Quote:
Originally Posted by Sculpt
Interesting points. I have always been interested in films that let the historical events be the story, rather than the characters. Straight history documentaries tend to be exactly that, especially war docs.
I'm not quite sure what you mean in your post at times. I understood you were saying Dunkirk isn't very character driven, and they aren't very emotional. What are you saying is missing from Dunkirk, in regards to the 'missed opportunity'? That it didn't display the Nasi side, the historical/military context, that it didn't offer the Nasi military as an interesting protaganist?
|
Not only that, I think this whole event could have been portrayed in more epic scale with the involvement of French side also as well as the civilians who bravely took part in the evacuation process. Most of those aspects were in there though but in a quite smaller scale that disappointed me. And this was the missed opportunity for Nolan as he didn't enough even try to explore those sides and thus his Dunkirk failed to become a memorable war film for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sculpt
I haven't seen Dunkirk, but sounds like Nolan was going for a 'you were there' experience as the basis for the audiences' entertainment (which is probably the basic element of a horror film); with some 'horrors of war', 'help your fellow man' and 'duty' thrown in.
Oh, and are you saying you didn't like Intersteller?
|
In terms of 'you were there' experience...for me I felt far more invested in many war films before but in Dunkirk, it didn't work for me as an audience. Mostly because I didn't much care or feel for most of the major characters in there. While watching it, at some point I was even thinking it'd be better for Nolan if he could make a Dunkirk documentary instead. The same goes for INTERSTELLAR too, yeah...I didn't like that much too, a bit dull sci-fi drama, IMO.