyline was pretty much non-existent but unlike the original film, which built characters with depth, this one didn't. Perhaps worse still, the film is an insult to all the young men that died on those beaches, many of whom were portrayed as hapless cowards.
Really - don't waste your money.
By An Archer fan
Boring,slow and dull. Not worth watching for free.
4k dvd with oppo
Hi this film played on a good high end 4k player will blow you away .... sound and picture right up there...
I don't know where to begin...
By Wye Photography
Dunkirk must have been an awful, awful experience. So was watching this film.
Never does it give you the scale of the evacuation. Seems more like 300 instead of 330,000 evacuated.
Six Ju87, a couple of He 111, four or so Me 109 and a few Spits was all the aircraft you saw. The air engagements were about as exciting as watching the kettle boil. Unlike Saving Private Ryan and Fury there was no grit. Any battle scenes were small scale and did not portray what it must have been like to be there. A totally bland and sanitised film.
There was more blood and action in the 1969 film "Battle of Britain". Watch that instead.
Watch the 1958 version of Dunkirk I think you'll enjoy it more.