Nolan does it again.

Rating: 8/10 (23 July 2017)

Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk has been perhaps one of the year's most awaited movies, quite rare for a war film. The man has been behind some of the best movies of the 2000s and 2010s, such as Memento, The Dark Knight Trilogy, The Prestige, Inception and Interstellar.
So how does Dunkirk fare against his other works?
Quite well, actually. Dunkirk is an amazing movie, and you can really tell Nolan put loads of effort into it (the film was a passion project of his, apparently). The guy certainly knows how to direct a film, deftly weaving through multiple plot lines. It's a visual achievement: The film looks gorgeous, even in the digital screening I was subjected to. I can only imagine how incredible the IMAX 70mm version was. And yes, the film is rated PG-13, meaning there's not as much blood and gore as an R-rated movie like Saving Private Ryan. But the way this film is shot, it doesn't need it. The blood and gore may be an added bonus at best, or a gratuitous distraction at worst.
The same can be said for the swearing: Of course, there is the usual PG-13 swearing (and even 2 f-bombs) but nowhere near the level of, again, Saving Private Ryan. But the way the dialogue is written, you probably wouldn't notice. Speaking of dialogue, there's not that much in it. This is a departure from Nolan's usually verbose scripts. He often lets the cinematography and sound design do the story telling.
Speaking of sound design, there is some incredible work here. It is quite realistic, making the experience more immersive and terrifying; I can see an Oscar nomination in this area. The score is also insane: Thunderous and tense, this one is probably one of Hans Zimmer's best works, and that is saying something. He is one of the greatest composers working in the film industry.
So, tight direction, beautiful cinematography, smart dialogue, incredible sound design and a fittingly intense score - why did I still give this movie an 8/10?
Unfortunately, the shallow characterization is more than a small handicap to the experience. Nolan did this on purpose, but this is one of his decisions that, in my humble opinion, backfired. None of the characters are given any substantial character arcs; we don't even catch the names of a few (which sadly include the lead of the movie). This makes it difficult to latch on to the characters and care about why they're fighting. The closest we ever come to any character fleshing-out is Mark Rylance's Mr. Dawson, and even that isn't much. It's an unfortunate choice, and prevents this movie from being the "masterpiece" it probably could have been.
Overall, though, I was really impressed with Dunkirk, and I'm really excited to see what Nolan does next.