Skip to main content

Dunkirk and Valerian

I'll start with Dunkirk even though it was the second movie I saw this weekend.


Dunkirk made a strong claim for the movie of the year for me. Similar to Fury Road from a couple years back, this is an exercise in sustained action and tension. Its story, although cleverly folded up within three time frames, is remarkably straight forward. The characters in the movie are either trying to get off Dunkirk beach before it is overrun by Germans in 1940 or they are trying to help those attempting to leave. This basic story is told through three threads, land, sea, and air as essentially anonymous characters work to survive. Other than a few blurry shadows and the strafing of dive-bombers, the human enemies are not pictured on screen. It is rather nature itself: water, wind, fire, and steel which closes in on the characters, snuffing out one life after another. A reoccurring image is the screen filling with water, as though the camera gives the audience the POV of impersonal, crushing doom.

I walked into this movie somehow having had this key fact of its structure unspoiled by reviews. And I found the effect fascinating. This is clearly a Nolan film, with big wide vista foregrounded by intimate portraits of fragile, wounded, and desperate people. The way time is handled through the story lines (Land takes place over a week's time, Sea over the course of a day, and the epic Spitfire dogfight of the air occupies a single hour) is engaging and also nerve-wracking. There is kind of dramatic irony at play here, when we already know that a ship characters are boarding is doomed. This puzzle-box quality is put to more interesting service here than in some of Nolan's other works. It's not a gimmick, it's a tool meant to heighten the overall tension of the story again and again and again.

As a side-note, make sure you see this film at least once in 70 mm, preferably at a true IMAX theater such as the one in Reading, Massachusetts (where I saw it). This is a film that really has to be experienced in towering glory, with full surround high definition sound.

The first film I saw this weekend was Luc Besson's Valerian and I really, really wish I could recommend it. In the same year as the vastly superior Guardians of the Galaxy sequel, this looked like a credible offering to something I've seen described as the 'cosmic powers,' genre - a type of space opera less concerned with verisimilitude in favor of colorful, entertaining action. Like Guardians, the goal here seems to be to fill the screen with as much bizarre art-rock cover carnage as possible and set it to some forgotten classic rock hit. Where Guardians had a tight script, appealing characters, and plenty of good-natured jokes; Valerian has a sprawling mess of a story with not just one but two prologues, characters that are merely wooden when they are not actively working to obliterate all audience sympathy, and scant, somewhat mean-spirited humor. I will say the first half hour or so are engaging but by the end it's clear the movie has run out of ideas, energy, and money. I liked this movie less than Lucy, on account of the latter being only stupid, not stupid and boring.
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing Horror

I'm wary offering advice to other writers. 

First of all I've got the whole imposter syndrome thing and whatever advice I give feels like a good way of revealing how little I know about anything. Second, what I've learned mostly relates to solving problems in my own writing. What advice does a dog have to offer to a duck on how to swim? 
However, for Arisia 2018, I'll be participating on a panel of doing just that - giving advice to aspiring horror writers about writing horror.

So, what truths can I impart?

Some advice feels absolutely true, if a bit self-evident.

You must read. If you're trying to write horror then you must read horror. Not just one novel. Not just one author. You should make a sincere effort to read everything by everyone. The more recent the better. The classics are always going to be there, but if you want a sense of where your stories could fit, you need to see what is being published out there.

You must write. I do not think you have to write …

Reading Response to "A Good Man is Hard to Find."

Reader Response to “A Good Man is Hard to Find” Morgan Crooks I once heard Flannery O’Connor’s work introduced as a project to describe a world denied God’s grace. This critic of O’Connor’s work meant the Christian idea that a person’s misdeeds, mistakes, and sins could be sponged away by the power of Jesus’ sacrifice at Crucifixion. The setting of her stories often seem to be monstrous distortions of the real world. These are stories where con men steal prosthetic limbs, hired labor abandons mute brides in rest stops, and bizarre, often disastrous advice is imparted.  O’Connor herself said of this reputation for writing ‘grotesque’ stories that ‘anything that comes out of the South is going to be called grotesque by the northern reader, unless it is grotesque, in which case it is going to be called realistic.’ This is both a witty observation and a piece of advice while reading O’Connor’s work. These are stories about pain and lies and ugliness. The brutality that happens to characters …

We Have Always Lived in Haunted Houses

As my final pre-Arisia post, I'd like to tackle ghosts. Metaphorically, of course, because ghosts are intangible and also don't exist. 


I don't believe in ghosts. Not the sort of ghosts, anyway, that float around decaying old mansions or scare impressionable media personalities. Physics, at least the way I've grown up understanding it, precludes the existence of energy that cannot be detected reliably. Put another way, physicist Brian Cox stated that if ghosts existed the Large Hadron Collider would have almost certainly found one by now.

So, when I say I'm a fan of ghost stories and tales of haunted houses, am I being hypocritical? Possibly, but I also think one can appreciate ghosts and haunted houses in a different way. Even though they might not exist in a 'peer-reviewed' and 'experimentally replicable' fashion, phantoms absolutely exist as a potent symbol of the past.

When we talk about ghosts what we're really talking about is that annoying…