Who said that a movie always need a main character and a backstory for him?

Rating: 9/10 (13 December 2017)

That's really my only question for those who doesn't like the movie. Seriously guys, who said that? Where is written this "cinema rule"?
Look, I'm saying this, because the only main issue that I hear people saying is that "the movie doesn't develop any main character, any backstory for no one, etc etc etc". Well, about this, the only thing I had to say is: The movie is about the war.
And, OMG, he is so well built on that, to the first second of the movie to the final one's, you're in the war, in a dirty, dense and sad war, when everyone's goal is to go home. And that is it, the movie is quite short (and this is a good thing), and straight to the point, the main goal is to pass this image and he succeeds.
In my opnion, this whole "no one knows any one in the war" thing was amazing! Becausa this is problably the sad true, on this situations you will not have a "hey, where you from? Do you have family?" moments, around the campfire and stuff, so people die alone, people die besides other people that they dont even know the name, and this is it. Trully this was one of the things that I most love about the movie, it is simplistic in a way, while it does something that amost any war movie did in the whole movie history.
Well, but this leave me on the thing that I find the most "weird" down there, still on this whole "no history characters" thing, problably the only moment that the movie tries to do something like this, it kind of floops. See, it isn't "bad", "awful" or anything like that, but (with out spoilers) in the middle of the film we see one especific character passing through a really tough moment, and I had two thoughts about that: (1) Only that only thing was strong enogh to do all this with the guy? (2) They try to build a emotional background, and a history connect with a newspaper that really dont get me, "hero at Dunkirk", ooh, come on, why? I know, I'm not complain about this especific thing on the history, in the majority of the movie it will work, but just doesn't fit here, that was not the type of movie that they were building.
But just this little thing doens't take out all the great thing that the movie has. Of course, we need to talk about the cinematography, the stunts and extra work, it's great, amazing, beautifull, in fact, I dont have words to describe this part of the movie, is simply mind blowing, I never saw anything like that. Paraphrasing one of my favorite movie critics (Chris Stuckman) "this is simply what movie was invented for", that is the best way to describe what this movie does.
In short, Dunkirk is a beautiful movie, that break some walls and run of the cliches out there, in a great and sad history, that at the same time shows the best and the worst of the humankind.
9,5/10