Dunkirk: Do Oscars Beckon For Nolan's War Epic?

[mikey4444]

I have read most of the critiques for this new film, and they are all very enthusiastic. I go to the pictures about once every 10 years but even I might be tempted by Dunkirk !

By the way, I have no idea of who Harry Styles is.

[Bazile]

I think the advert says - ' must be seen on the big screen' or words to that effect ( but then they would say that wouldn't they )

However in this case i agree - in general i , prefer the big cinema screen, for epics like this film, where the special effects / imagery / sounds etc , are a big part of the movie experience .

[mikey4444]

Baz....definitely looks like a Big Screen film !

[Hazi-Hammenuhoth]

Yes, I hope so, by all accounts it will be well-deserving of some Oscar nominations, although the PC brigade are already criticizing it, noting that "the fact that there are only a couple of women and no lead actors of color may rub some the wrong way." (USA Today, Brian Truitt.) Hollywood don't like facts of history to get in the way of their "inclusive" left-wing agenda. So don't hold your breath Mikey!

[mikey4444]

Hazi....what on earth has "left wing" got to do with a film about Dunkirk ?

[dannyk13]

Reminds me of Mrs. Miniver, the first film to show the Dunkirk rescue, which won 6 Oscars.

[mikey4444]

It reminds me of those first few minutes of "Saving Private Ryan". That was hugely impressive...I am still not sure how Spielberg filmed those scenes without actually killing dozens of people.

I have found this trailer of "Dunkirk" :::

[Hazi-Hammenuhoth]

Left-wing has nothing to do with Dunkirk, thankfully. But the left-wing agenda will use anything to further their cause. As I quoted: "the fact that there are only a couple of women and no lead actors of color may rub some the wrong way." (USA Today, Brian Truitt.) Hollywood don't like facts of history to get in the way of their "inclusive" left-wing agenda.

[mikey4444]

Er ? rightio Hazi.

[atalanta]

Today's Times has a very tepid review of the film. Repetitious, hysterical, manic, cacophonous, lacking empathy, disappointing, superficial. And I quote word for word " 'Dunkirk' is no more than 'Baby Driver goes to war' "
Not a review which would remotely tempt me to see it, let alone vote it an Oscar.

[New Judge]

Well if they do beckon that's put the lid on it for me:

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Media-and-TV/Film/Question1562114.html

I had no intention of watching it anyway but from the amount of hype it's received I don't doubt it will be up for some Oscars (provided they can get somebody to open the right envelope). I've never really understood how films receive such acclaim before they have been released. A few dozen critics give their opinion - hardly a ringing endorsement.

[Mamyalynne]

I'll watch when it comes to my lounge, I can't cope with the big screen.

[Togo]

Going to watch next week, Hans Zimmer scores the musical elements, so that is enough for me.

[RobNorth]

Atlanta
"Today's Times has a very tepid review of the film. Repetitious, hysterical, manic, cacophonous, lacking empathy, disappointing, superficial"
Perfectly describes 95% of modern films....

[jno]

I think you can see it at an Imax if you want big screens. jno jnr's just got back from seeing it on a regular-size screen and gave it four stars, but he says definitely not five.

As for Oscars, I suspect not. The director's well known in America but I'm not sure this film is of interest to many outside Britain. Most of the world knows nothing about Dunkirk and those who see it will soon realise, if they don't know already, that it's about military defeat, which isn't usually a big seller in the States.

[donchano]

Saw it yesterday at IMAX screen and I thought it was excellent, a technical cinematographic masterpiece enhanced by an outstanding score. It won't work so well on the small screen because it's all about the spectacle and doesn't develop the characters or individual stories to any great degree. One small gripe is I often couldn't make out the dialogue over the background noise, but that's a common problem I frequently encounter at the cinema and on TV these days so maybe that's just me!

[Zacs-Master]

'it's all about the spectacle and doesn't develop the characters or individual stories to any great degree'

Well, that's put me off.

[jno]

it's not just you, donchano...

[Bazile]

Let's wait for Mikey's critique when he's seen it :-)

I believe one of the problems with this current genre of films is that the the lead cast lack the presence of actors like your John Wayne , Kirk Douglas Henry Fonda

I might however give it a go

[jno]

Bazile, the sight of John Wayne in The Longest Day reminded us that the war was won by 55-year-old Americans. (The guy he was playing was 27. In fact by the time the film came out he was still 10 years younger younger than Wayne.)

He still demanded separate billing, expecting it would appear as "Starring John Wayne and... cast of thousands". Instead they ran the cast of thousands on the screen first and added "... and John Wayne" at the end.

[douglas9401]

And the Oscar for most convincing line delivered with a straight face is: By the way, "I have no idea of who Harry Styles is."

The film seems to be more of the same, a retelling of a well known event, possibly for the benefit of those who were educated in the last 30 years and know nowt of recent history.