Dunkirk movie review- Stylish (no pun intended)

Rating: 8/10 (29 July 2017)

To this day, people do not know why Adolf Hitler allowed the Dunkirk evacuation to happen. He has the entire British army pinned on a beach. He had them surrounded, and the Luftwaffe had air superiority in the sky. The U-boats made life hell in the seas, and the British were considering a conditional surrender at that point. But he stopped his advance, he let the British army escape, and the rest we know is history.
"We shall go on to the end. We shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender." - Winston Churchill, after the Dunkirk evacuation
History notwithstanding, Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is not a war movie in the traditional sense. There are no sweeping armies, grand strategy at play, rousing speeches, intense drama or fierce combat. Instead, it establishes 3 interlinked perspectives, one each an exposition of the 3 essential asks of a soldier at war- resolve, courage and the will to survive.
Mark Rylance leads the first theme, where he demonstrates impeccable resolve against the odds to do his bit in the civilian action in the evacuation. Tom Hardy is the courageous Spitfire pilot who selflessly tries to offer protection from the skies, even at the cost of his own freedom. Harry Styles leads a group of soldiers who are, well, just trying to survive. All the three threads play across different periods, in different theaters (land, sea, air) but all converge to one fateful moment.
A good war movie is one that makes you hate war itself. Unlike traditional war epics which tries to do that by establishing good and evil sides, Dunkirk tries to achieve that by focusing on realism- the harrowing experience of the combatants. Dunkirk eschews dialogue in favor of visuals- George c scott's opening salvo in Patton might be longer than the entire script of Dunkirk. But Nolan's signature take is all encompassing here- an ominous score by Hans Zimmer engulfs the senses, wide 360-degree shots highlight expanse and impact, IMAX shooting tech makes you feel as if you are a part of the movie, and a mix of stalwarts and fresh faced actors bring in both innocence and class. In a way Dunkirk plays like an atmospheric horror movie. At the same time, the central theme that Nolan has explored in his Batman trilogy is touched upon here too- how do humans react in times of chaos.
Is Dunkirk the best film of the year so far? Maybe for die-hard Nolan fans who like his "different" take on the war movie genre. But somehow it did not click for me the way I thought it would. Maybe because the movie ended just when it was getting engrossing. Maybe it was a bit too economical- run time, script, settings. Maybe because in India we just cannot experience IMAX tech in all its glory. Maybe because I prefer traditional war epics with dialogues and punch lines.
Maybe because 19 years on, I am still not over Saving Private Ryan.
Let that assessment take anything away from the immersive cinematic experience that Dunkirk is. Just don't look at it as a war movie.