Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, July 21st 2017) Movie • Page 24

Uncredited according to IMDB.

 

Full Interview: 97-year-old Dunkirk vet’s emotional interview after watching movie | Watch News Videos Online

 

Just came here to post that as well. Holy shit.

 

I was stressed watching the movie, especially with the noise. I couldn't imagine watching something like that at 97 years old, let alone having LIVED it.

 

Amazing film. Reminded me of Mad Max in its unrelenting nature. Harry Styles can hold is own let me tell ya. One of the best directors of our time.

 

Should not have watched that at work. Beautiful, but heart breaking too.

 

saw this earlier today! it was pretty good, i didn't quite love it tho.
i know it's based on real events so it's not like they can make up some character development/art, but i just didn't feel truly attached to these particular characters (other than Tom Hardy)
the action scenes were still tremendous and spectacularly well-done, but i feel like i would have felt more tension if i grew more attached to a main character.
but then again that's coming from me watching mainly fiction most of the time

also a reason i felt detached; i will eventually learn to stop drinking a soda before/during movies because the eventual/sudden need to pee will always pull me out of whatever i'm watching and distract me

 

I know there was an interesting discussion earlier about the lack of diversity in this film. A few people dismissed this criticism as 'history'. However, I just came across this article about how the film ignores the Indian contribution to Dunkirk. Very insightful and good to read if you want to pick up on a broader perspective of 'history'.

I don't want to personally determine whether the film was 'right' or 'wrong' for not being diverse but I do want to throw out that there is a genuine historical basis for including people from different ethnic backgrounds. Let's not write our history completely from the white, western perspective!

(Tagging a few people who originally commented on this and may find this interesting: @a nice person @VincewithoutheE @OhTheWater @CarpetElf @Jason Tate @SteveLikesMusic )

 

The movie focuses on the BEF, I wouldn't say it's "ignoring" the other groups, it's just focusing on a relatively small contingent of BEF soldiers (and one French).

You never see a German soldier either iirc.

 

Yeah, I wasn't saying that it is 'right' or 'wrong' or that the film 'ignored' people - just thought it was information that those who passed comment might find interesting.

 

There are black French soldiers getting turned away at the mole. There are German soldiers out of focus who accost Tom Hardy at the end.

But one of the most popular pieces of media in recent memory had black people playing George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton so people defending exclusively white casts with "accuracy" no longer holds up for me. I get why something like Dunkirk is cast the way it's cast but let's not pretend an Indian soldier with some lines would have taken anyone out of the movie or lessened its impact somehow. Dunkirk is a white movie about white people, fine. More white artists should just acknowledge that. Like when Sofia Coppola defended taking the slave character out of the Beguiled, she said she was more interested in the gender aspects of the story than the racial ones. No, you're just interested in the white racial aspects. Which is fine. The Beguiled was good. But own your whiteness and that you're telling white stories. Stop letting white stories be talked about like they aren't about race. They're about whiteness.

 

I feel like anyone who watched Dunkirk through a lens of...is this promoting overt whiteness in film...really did themselves a disservice.

It is a historical movie that focuses on an incredibly narrow cast of characters during a narrow time window.

Could Nolan have gone full Hamilton and had J Cole playing Tom Hardys role, throwing out okay rhymes about his gas gauge? Yes he could have.

But just because he didn't, doesnt make this movie racially insensitive or an overt aggressive stance by a British filmmaker promoting whiteness.

 

what

 

It's completely inexcusable that Hacksaw Ridge by Mel Gibson had more diversity than Dunkirk, the female characters were a wife and mom but still technically

 

Strange comparison. Very different stories and types of movies.

 

This is a really weird way to talk about race in film. I don't think Dunkirk is "racially insensitive" or "an overt aggressive stance by a British filmmaker promoting whiteness". But it is a white story. Noting that isn't saying it's lesser because of it.

I don't know how to engage with whatever point your trying to make drawing on J. Cole, saying... if he were playing the Tom Hardy role, he'd be rapping for some reason? That's such a weird way to talk about this.

 

I'm thinking they're trying to compare it to Hamilton but yeah strange comparison

 

It was a Hamilton comparison. Ya know, because they rap almost the entire play.
Was comparing J Cole to using someone like Harry Styles...who isn't an actor by trade.

I see that you'd like me to be racist but it's a reach.

I've unfollowed the thread and I shouldn't have engaged.
Hope those that enjoyed the movie can enjoy talking about it and those that want to discuss other areas of improvement in the film industry can find a constructive way and place to do it.

 

Comparisons to Hacksaw Ridge and Hamilton makes me wonder if I saw a different movie. The constraints put on the story I think worked to its benefit, and as a work of 'historical' fiction I think it got across it's main theme. It's not really a movie about specific people, as it is survival (I can't even tell you the names of the characters off-hand, and for some that's been their biggest complaint).

 

I don't know what to say to this except that I don't think you're racist or want you to be racist. I wasn't sure what you were trying to argue by saying that if J. Cole were in the Tom Hardy role he might rap. Harry Styles didn't sing in his role. Dunkirk isn't a musical, why would anyone rap? Bringing up Hamilton was just citing an example that people of color have been cast as historical white figures and it can work and be one of the most lauded works of art in the world. There was a discussion of race in film and Dunkirk's place in that context. It's a white movie. Fine.

 

I'm not comparing Dunkirk to Hamilton except in regards to a discussion on race in media, citing successful instances where historically white figures have been cast by performers of color. I'm not mad Dunkirk didn't do that. I think Dunkirk works really well as the movie it is. I'm not criticizing Dunkirk for being white. I'm talking about it and Hamilton in a broader context of race in works of historical fiction.

 

I was just thinking about a recent World War 2 movie, I feel like the characters being anonymous would have made diversity easier

I'm not mad I'm just disappointed, I can't believe I just said that sincerely

 

Where? Hacksaw Ridge is about a person, and his life, so introducing his mom and wife as bigger characters makes sense.

Dunkirk gives us basically two British pilots for an hour.

A British boat of a dad and his son and their friend.

And then small glimpses of the BEF in the mole. Here, the nurses that you see make sense on the boats. But everyone except a few characters are all seen in passing.

So the place is probably the boat and make the son a daughter or George a friend's daughter.

 

Women can drive boats it's 2017, no I guess Dawson having a wife wouldn't make that much difference, Nolan's just pretty good at writing female characters but you're right besides Dawson no one else had a backstory

 

70mm'd it today. Still so goddamn good