RIP Sir Bruce Forsyth

1928 - 2017

DUNKIRK

A few days ago I went to the flicks to see Dunkirk, mostly to see what all the fuss was about; to see if it truly was the thrilling, blistering, sense-shredding barn-storming, thunderous modern-day revamp of the classic war epic that could not fail in blowing you away.
Short answer: yes, it kind of was.
However, I shall add a slight caveat to that - I do not think it is what you would call, or ever really hope to call "a perfect film". I don't think it was a "perfect" war epic, a "perfect" spectacle or even a "perfect" action film. OK, I'm going to stop saying "perfect" now, because really you could go for days just scratching the surface of what constitutes a "perfect" film, and really what is "perfect" anyway? No...no let us not go into that one...
Dunkirk then...what I think this film IS quite simply, is bloody good.


A riotous assault of sound, vision, texture and tone. Christopher Nolan encapsulates the feel of a World War II film from the first second to last. In terms of look, sound and feel this film totally nails it. Dunkirk takes centre stage, but more so than that, the different aspects of the Dunkirk situation for those stranded troops, and those trying to save them, are almost perfectly fused together in a seamless skipping through time and space, though in reality what is envisioned is mere days, hours and indeed moments of history, struggle and drama for those involved.
Be warned though, this does not give you the history of the Dunkirk episode of the bloody, sorry and savage time that was WWII, far from it in fact (barring a very slight and swift opening blurb). It could be said this film credits its audiences with some intelligence and common knowledge - it does not walk you through the historical narrative of Dunkirk, but rather hones in on fictitious but highly realistic individual events, that make up one small section of the Dunkirk tapestry.
I suppose that is what marks this film from other "war movies" from days gone by. It does not presume to tell the story of a historical event from beginning to end looking inward, almost a kin to a docudrama war programme on BBC4, but rather from very much the inside looking out, Christopher Nolan very easily it seems, presents us with a wealth of character and portrayal of remarkable figures and stories that all interweave together to become the finished product.

Yet for all its new approaches and modern touches, for lack of a better term, there are some classic, even old-fashioned element to Dunkirk that are noticeable, and that I quite like. For instance, the old black and white and early colour war epic films presented a huge ensemble cast and tried to give equal screen time - so that no one actor (often unlike Hollywood films of today) could ever even hope to claim to be the star of the show. Despite a stunning cast, often giving great performances all in turn, the same effect is created here. No one actor is ever seen to be given too much screen time; there is no particularly obvious bias to highlight one name more so than another - meaning that the performances on show need to speak for themselves, and hold audiences even more so.

Broadly speaking, this does happen throughout thanks to the aforementioned stunning cast. There are some great acting talents on show here - both young and new, and the more established legends. It is often the case I find, that new up and coming actors who are thrust into taking a leading role in a big film often fail or just come across as supremely arrogant, or both. Whilst there is a little bit of aloof in the air around him, I think Fionn Whitehead does a tremendous job as Tommy, as does Aneurin Barnard as the mute French soldier by his side. Admittedly I did roll my eyes considerably when I heard Harry Styles had been cast in this - I do not believe for a moment Christopher Nolan was "unaware of the hype and fame" surrounding Styles when he was cast. Happily however, the ex-One Directioner did not mar proceedings too much at all, but added to the tapestry of Tommys that this film featured and he fit quite well into the line up young soldiers awaiting their fate on the beach. I will say though - I do think trying to force Styles to portray the emotion of a broken soldier was a bit too much - for it  well and truly did come across as forced.
Happily however we also had some seasoned acting greats and talents to whip the youngsters into shape. Tom Hardy's solo pilot was a joy to watch, and to hear as most of the time we hardly saw his face, yet his expressions and cool as Spitfire pilot calm was very welcome. Kenneth Branagh shone as always as the fretting yet proud naval commander, Cillian Murphy superbly captured the shivering shell-shocked soldier at war, and the superb Mark Rylance as the stalwart civilian yacht captain sailing to the rescue of Dunkirk was a joy to watch. We even got a vocal cameo from Michael Caine.


So then, a great war epic that harks back to the good old days but stacks up to modern times? Yes I think you could certainly say such of Dunkirk. However a couple of casting bits did fall flat, and yes if you're looking for a film that fleshes out the history of Dunkirk then look again. What this film does do, is take a simple few moments lived by a simple few men (played by mostly simply great actors) and offers them to us. I think it cannot really fail to move you though - it is certainly one of the greatest films of the summer, and who knows? Dunkirk may well go on to be one of those future films listed amongst the greatest war movies of all time.

RIP Robert Hardy

1925 - 2017