Four Reasons Why Dunkirk Will Be a Flop!

Yeah, I know this site is supposed to be about "comic book" stuff, but I think anyone will agree that it's not really the case right now, since this site have been about blockbuster cinema in general, and prefix "comic book" in its name is really no longer relevant. And since Dunkirk is a blockbuster cinema, I think it's appropriate for me to tell you why this movie will not only be the first truly bad movie by Nolan (please, TDKR and Interstellar haters, leave your “smart” opinions outside), but it will be a flop of really catastrophic proportions. And I mean that, because, a lot of riding on this movie.

Reason Number 4:

Fricking PG-13!

A PG-13 movie, that is supposed to be built around a non-stop "tension and horror of war" (Nolan's words, not mine), is fricking PG-13? Listen, I'm not one of those lame whiners who will say that everything is better with an R-rating (even though it is). You can make a great PG-13 movie out of any subject matter, no matter how dark and mature it might be. You can make a PG-13 war movie… only if it’s not focused on the war itself and its awful nature. You can have a movie set in a war conflict, but that is about completely different subject and war is only a backdrop. This is not the case here. This movie is about war and the idea of trying to survive during the war crisis. And now, think for a second, how can you show the awful nature of war, a desperation and fear that soldiers felt during it, if you can’t even show a goddamn drop of blood in your movie? Yes, not everything has to be guts and torn limbs, but you also can’t take audience for granted and expect them to accept the awful nature of war without actually seeing its awful nature. Which is what Nolan's seeking to do with this movie: he wants audience to feel it. But how can you feel it if you can’t see it?

Reason Number 3:

Fricking 101-minute runtime?
 
By now, Nolan has been known for making his films very lengthy. In fact, so lengthy, people often criticize him for stuffing to much stuff into the movie and not leaving a lot of things on the cutting floor. Well, I guess he heard you, because Dunkirk is going to be not only the shortest movie Nolan ever made but also the shortest big-budgeted war movie ever.  And now thing start going little bit scary. A World War 2 movie with PG-13 rating and a runtime of a romantic comedy? That doesn’t sound promising. If you can’t show us the war itself in all its ugly glory, then maybe you have an interesting, well-written story for us? Maybe. But ask yourself: how can you write a great story with such limited amount of time while having to deal with so many events? Remember, this movie will not be focused on one character and instead will be cutting back and forth to different scenarios. I know a lot of good movies with a runtime under 100 minutes that tell compelling stories. But the difference is, those movies are mostly centered around one specific thing. This movie, however, positions itself as an “event”. So it’s very unlikely that the story is compelling enough for the viewers to care. In fact, the way Nolan describers this film, seems like this movie isn’t about the story; it’s about the experience. Which, again, sucks, because you can’t show us the full experience due to your fear of not getting more people seeing this movie.

Reason Number 2:

There is no defining character arc in this movie!??
 
Yes, you heard it right: this movie won’t have a character arc. This movie won’t focus on emotional journey of any of the characters; this movie won’t have a defined protagonist; it won’t be about relationships between the soldiers and such. This movie will be a 101-minute IMAX orgy of soldiers running around and being scared. Which explains the terribly short runtime for a movie like this. If you have no characters to build, you don’t need a lot of runtime. And that ain’t something I just came out with, mates. No-ho-ho-ho-ho! That is an actual fact. The script for Dunkirk is only 112 pages long and it has very little amount of dialogue. Sounds great, doesn't it? (No.)

Reason Number 1:

THIS F&*&*& GUY!

Look at this face, people. This is the face that destroyed this movie.

Conclusion:

So, now when you know all of these nuances – a bloodless war movie, a short as hell runtime, a non-character-based story – I think you will understand my consensus about the possibility of this movie flopping. And, quite honestly, I think it will. I will eat my words if it doesn’t, but I think I’m right with this one. Heck, I think critics will tear this movie to shreds. It will have 5% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, guarantee you, mates.