I hated Dunkirk
I thought there was no story or any interesting characters. Am I likely to like 1917?
shareI hated Dunkirk & loved 1917. Not to say you would.
share
MovieChat Forums > 1917 (2020) Discussion > I hated Dunkirk
no, i guess war movies are not for you then...
shareNaw I love war movies, I just don't like dumb war movies.
shareso authentic war movies are dumb? war is not about story or characters.
shareBut Dunkirk wasn't authentic, it was cliched and it had no story. (and yes a war FILM is about the story and the characters and how the war affected them. If you want to give the audience the war experience you'd let them know a little bit about the people who's perspective you are seeing the war through.) (I also don't appreciate your pathetic attempt at strawmanning)
Listen man I am a huge Christopher Nolan fan but even I have to admit he dropped the ball here big time.
not sure what you're talking about. war movies are about a situation, rather than story or character. and contemporary witnesses have reported that dunkirk is a pretty accurate depiction of what the war has been for them back then.
certainly there are also drama movies which span a wider picture, telling more about characters or story, but to get back to you initial question - you won't find that in classic situation based war movies such as dunkirk and even less in 1917, considering this movie is shot as a realtime war experience (no visible cuts).
Please show me what rule says war movies are just supposed to be about a situation and not an actual story numbnuts? It seems like you’re just making stuff up to suit your agenda. It’s also ironic that war movies that were far more successful and far better than Dunkirk (Platoon, SVing Private Ryan) actually had a story. Taking away the story doesn’t make the film deep or realistic, it makes it shallow and boring. Now why don’t you just answer the question. Is 1917 a compelling war drama with an actual story and relatable characters or is it just a mindless Michael Bay like action film focused on the explosions and special effects?
sharebecause war itself is a situation. of course you can tell a story around the war, like i already said. but that's not the approach of movies like dunkirk and 1917 which focus on the war as a situation.
Now why don’t you just answer the question. Is 1917 a compelling war drama with an actual story and relatable characters
i already answered your question in my last post. what do you want more? like i said, if you didn't like dunkirk because of its approach then you'll most likely enjoy 1917 even less, as this movie is made as a realtime action movie, hence no story, no (deep) characters - just a soldier carrying out an order and meeting obstacles on the way. if you don't like that simplicity, then the movie is not for you. as simple as that. share
Gotcha so it’s another Michael bay like film, I guess I won’t bother watching it. I also understand that’s the approach Dunkirk and 1917 took that doesn’t mean it’s an effective approach in getting their point across. It just makes the movie boring
sharemaybe you should watch mendes' jarhead instead. this was more story / character based, as far as i remember.
shareAgree. Dunkirk was weak and Schmaltzy. Certainly not worthy of hype. Nolan dropped the ball on that one. I like most war movies. Haven't seen 1917 yet.
shareYeah and one could even say I’m obsessed with Nolan but Dunkirk just isn’t up to the level as his previous works, he’s great with psychological thrillers, he’s great with sci fi, he was amazing with Batman, he shouldn’t be directing war movies.
shareYeah, The Prestige is one of my top 10 movies probably. Rewatch it often, but it's his best work IMO. His others, while technically pretty good, are just too flawed to love.
shareMemento, Batman Begins, The Prestige, The Dark Knight, Inception, The Dark Knight Rises and Interstellar are some of my favorite films of all time. Dunkirk and Insomnia to me fall short
I will say this though in 2017 I saw three films and Blade Runner 2049 was the best, Dunkirk was second and Star Wars The Last Jedi was a very distant last place
Just got back from seeing it, I liked it, it was much better than Dunkirk and didn't have the problems I thought Dunkirk had.
I know I've trashed Dunkirk a lot but it's still a competently made film, it is a technical masterpiece but there is not much under the surface and parts of it were beyond cliched. But it's still nowhere near a bad movie (I'd give it a B which for a Nolan film is a bad place to be, none of his films should ever dip below an A-)
Dunkirk was good.
1917 is similar to Dunkirk, actually, but it's an entirely superior level. Sam Mendes is a more competent director and better story teller than Nolan.
Well I love Christopher Nolan in fact 4 of his films make my top 25 of all time. But I tried to like Dunkirk and I just can't, he dropped the ball with that one, but that's good to hear that 1917 is better, I think I'll check it out. Also hopefully Nolan redeems himself with Tenet, looking back I don't think Dunkirk was the right project for Nolan, he is great with psychological thrillers, science fiction and he made a damn good Batman trilogy but I think he should stay away from war films from now on.
shareI didn't particularly like Dunkirk but I flat out *LOVED* 1917.
shareThis focuses on characters, so it is different.
shareI stopped watching Dunkirk because it was boring, and I watched all of 1917, but it was also boring.
share