It is ridiculous
How much better Interstellar was than this.
shareHe's trolling, right?
Nobody could possibly believe that "Interstelkar" is better than anything, especially a good film like this.
Uhhhh yeah, Interstellar did pretty much everything better than Dunkirk. Dunkirk is easily Nolan’s weakest film
shareDefinitely troll!
shareFunny I was thinking the same thing about you.
Also it’s quite arrogant of you to think that anyone who doesn’t share your opinion must be a troll, get over yourself.
Not when it's me and you, troll.
shareThey're both masterpieces, so take your pick.
shareHoly shit, not even the most extreme Nolan fan could believe that "Interstellar" is anything but an incoherent mess!
You trolls have to try harder.
Interstellar is fantastic sci-fi. For me, Dunkirk, was good to watch.... once. saw it in a hug imax with rumble seats, i suppose it was kind of accurate on some things, but no characters, no plot, just basic action? not that cool overall.
the only incoherencies in interstellar are the fictional stretches of quantum data from a black hole fixing gravity, traveling worm holes, and deep sleep - but science fiction is FICTION, so it's allowed those stretches
i suppose it was kind of accurate on some things, but no characters, no plot, just basic action?
It's a bit unfortunate that that was your take away, especially since the "plot" was taken from history lol. It's war film based on the Battle of Dunkirk, the evac of those british soldiers. That's the story.
The movie is not everyone's cup of tea. It's not exactly action packed or bloody as saving private ryan or black hawk down, but it's a bit dishonest to regard it as plotless. And character less for that matter, especially because one of the three sections of the film is mostly character driven. share
That’s not a story, that’s just an action sequence. Dunkirk had no story and I’ve heard every excuse in the book for it and none of them hold up.
shareIncorrect.
By that reasoning, Saving Private Ryan is just about a bunch of soldiers bringing a soldier back home.
Because Dunkirk is about a bunch of people trying to bring a bunch of soldiers back home.
All because you don't like Dunkirk doesn't mean it's fair to peddle nonsense about it.
Totally wrong, Saving Private Ryan had a story and you knew who these characters were. There was a plot, there was an objective and it was saying something about war and is it possible to do a moral thing in an immoral situation such as war. There was actual depth in Saving Private Ryan, there was an actual reason to care about the people involved because Spielberg took the time to set things up.
False equivalence on your part.
EDIT: It’s also fallacious to compare Dunkirk to Saving Private Ryan. SPR is a war Drama, Dunkirk is just an action movie, a more appropriate comparison would be Rambo III (although I would argue the characters were stronger in Rambo III).
I think the interplay of individual drama and danger superimposed on the sweeping danger that affected everyone was well-balanced, and I absolutely loved the way the timelines were layered. The first time through, the viewer gradually realizes that he's seeing the events of a 10-day span, a 1-day span, and a 1-hour span, overlaid in such a way that they run simultaneously. This isn't the normal "action out of sequence" you see from time to time. We see 10 days laid upon 1 day laid upon 1 hour such that all three spans start and end together. It's brilliant, really.
share