LogFAQs > #884659732

That I didn't like Dunkirk.

Why? Because Nolan is great at telling stories where you care about the plot, and with this one... you kinda don't because the entire film is structured like a 3rd act.

And that's not how movies work.

I think it's worth noting that Nolan movies have been betting longer and longer with time with Interstellar hitting nearly 3 hours, but Dunkirk clocks in at like 1h50m, and so it really feels like this is the 3rd act to a traditional Nolan movie where we just don't get to see the rest of the movie. Like if Inception had started in the big dream heist.

And yeah, doing that, skipping the part where you establish the world... it's bad movie making, it makes for bad movies, I kinda think this is a bad movie, but I guess I'm one of few people who care about narrative these days because this has like a 93% on RT and this wasn't a story, it was just some stuff that happened.

Also I heard somebody commend Zimmer's score and it was alright but for a Zimmer score in a Nolan movie it was also a bit of a letdown. Apes 3 had a much more iconic.

I'm really shocked how little I enjoyed this movie. It didn't help things that I was in one of the worst moods in my life, but the idea was that I'd see a movie from my favorite director and hopefully feel a lot better because I was happier, did not work at all.

Hey, Nolan, my favorite director ever, just because people give you shit for making long movies, don't cut out everything but your 3rd act, it really hurt your movies.

Am I crazy? Aren't movies supposed to be narratives?

If you'd have told me I'd like Spiderman Homecoming a lot more than Dunkirk I'd call you crazy... but fuck here we are. And how much can you really enjoy a movie without a first or second act?
---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
http://i.imgur.com/TheGsZ9.gif