Dunkirk User Review

  • ArabellaB
    Badly overhyped, dreadful continuity and poor CGI
    Review of Dunkirk Movie by ArabellaB, Jul 26, 2017.
    I think everyone has become blinded to the glaring errors in Dunkirk by the intensity of the subject. Although the cinematography was impressive with the close-up shots of relentless life threatening scenes that the young soldiers were experiencing, the basics of film making had been completely ignored - very bizarre. I spent most of the film wondering how in the same day, and the same ten minutes of a scene, we saw soldiers sitting on a beach in a storm which was wild enough to throw up a beach full of foam, and in the adjoining scene, boats sailing on millpond waters with a blue sky behind them. Then the next shot would be Kenneth Brannagh staring out to see into a sea fog and obviously freezing weather, only to be juxtaposed with another brilliant blue sky and sea. It was so glaringly bad that I couldn't actually concentrate on the film itself.

    Shots of the soldiers on the beach looked as if they had got a few blokes from the local town to line up rather than the 400,000 of them who were there for heavens sake. The same issue arose with the fleet of small boats coming from England to collect the soldiers - couldn't they have gathered more than the dozen that they showed? There were hundreds and hundreds of them in the rescue. Really skimpy and unbelievable.

    The CGI of looking down on the spitfire which was landing on the beach was so bad that it could only have been surpassed by having a cut-out waved about on a string.

    My partner also told me that the train carriage in which the soldiers were taken home was also not produced until 1955.


    • Close up of the fear and claustrophobia of war


    • See above


    1. BigStu1972 and jimarchy like this.
    • lucasisking
      No offence to you or your partner, but I have to wonder after reading that if maybe you should stop watching movies, as you dont appear to understand them.

      The planes weren't 'CGI' for a start they were real planes, so if you think they look 'poor' you should take it up with reality. If any CGI enhancements were made I certainly didn't notice them. You also dont appear to realise the film was set in three distinct timeframes that were intercut, so it wasn't 'bad continuity', it was how the film was supposed to be structured.

      And as for your partner nitpicking technical details he should be reminded that we're lucky to have this film at all- considering how rare it is in Hollywood to get a big budget British war film made. Actual veterans of Dunkirk saw the film and described it as incredibly authentic; if its good enough for them it ought to be good enough for you!
    • Geoff_D
      There was some CG, like the splashdown of the Spitfire. But yeah, the vast majority of it was the real deal.
    • Jaxkesa
      @Geoff_D I believe that was actually a radio controlled model rather than CG.
      Geoff_D likes this.
    • Geoff_D
      Thanks, it just looked 'off' in any case, it didn't have any weight to it.
    • Anti Monitor
      I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion of a 1/10??!
      It's better than all the other crap out there at the minute by a long mile. Easily a 8.5/10... All day long.
    No comments have been posted on this review yet.
  • Loading...
  • Loading...
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice