Off Topic Thread 3.0

Podge_irl wrote: »

Lacks substance in what way? I thought it was fantastic. You could argue it doesn't quite capture the scale of the events, but I felt that was deliberate in that it really was only focusing on a few individual stories.

Lacks substance, as in dealing with what went on around Dunkirk. It barely makes reference to the British being prepared to abandon 360,000 troops to conserve ships and planes. It doesn't really deal in any great way with the actual issues of the day. I know he's chosen to focus on the human survival instinct, but it's strange to choose a war movie to do that and largely ignore the war.

stephen_n wrote: »

Lacks substance, as in dealing with what went on around Dunkirk. It barely makes reference to the British being prepared to abandon 360,000 troops to conserve ships and planes. It doesn't really deal in any great way with the actual issues of the day. I know he's chosen to focus on the human survival instinct, but it's strange to choose a war movie to do that and largely ignore the war.

You don't see a single German. It's all very intentional, it makes the threat to their lives seem a lot more sinister and more generally existential. Indiewire's review of the film does a better job of explaining it.

I thought they addressed the idea that they were willing to sacrifice the soldiers multiple times though, in the conversations between the admiral and the colonel.

.ak

swiwi_ wrote: »

Did you see it in imax .ak?

Apparently imax, 70mm, gives the best cinematography experience.

No but i plan on rewatching it as many times as possible...

.ak

stephen_n wrote: »

Lacks substance, as in dealing with what went on around Dunkirk. It barely makes reference to the British being prepared to abandon 360,000 troops to conserve ships and planes. It doesn't really deal in any great way with the actual issues of the day. I know he's chosen to focus on the human survival instinct, but it's strange to choose a war movie to do that and largely ignore the war.

I don't see how what you've described above translates into lack of substance (and for the record I do feel they made the idea of abandoning of the troops very clear).

For me this why it's such a good movie, it doesn't comply with the usual war movie cliches, it's completely unique in its format, and it doesn't rely on massive battles to tell a story.

I thought it was beautifully conposed, with so many stories, events and characters the thing was overflowing with substance! You're brought along a journey of sheer misery, to panic, to elation and sadness.

Hans Zimmer has also outdone himself here.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You don't see a single German. It's all very intentional, it makes the threat to their lives seem a lot more sinister and more generally existential. Indiewire's review of the film does a better job of explaining it.

I thought they addressed the idea that they were willing to sacrifice the soldiers multiple times though, in the conversations between the admiral and the colonel.

He did choose to highlight the sinister threat early on with the use of propaganda as a tool of fear. Having a faceless enemy plays up on that too, but it also removes the context of the fear to a certain degree. It's like he wanted to down focus the war aspect and just focus on the human desire for survival.

Yes Branagh's character mentions it on two occasions in conversation, but it's like a passing footnote more than anything else. I guess in the current climate, I was expecting more of an anti-war sentiment or undertone i.e. the lessons to be learned. Nolan obviously very deliberately steered away from that.

.ak wrote: »

I don't see how what you've described above translates into lack of substance (and for the record I do feel they made the idea of abandoning of the troops very clear).

For me this why it's such a good movie, it doesn't comply with the usual war movie cliches, it's completely unique in its format, and it doesn't rely on massive battles to tell a story.

I thought it was beautifully conposed, with so many stories, events and characters the thing was overflowing with substance! You're brought along a journey of sheer misery, to panic, to elation and sadness.

Hans Zimmer has also outdone himself here.

It certainly doesn't comply with any war movie cliches, it's not a war movie.

It does have lots of stories, small vignettes that are well composed, well acted and delivered, but does that give it substance? It's like a collection of snapshots taken from different prespectives, but nothing to connect them, for me it misses the story of the bigger picture. Then again as I said, Nolan seemed to want to avoid making a war movie and make a survival story.

The time frame skipping was annoying too

Podge_irl

stephen_n wrote: »

The time frame skipping was annoying too

Yeah, I don't think that was made as clear as it could have been at the start.

pickarooney

I just finished watching it. I wasn't too impressed with the cinematography.

.Sent from my iPhone

Was surprised they didn't digitally edit the buildings on the seafront, the scene when Tom Hardy flies by near the end, you see all the modern glass and steel buildings.

thomond2006

Where did all these donut places in Dublin appear from? They're suddenly everywhere.

molloyjh

thomond2006 wrote: »

Where did all these donut places in Dublin appear from? They're suddenly everywhere.

What do you mean suddenly!? The doughnut age has been upon us for over a year now.

thomond2006 wrote:

Where did all these donut places in Dublin appear from? They're suddenly everywhere.

Been appearing for last year or two. Apparently their success is heavily assisted by the theory that they're an extremely pleasing food aesthetically which means all those hipsters and millenials are desperate to buy them and post photos of them on their social media.

Erik Shin

Any nice places to eat in the ballsbridge area? ...I shall of course be wearing my Munster Jersey tomorrow

http://coub.com/view/ax7s

dregin

Erik Shin wrote: »

Any nice places to eat in the ballsbridge area? ...I shall of course be wearing my Munster Jersey tomorrow

http://coub.com/view/ax7s

http://paulies.ie

molloyjh

Buer wrote: »

thomond2006 wrote:

Where did all these donut places in Dublin appear from? They're suddenly everywhere.

Been appearing for last year or two. Apparently their success is heavily assisted by the theory that they're an extremely pleasing food aesthetically which means all those hipsters and millenials are desperate to buy them and post photos of them on their social media.

Most are crap. Far too heavy. A doughnut is meant to be light. Like croissants most places have no idea how to do them properly. That said Off Beat do a fantastic lemon meringue doughnut.

Off beat red velvet with cream cheese is heaven.

Lads. A moment on the lips, a lifetime on the hips

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Lads. A moment on the lips, a lifetime on the hips

Fook that. My gang are away. I get to cook what I want. Cuban sandwiches for lunch and pasta dish with enough cream to drown a man for dinner.

Wouldn't mind a lemon meringue doughnut now for supper.

Erik Shin wrote: »

Any nice places to eat in the ballsbridge area? ...I shall of course be wearing my Munster Jersey tomorrow

As dregin recommended, Paulie's is solid. If you're looking for a bite during the day, drop in to Juniors (their sister restaurant) which is around the corner. They've some of the best sandwiches in Dublin. At least they used to. Try their signature hero sandwich.

Farmer Brown's down on Bath Avenue can be good too but will be annoyingly busy if you're going for lunch at the weekend. The house burger is very decent if a little messy.

mfceiling

Ah lads if you are in ballsbridge it has to be Rolys Bistro.

Good solid grub and lovely staff. Fairly unfussy stuff for a Munster man!!

Buer wrote: »

Fook that. My gang are away. I get to cook what I want. Cuban sandwiches for lunch and pasta dish with enough cream to drown a man for dinner.

Wouldn't mind a lemon meringue doughnut now for supper.

Surely you'd be spending a few nights out on the sauce in that case?

awec wrote: »

Surely you'd be spending a few nights out on the sauce in that case?

Oh awec. You'd be mistaken to think that:

a) People in their early/mid thirties are available or interested in going on the p*ss on Monday night
b) I'm most interested in anything other than getting 10 hours sleep

I have eaten my body weight in pasta and have watched GoT. I'll be asleep shortly.

pickarooney

Buer wrote: »

Fook that. My gang are away. I get to cook what I want. Cuban sandwiches for lunch and pasta dish with enough cream to drown a man for dinner.

Wouldn't mind a lemon meringue doughnut now for supper.

Just looked up Cuban sandwich. Dayum that sounds tasty but aintnobodygottimefodat.

Buer wrote: »

Oh awec. You'd be mistaken to think that:

a) People in their early/mid thirties are available or interested in going on the p*ss on Monday night
b) I'm most interested in anything other than getting 10 hours sleep

I have eaten my body weight in pasta and have watched GoT. I'll be asleep shortly.

Life in your thirties sounds class.

Rigor Mortis

awec wrote: »

Life in your thirties sounds class.

Wait till you get to your forties. Its the same but with elasticated waistbands

Erik Shin

awec wrote: »

Life in your thirties sounds class.

You think that's good....wait until you hit your 40's...bed by 9, waking at 12...3...&5 for a piss.... eating food that's good for you but tastes of cardboard....ah tis the schizzle !

pickarooney wrote: »

Just looked up Cuban sandwich. Dayum that sounds tasty but aintnobodygottimefodat.

Gotta do a bit of prep work in the day or two before. Probably not worth it overall just for a sandwich but it is very good. Was eager to try a few new meals with the spare time.

Its unbelievable

Just looks like a ham and cheese toastie?