Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk: (Up: Trailer #2 in OP)Movies 

...Well, that was interesting. Seems like a laugh-a-minute wholesome family fun.

Summer 2017? Honestly, can't see it as a summer blockbuster. Wonder how it'll fare.
 
Collider just put up a reaction video, and they said the exact same thing.

...For the record, I don't work for 'em. :P


Seriously though - what's releasing in next Summer? Lessee...

  1. Guardians 2 (May 5th)
  2. King Arthur (May 12th)
  3. Alien: Covenant (May 19th)
  4. Baywatch (May 26th) Yes, I'm considering this as a big summer blockbuster.... sad times.
  5. New Pirates of Caribbean movie (May 26th)
  6. Wonder Woman (June 2nd)
  7. The Mummy: Tom Cruise Edition (June 9th)
  8. World War Z:2 (also June 9th, although this could change)
  9. Cars 3 (June 16th)
  10. Transformers 5 (June 23rd)
  11. Despicable Me 3 (June 30th)
  12. Spiderman Homecoming (July 7th)
  13. War for the Planet of the Apes (July 14th)
  14. Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (July 21st)
  15. Dunkirk (also July 21st)
  16. The Dark Tower (OMG OMG OMG!! It's happening, on July 28th)
  17. Blazing Samurai (August 4th)
  18. The Hitman's Bodyguard (August 18th)
  19. Aaaaaand, nothing much besides until Oct. 6th, when the Bladerunner reboot hits the screen
Judging by what's scheduled to come out, I guess it might do well, trading on Nolan's name alone.
 
My hopes for this film are low as they've apparently stuck to a PG-13 rating because Harry Styles is in it and they want to attract his followers.

Because you just know One Direction fans (aka girls under 15) are going to flock to a movie based on a WW2 battle. :rolleyes:
 
My hopes for this film are low as they've apparently stuck to a PG-13 rating because Harry Styles is in it and they want to attract his followers.
Going by the trailers, I doubt that there would be very much in the way of war scenes. Rather, I think it's going to be a character study of the soldiers stuck in limbo while the Dunkirk Evacuation is organised. No doubt there will be action at the end, but I don't think that it was ever going to be another Saving Private Ryan, regardless of who was cast.
 
Going by the trailers, I doubt that there would be very much in the way of war scenes. Rather, I think it's going to be a character study of the soldiers stuck in limbo while the Dunkirk Evacuation is organised. No doubt there will be action at the end, but I don't think that it was ever going to be another Saving Private Ryan, regardless of who was cast.

...I might've agreed with you, were it not for the fact that it's scheduled for release during the tail end of a busy summer blockbuster season. Warner clearly thinks it's a potential box office winner, and following the time-worn Hollywood logic of "Big Explosions = Big Crowd" it's safe to bet that this film will have its fair share of explosions.

Knowing Nolan, though.... he might try to shoe-horn in some deep, deep meaning of life stuff or something...
 
Going by the trailers, I doubt that there would be very much in the way of war scenes. Rather, I think it's going to be a character study of the soldiers stuck in limbo while the Dunkirk Evacuation is organised. No doubt there will be action at the end, but I don't think that it was ever going to be another Saving Private Ryan, regardless of who was cast.

True. But it still worries me that they may be watering the film down to appeal to an audience that will not have any interest in the film even if Harry Styles is in it.
 
following the time-worn Hollywood logic of "Big Explosions = Big Crowd" it's safe to bet that this film will have its fair share of explosions
Oh, no doubt. It is, after all, a war film. I was just disputing the idea that the rating had been toned down simply because of a cynical attempt to lure the fans of a pop musician into theatres.

The studios trust Christopher Nolan (it probably helps that his wife runs Syncopy). He's got a proven track record of producing quality films from high-concept scripts. Memento and Inception in particular were the kinds of scripts that studios would shy away from, but he made them work brilliantly. And given its content, Interstellar would be practically unfilmable in the hands of any other director.

Knowing Nolan, though.... he might try to shoe-horn in some deep, deep meaning of life stuff or something...
It would be easy to make a film focusing on a squad of mis-matched soldiers in a desperate, last-ditch mission to get vital information back to Britain to save the soldiers at Dunkirk.

But I don't see any of that in the trailer. It looks like all of the protagonists are going to be stranded on the beach, waiting for a rescue or for the Germans to descend and slaughter them all like cattle. Dunkirk is being positioned as a pivotal moment in the war, and yet all of the protagonists are trapped in limbo - powerless to do anything, and yet going through the motions of soldiering simply to give them something to do. So there's a psychological element to it, as the protagonists resist their every impulse to flee.

True. But it still worries me that they may be watering the film down to appeal to an audience that will not have any interest in the film even if Harry Styles is in it.
Nolan has a reputation for retaining a lot of creative control over the projects he works on. He's one of the most powerful directors on the planet; Joss Whedon is probably his only real rival, and then only because he consults on every Marvel film and is probably the only person who knows how they all fit together.

Anyway, Nolan is working with all of his regular producers and distributors - the people who have been with him since Batman Begins. The only real change in the film crew is Hoyte van Hoytema, who was drafted in as cinematographer after Wally Pfister tried his hand at directing with Transcendence. I see no reason as to why the producers would suddenly lose faith in Nolan and force him to cast Styles for the sake of baiting teeny-boppers into the cinema.
 
My (paternal) grandmother and her best friend, both sadly passed, were at Dunkirk. It'll be interesting to see how this recounting stacks up against the stories they told us. So far I'm thinking it all looks a bit too clean and well-organised :)
 
Almost certainly going to see this in the theater, but very unsure of Nolan as a director for this kind of movie. It's an interesting historic event, showing the time when the allies were everything but succesful in the war, which hasn't really been done in any movie that I can think of from the last three decades. But of all the people to direct it....
 
The closest thing that I can think of is Inglorious Basterds, but I tend to view that more as social commentary than dispelling the myth of the Allies being ever-victorious.
 
People who watched the prolouge in theaters say it's great and looks much better than the trailer.
 
Also it was in essence an alternative reality ;)
True, but I think the message is that while we could have done more to stop Hitler sooner, we have to ask ourselves what the cost would have been. Defeating Nazism would have been for nothing if we simply replaced one horrifying regime with another that was equally bad.
 
People who watched the prolouge in theaters say it's great and looks much better than the trailer.
I can confirm this. I went to see Rogue One in IMAX tonight and they showed the extended preview for Dunkirk and it really sold me on the movie, which the trailer had trouble doing. The rumble through the whole theater with the airplane scenes was fantastic. And everything looked incredible. So with that said, when I go see it for the first time, it will probably be in IMAX.
 
Back