Great movie

Rating: 7/10 (31 July 2017)

SPOILERS ALERT
When I was told that Dunkirk was directed by Christopher Nolan, I was immediately drawn to it, and I knew I had to watch it. Needless to say, I had very high expectations, for I am a huge fan of Nolan's work. Once the movie ended, I was left feeling empty. There wasn't a major plot twist. Instead there was an attempt to make the audience feel slightly better. Let me clarify: from the very beginning, the movie is clear – this movie is about war, death and survival at its finest. Soldiers die and if they want to survive, they must not look back and continue to run until they've reached a safe – or better yet, less dangerous, - place. The story line develops and we become aware that there are about 400.000 British soldiers (plus French and Belgium ones) trapped on a beach in Dunkirk. The goal is to get at least 30.000 of them. How? By the ocean, obviously, but this is a very hard task, for the enemy is constantly attacking, making it nearly impossible to escape. The movie doesn't focus on many characters. On the contrary, actually. Truth is, even though the screen time isn't split by many soldiers, we still don't get to know the name of some of them. Or their background, for that matters. Some people might feel like that's the movie Achilles' heel, because it created a lack of emotional connection to the characters, but I am forced to disagree. I felt incredibly sick since the very first moment. There's no need to know much about the characters – the situation they're encountered in is the emotional connection to the audience. They know that they are most likely to die, because not all of them will be able to leave the beach. And it was impossible for me not to feel deeply for all of them. Certain philosophical themes are, too, explored: there's a scene in which the soldiers get into a heated argument because some of them try to force a French soldier to leave a boat (that they all found and were planning on using it to escape, before they were under attack) and one British soldier strongly stands up for him, for is it really fair to stop valuing someone's life to save our owns? Is it ethical to throw someone into the wolves (quite literally) for the sake of other people's lives? Due to the situation they're in, is it justifiable to value certain lives over others'? In the end, they are able to save many British soldiers (over 300.000) and yet, the captain (?) chooses to stay to help the French soldiers get home – I couldn't help but think what would've happened if that number was far lower. But afar from the plot itself, Dunkirk has another trick up its sleeve: the cinematography. It's a beautifully shot movie. The colors are cold: a lot of grey and pastel colors are seen throughout the film to enhance the fact that there are no really happy endings in war. Once they soldiers are back home, they are seen on a train passing a warm green field, but even after that, the audience doesn't really feel any better – but I think Nolan wanted us too. The soldiers are worried they will be portrayed as weak and a waste of space, since everyone went through so much trouble to save them and the war isn't even over yet. However, the soldiers are welcomed into warm embraces. But, we cannot feel better, because the truth is many of them are dead, and the ones who aren't will always have the horrifying memories of what happened and of what they were forced to become.