• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

"Dunkirk is Christopher Nolan's biggest trick - not his best"

Gastone

Member
I came across this article on Sky News, and i thought i'd bring it to attention. I haven't found anything about this yet after a search, so apologies if already mentioned.

I personally think the writer is full of shit and has no clue about the importance of movie scores. You can basically apply his logic to any film and you'd have the same result, more or less.

From the article:

"Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts," Michael Caine coyly whispers in The Prestige, explaining how the magician "takes the ordinary something and makes it into something extraordinary".

This is Christopher Nolan's ultimate goal: to trick the audience into believing something is happening when it isn't.

To do that, he uses Hans Zimmer's daunting score to keep us all on the edge of our seats, expensive IMAX cameras to draw us closer and timeline jumps to keep us going back and forth.

But why all the spectacle?

Mainly, to distract us from the fact that he can't write dialogue, direct actors or grasp the subtleties of modern film.

In Dunkirk, Nolan and Zimmer refer to a sound illusion called the Shepard Scale, to trick audiences into believing something is about to happen, simultaneously ascending and descending in tone to confuse its listener.

The technique is nothing new, and consists of superimposing sound waves to give the feel of growing tension leading to nothing.

This was used in all three Batman films, Inception, Interstellar and now Dunkirk.

While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

The conclusion I came to was not new. It had already hit me during the mind-numbing three hours of Interstellar: Christopher Nolan destroys great actors.

I recommend reading the entire article:
http://news.sky.com/story/dunkirk-is-christopher-nolans-biggest-trick-not-his-best-10968525

Remove my score if old and boring.
 
While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

The conclusion I came to was not new. It had already hit me during the mind-numbing three hours of Interstellar: Christopher Nolan destroys great actors.

What a lousy fucking critic, imo. You can't critique just individual components of a work. You engage with the work as a whole.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

"I ignored key parts of the core experience of and goals of the film and it didn't hold up."

What a load of shit and a complete failure of intelligent criticism
 
While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography

"When you remove the best parts of the film and try your best to miss the entire point, strangely enough, it's not that good anymore."

tim-and-eric-mind-blown.gif
 

RoKKeR

Member
This type of smug critique is insufferable to me.

*watched a movie on mute and ignored the wonderful cinematography, it was shit*
 
I agree.

Yesterday I put on 2001: A Space Odyssey and closed my eyes and came to the realization that this Kubrick guy just used pictures to distract from what's really happening. Hack.
 

Catvoca

Banned
I watched The Godfather blindfolded and with earmuffs on and it just made realise that Coppola was a hack the whole time, tricking me into thinking the film was good with "sounds" and "images"
 
I did not care for Dunkirk...but this article is shit.
While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.
He IGNORED a part of the movie? Yeah, that makes sense. I mean....I don't believe him either way. But still a dumb thing to say.
 
I don't know.

Nolan is actually capable to get great performances out of actors. Not everyone is a hit, but there's standouts.

Rather strange critique
 
Mainly, to distract us from the fact that he can't write dialogue, direct actors or grasp the subtleties of modern film.

Give me a fucking break, Nolan has made some of the most recognised films around and arguably has had a part in making what modern movies are. I can understand people not liking his films but sometimes the shit he gets is ridiculous.
 
What stupid article. Nolan has done great characters before Dunkirk.

This critic using this one film where character development isn't an essential part of the experience and say he's never made good characters.
 
I love how angry some people are about Nolan's success. Ever since Dark Knight was so huge and universally praised, hipsters are just dying to tear him down.
 

lobdale

3 ft, coiled to the sky
When you reduce a whole into its component parts, sometimes one or two of those parts isn't as good as the whole.

WOW
 

Superimposer

This is getting weirder all the time
This writer guy and I have mutual friends on Facebook so I saw it on there this morning. It's some real BS.

"Strip away the things that make the movie good and it isn't good anymore"
 

cackhyena

Member
"Mainly, to distract us from the fact that he can't write dialogue, direct actors or grasp the subtleties of modern film."

What is this utter horse shit?
 
Wally Pfister Wasn't a bad Cinematographer himself either.

Got a couple nominations and a win with Nolan. His work on Inception and Dark Knight were great. But I think Interstellar and Dunkirk were better
 
He isn't that wrong music and camera work were best things about Dunkirk

Isn't the point to critique something as a whole? You can't just remove parts that make it good and then call the whole thing mediocre. Of course it's gonna be mediocre if you take that stuff out. I haven't even seen Dunkirk, but his line of thinking is incredibly dumb.
 

Whompa02

Member
Loved the movie for being so different and telling a unique war story. I really liked the use of audio. Gave a heightened sense of something in the distance, even though there wasn't always something there.
 

Tuck

Member
While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

Er... what?

"I ignored the all the reasons the movie is good and the rest didn't hold up."

Well, yeah.

I liked Dunkirk, but wasn't blown away. But the parts of the movie he is critiquing were like that for a reason. Dialogue? Nolan intentionally made a movie light on dialogue. Likewise with the storyline. Its light on purpose.

The movie is basically Nolan's Mad Max: Fury Road. its meant to be spectacle.

Sounds like the author of this article missed the point.
 
I haven't actually seen the film, but it sounds like the critic is boiling things down to "if you take away all the parts of the film that are done well, it's not very good." Which is kind of like... no shit? A critique that holds true for every film in history, it turns out. "Sure, Casablanca is a classic, but if you judge it on its color grading and the vibrancy of its palette, it really pales in comparison to every movie that's been filmed in color."
 

Sunster

Member
if the score was not there it would have been a worse movie. but the score is part of the movie sooooo how is having one a trick?
 

CD'S BAR

Member
I'm not going to give the full article a click or a read, but I'd love to know what these "subtleties of modern filmmaking" are that some nobody critic is tapped into but Nolan isn't.
 

NewDust

Member
Dismissing Hoyte van Hoytema as a Wally Pfister copycat... WTF?! HvH definitly didn't simply reproduce, obviously there are similarities due to Nolan being the director, but it's much different from his previous works. HvH is probably one of, if not the best DP's currently.
 
Pretty obvious the film was not going to be about the characters, but the overall experience of the war. Guess this critic just wanted a different film. Then he should watch a different film.
 
I sort of wish that Nolan and Zimmer would go their separate ways for a minute. They've done incredible work together, but it feels like they've settled into a rut where the soundtrack just dominates everything else in the film. There are a lot of moments in his last few movies where the intensity of the score building to a climax 10 minutes from now drowns out what's currently happening on the screen.
 

Dopus

Banned
While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the showing and opted to see the Emoji Movie instead. The conclusion I came to was not new. Christopher Nolan has destroyed cinema.
 
Nolan hasn't made a good film since TDK, and that even had serious problems.

Nah. At the most, I'd say that Interstellar and TDKR are his two weakest films. However TDK is still the king of that genre in my eyes. Inception was a ton of fun. and Dunkirk, while not my personal favorite in his filmography, is quite possibly the best thing he's made. Easily his most elegant, mature, and tightly executed piece of filmmaking.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
I dont care much for Dunkirk, but this article is so silly. The soundtrack, cinematography and of course the tension building is a huge part of a suspense movie like Dunkirk. there are no fake outs either. When the soundtrack builds up, it usually delivers with a massive setpiece instead of 'leading to nothing'.

I will agree that he didnt give his actors much to work with in this film, but to say that Nolan always does this is ridiculous. Mathew Mcconaughey was given some incredibly poignant scenes with his daughter who was also given a lot of really great material to work with. His scene watching Casey Affleck's recorded messages is devastating and an actor's dream scene.

His decision to focus on Bruce Wayne instead of Batman in TKDR was derided by many, but again shows Nolan's focus on making a movie around characters and giving actors real work instead of hiding them behind a mask for 90% of the movie. Both Talia and Bane are given a great backstory which is more than what we can say about most comic book villains. This guy made Batman Begins and reinvented comic book movies ffs.

Even Inception, which would've been a straight up Sci Fi heist movie if made by any other director, was grounded by DiCaprio's relationship with his wife and children. Dunkirk is an exception, not the norm with Nolan. This writer is full of shit.

The ending didnt work for me but again, picking on Harry Styles is ridiculous. These are shell-shocked soldiers who barely survived a horrowing ordeal for a week and this guy is complaining about him not realizing a guy was blind.
 
Top Bottom