The Dunkirk Evacuation was an event transpiring over the course of nine days in 1940 on a French beach that entailed 400,000 soldiers from various countries being trapped on this beach as enemy German troops surrounded them every which way. The only way to get out is by way of boat, a task made difficult due to the presence of enemy pilots shooting down some of these boats as they try to get home. Nolan's depiction of these events is comprised of entirely fictitious characters who are meant to individually represent certain types of human beings who were involved in the Dunkirk Evacuation, such as a civilian boat captain, a young soldier or a British plane pilot. Note to Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor movie; this is how you incorporate fictional characters as the leads of a movie detailing a World War II event, you make those characters thematically tied into the event itself instead of having the horrific slaughter of innocents at Pearl Harbor play as a backdrop to a terrible love triangle.
Anywho, the cinematic recreation of this event is told over three different storylines, each taking place over a different span of time. The first is a storyline called The Mole, takes place over a week follows soldier Tommy (Fionn Whitehead), whose one of the thousands trapped on this beach, trying to get back home while also doing all he can to assist anyone whose in need in this dire hour. The second storyline, The Sea, takes place over a day follows Mr. Dawson (Mark Rylance), a local resident whose answering the call from the government for civilians to chart their boats to the Dunkirk beach and help evacuate soldiers. Our final storyline, The Air, occurs over the course of an hour and centers around Royal Air Force pilot Farrier (Tom Hardy).
All of these individual plotlines are all part of the same real-life historical event but they all play separately from one another. It's a bold choice that could have easily made the movie feel overstuffed but both the screenplay and editing do a wonderful job of making it a cohesive experience. In terms of storytelling, this particular trio of tales manages to share recurring themes (most notably, what are human beings capable of, both good and bad, when under life-and-death circumstances) while also carrying unique traits such as different types of characters that inhabit each tale so the stories don't blend into each other. Playing these individual stories out as separate pieces also allows for the scope of this rescue mission to be truly felt, as you can see just how the Dunkirk Evacuation impacted all kinds of different people in the area from soldiers to normal people volunteering themselves and their boats in the name of a rescue mission.
In visually depicting the three tales, some masterful editing courtesy of Lee Smith is incorporated that has the various plotlines co-existing in harmony. That may be one of the most impressive achievements of Dunkirk is just how it's able to constantly cut back-and-forth between its various tales while maintaining a constantly intense atmosphere and Smith's editing is a key reason for that. Transitions between the storylines are kept graceful and don't come off as abrupt, there's always a good thematic reason for why, at this particular moment in the film, we're cutting away. That level of thought put into the editing really does help Dunkirk make its individual plotlines feel like LEGO bricks that can be pieced together to form a larger whole.
Something connecting all three plotlines is a unifying atmosphere of terrifying uncertainty. While not a unique element to war movies, I've rarely seen any films in this genre execute the unpredictable nature of war in such a gripping manner. From the first scene onward, which depicts Tommy trying to rush away from the gunfire of unseen enemy forces, that atmosphere is clearly established and enhanced by how we never get specific names or visuals to associate with the German forces attacking these 400,000 trapped soldiers. They're simply supposed to be seen here as a malevolent force whose power comes from their gunfire that can pounce on these poor souls at any possible second. The incredible sound work makes every piece of gunfire that rains down on the ensemble cast feel like it's going off right in your ear, which only heightens the horrifying capabilities of these enemy forces.
The camera work in the movie mimics the way the sound work transports the viewer right onto the battlefield, with the camera frequently putting the viewer right on the wings of planes in the middle of air combat or right in the middle of a sinking ship soldiers are trying to get off of. The horrors of war are made incredibly palpable by the visual work here which depicts the scripts wall-to-wall intensity in a gloriously severe fashion. For so much of Dunkirk, my fists were clenched, my breath was being held in my mouth, my toes were curled, it was all so incredibly well-put together and makes the ceaseless challenges the various soldiers face in trying to get back home resonate in a particularly potent manner. Considering how visually incredible Dunkirk is, it should be no surprise that the cinematographer on this one was Hoyte Van Hoytema who does outstanding work in terms of depicting the carnage the soldiers here experienced, particularly in the IMAX 70mm format I saw it in. In addition to the aforementioned camerawork that places the viewer directly into the action, you also get these recurring sweeping landscape shots that emphasize how far home is from where these soldiers are trapped, another way Dunkirk is able to convey its underlying ideas in captivating visual terms. It's a good thing the camerawork and editing in Dunkirk work so well given how much of a visually-oriented movie it is, to the point that it actually eschews dialogue for a good chunk of its screen time, which is one of my favorite aspects of the film. It's such a bold choice to make so much of Dunkirk a silent movie but it works like gangbusters, both because the visuals of the movie are impeccable and the thoughtful themes in the script come through in spades without the aid of verbal communication.
Dunkirk, as a movie, is many things. But one of my favorite things about it is that it's a war movie where a good chunk of the main characters don't do what many characters in these war movies do, which is actually engage in the combat of war. Royal Air Force pilot Farrier, of course, does just that high above the skies, but for the rest of the characters, they're merely trying to survive and return to their homes. Acts or threats of violence in the first two plotlines, notably, young soldiers turning on each other and an act of aggression by a traumatized soldier played by Cillian Murphy, are depicted as the low-points for the characters in those individual stories. Dunkirk isn't saying violence itself is bad, but rather is saying the reason for these particular acts of violence occurring are the problem. Both of these acts were selfish decisions made out of fear, and while fear is very much understandable in this scenario, that is not what leads to the most triumphant moments in Dunkirk.
Acts of selflessness, like Tommy helping a wounded man to a boat or the very act of Mr. Dawson going out on his own small boat to help soldiers in need. Helping our fellow man, showing compassion to those around us, that's what'll help us in times of crisis. Dunkirk is a movie very much intent on depicting the vividly suspenseful trials and tribulations its characters go through, but it's also a subtly optimistic movie about what unity can accomplish. Tons of small bits of characterization scattered throughout the story only enhance this fascinating idea that works as the foundation for the excellent and thrilling Dunkirk, a unique as all out war movie whose visual audaciousness is only matched by its subtle thoughtfulness.
No comments:
Post a Comment