Dunkirk Movie 2017
Right off the bat, I'm getting divisive. Certainly, there is a tremendous amount to admire in Christopher Nolan's latest film, Dunkirk. The sparse, tensely dramatic war picture is an incredible technical feat and narrative accomplishment, allowing the British director to hone in on his talents for building a wealth of suspense and dread with the perpetually ticking clock announcing the impending doom that is always felt in the hearts and minds of these soldiers.
It's a captivating watch in the right moments, allowing itself to always feel urgent and dutifully true to life, even if the events themselves took place nearly 80 years prior. It's a movie that's always rich on atmosphere, tension and the jittery feeling that anything can go wrong at any moment.
As a cinematic experience, it's a ticking time bomb that's also willing to let itself breathe in moments of somber, sobering reality, realizing that tragedy is always at the door of triumph and that for every victory, there's the inevitable defeat of many good men. But while it's understandable to see why Dunkirk is the Christopher Nolan movie that finally got on the Academy's good notice, earning eight Oscar nominations and winning three awards, it is also the one that feels less-than-whole compared to Nolan's other, more involving, character-driven narratives.