Dunkirk Official Reviews Discussion

The 2017 World War II thriller about the evacuation of British and Allied troops from Dunkirk beach.
Posts: 356
Joined: November 2014
MuffinMcFluffin wrote:Another rotten tomato.

135/7
95%
8.9/10
Another fresh one added.
136/7
95%
8.9

User avatar
Oku
Posts: 3319
Joined: May 2012
RIFA wrote:Image

I think this is the only positive review that is actually ironic. Because Dunkirk is not that type of movie.

Non-linear storytelling aside, it's simple, raw and straight-to-the-point filmmaking. The more unique thing about this film given that it's a Nolan work. What you get on the first view is pretty much all.

Maybe they were one of those guys that got confused and instead of slamming it they found the positive in it lol. Halo Reach.
I definitely disagree, there's so much to catch on a second viewing that you miss on the first viewing because everything passes by so fast.
RIFA wrote:
hasanahmad wrote:2 negative reviews added both from the same website and both are separate RT reviews

https://www.kaplanvskaplan.com/new-releases/dunkirk/

Both have the same complaint that they didn't get to see Harry Styles tell Joe how the jam toast reminds him of his mom so we care for his character
You get sites like this one and then you ask yourself how the fuck do they get 50k traffic per month. I'm not talking about the quality of content but the site itself. What a puke lol.

I mean I achieved this on Lunch and other websites and in total I got like 600.000 hits in one year. So even if you average that it would be slightly above 50.000 per month. But to have the same amount of views on your own website is way harder than by using popular platforms.
What is Lunch?
nightfury93 wrote:
Miles wrote:95%
115/6
8.9

So with how many drags he's taken with every new fresh rating....how high is Mr. Murphy in your pic now? ;)
:lol:
redfirebird2008 wrote:
Spert wrote:STL Post Dispatch reviewed it again? And gave it a 4/4

I guess another 100 on MC? Lol
It looks like on their website they do have multiple reviews for a lot of movies. Calvin Wilson is the person who gave it 4/4. His review was included on MetaCritic for Valerian (2/4 or 50/100), so it kinda seems like Calvin's review will be the one on MC for Dunkirk as well.

It sure seems Dunkirk might end up with 60 reviews or so on MetaCritic, which is nuts considering the biggest Oscar bait last year landed in the low 50's in review count (Moonlight, La La Land).
You haven't seen the film yet, right??

Aren't you worried that you'll be spoiled and have too many preconceived notions about the film before walking into the theater? :shock:
Jesus of Suburbia wrote:
mclovin wrote:
Miles wrote:95%
127/6
8.9

Only 5 more fresh to get back to 96% I believe. Though I'm sure another rotten is right around the corner. I think 95% is where it'll end. Something like 200/10 with an 8.9 avg.
one more fresh for 96%
There are a couple of more that will be added St Louis Dispatch needs to be added. And There is old RT from the Minneapolis Star Tribune who has not reviewed a film in decade who wrote a review. Since it been a long time I am not sure if his review will get added to RT
Hmm, that does sound strange, what is up with that?

Must've wanted to see the film so much that he/she was like, "Move out of the way, young'uns, I'll review this one".
nightfury93 wrote:
GamingFreak wrote:Edelstein is a top critic so the perfect score is gone now.

Yep... dang.
Ah well, it was bound to happen.
What kinda films does Edelstein like? He a good critic or a pretentious a-hole critic? Just wondering haha.
He gave positive reviews to Spider-Man: Homecoming and Valerian, and negative reviews to War for the Planet of the Apes and Dunkirk.

From that, I gather that he is more favorable towards fun blockbusters than serious ones.
nightfury93 wrote:
MuffinMcFluffin wrote:Another rotten tomato.

135/7
95%
8.9/10
So is it pretty safe to say the score *knocks on wood* probably will stay at least 93/94% and 8.5/8.6 avg. rating at this point?
*knocks on wood harder*
I wouldn't jinx it. :P

Posts: 356
Joined: November 2014
okungnyo wrote:
From that, I gather that he is more favorable towards fun blockbusters than serious ones.
Oh, well in that case if any Top Critic had to give it poor markings, I'm glad it was him.
Then again maybe that's just my disdain for Marvel/Disney talking :lol:

Posts: 88
Joined: March 2015
RT 142/8 8.8

Posts: 395
Joined: June 2017
Damn they had to bring back rex Reed lmfao

Posts: 2256
Joined: March 2010
Location: Texas
Rex Reed is back in the critic game, just for Nolan. Interesting. :lol: But what the hell, a 50 is better than the 25 he gave Inception.

Posts: 443
Joined: June 2017
Location: Holland
AsianVersionOfET wrote:spert is just a troll guys. Ignore him. Her? It. Ignore it.
Yes. Please.

Posts: 2256
Joined: March 2010
Location: Texas
Kenneth Turan's review for the L.A. Times is rated 100 on MetaCritic.

Posts: 3323
Joined: September 2013
Location: Copenhagen
10th

Posts: 3323
Joined: September 2013
Location: Copenhagen
dammt

Post Reply