Christopher Nolan's "Dunkirk" will have a unique plot structure

quote:

---

The problem is not who they are, who they claim to be, or where they come from.

---

Isn't that a problem in filmmaking?

People care about people and their story...not just bodies.

quote:

---

Depends on what kind of film you're trying to make.

---

I don't think Gallopi would have mean't much to me...if I hadn't had an hour of pre-war story on Mark Lee and Mel Gibson's characters. Why did they do that? When even their colonels didn't want them to rush into the line. You can't just have action without motivation and the motivation just can't be "because WWI." Or in the case of this movie, WWII.

Paths of Glory deals with this. Life and death in war is just as complicated as life and death outside...these aren't robots, not just orders...they are human beings ...and involves people who had motivations and reservations...naturally due to preservation and also to leadership and objective and purpose and point in life - and everything else under the sun. (Malick in A Thin Red Line also touched on this reality.)

You can't just have - people doing stuff just to do stuff and you can't just have action where you can't emphasize or connect with the characters...especially in war. That's important.

If he's making a video game...fine. I guess some people want that.

But without character development - it's not a movie...because those involve stories...and I've never read a novel that didn't include describing a main a character and his motivations and fears.

If Nolan wants to make a real life Star Wars Storm-Trooper movie...unknown people die en-masse. That's fine. But I don't see how it works...it seems a contradiction to basic story-telling. Unless movies have decided they don't need to tell a story - just show pictures that move rapidly in front of our eyes.

But then it's just Tom and Jerry getting whacked over the head...actually, I might have more empathy. I grew up with Tom and Jerry.

(I think he might be trying to do a Mel Gibson thing ala Apocalypto...but even then we got to know the characters quite well.)

Don't forget, though, this is history. If there is one thing Hollywood screws up more than anything, it's history.

How many times must we suffer a bullshite antagonist or love interest made up entirely for no other reason than some asshat thought the story could use some fake elements to help the audience identify with the characters. As if historical events don't have enough drama, we need last second chase scenes and loves that almost weren't. What they don't realize it's such devices are used like a crutch because they failed in conveying the true drama of the moment. Had the writer and director done their jobs, you wouldn't need BS character development tricks.

quote:

---

But without character development - it's not a movie...because those involve stories...and I've never read a novel that didn't include describing a main a character and his motivations and fears.

---

Assuming the movie is engrossing enough do you really need deep character development?

The idea is to show the human experience of a battle, not to make you cry cause Jim won't get back to his sweetheart. We already understand what is at stake when young men go to war.

I rather see a movie spend time on taking you into the Dreed that is battle on that scale.

But will love transcend time and space?

I'm not a WWII fan but I'm ready for this one.

Im already calling it GOAT war movie.

perfectly said

quote:

---

As if historical events don't have enough drama, we need last second chase scenes and loves that almost weren't. What they don't realize it's such devices are used like a crutch because they failed in conveying the true drama of the moment. Had the writer and director done their jobs, you wouldn't need BS character development tricks.

---

Thing is you think you'd want this, but honestly just straight up story telling doesn't usually make for a really good movie. And if you're going to a film to be educated on history, that's on you.

Hanks has said this in a few interviews concerning Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, and Sully. They talk to the people they are going to be portraying and up front tell them "this is going to be maybe 15% accurate. You're going to do things you never did, going to say things you never said." They try to honor those subjects as best they can, but in the end, they are making a movie.