The history of the Second World War is particularly important to us Poles. Recently, we commemorated another anniversary of the outbreak of the Warsaw Uprising. The uprising continues to provoke considerable controversy among us. To this day, we debate whether launching it was justified. Although the discussion continues, let us remember that, as one of the few nations in Europe, we did not regain our freedom and homeland without bloodshed. Learning about history is not merely studying thick books and “cramming” dates that will leave our memories anyway. I think there are many more interesting ways to learn about the history of our ancestors. Today I have decided to recommend an extraordinary film to you. Good cinema, despite being excellent entertainment, also has an educational function, especially when it concerns history.
This extraordinary film is “Dunkirk” (Polish: “Dunkierka”), directed by Christopher Nolan. Nolan is known primarily for action films (“Inception”, “The Dark Knight”, “The Dark Knight Rises”, “Batman Begins”).
Why this particular film? There are at least several answers. First of all, it is very good. Personally, I love good cinema, especially on the big screen. The large format conveys the atmosphere of a film. Recently, I watched several excellent war films. One of them was Mel Gibson’s “Hacksaw Ridge”. I mention this film deliberately. Before going to see “Dunkirk”, I went through all the more interesting reviews and watched the trailers. The first trailer disappointed me greatly. It showed almost nothing. Fortunately, several more appeared a few months later—this time genuinely attention-grabbing. Nolan’s latest film is compared precisely with “Hacksaw Ridge”. Many people claim that “Dunkirk” has no action, plot or characters. To some extent, I can agree. It is a distinctive film. There is little dialogue. However, this is not a problem at all. Imagine being fired upon with a machine gun. Bullets are whistling past your ear. Your rifle has jammed, to make matters worse, and you are genuinely in a critical situation—so what is there to talk about, and what dialogue is needed? None.
There is plenty of action in the film; after all, it is a war film. The advertisements before the screening completely wore me out. I nearly fell asleep, but the very first scene of the film pinned me to my seat. The director focuses on individual stories that come together to form a whole. At the forefront, our main character is primarily trying to survive and reach the beach at Dunkirk, from which the evacuation of Allied soldiers is being conducted.
The film is divided into several threads. Each of them is represented by a specific character. In addition to our unfortunate soldier Tommy (Fionn Whitehead), we watch a brave pilot named Farrier (Tom Hardy). His dilemma involves making an important decision: whether to save himself or rescue hundreds, perhaps thousands, of soldiers. Mr Dawson (Mark Rylance) is a civilian who sails his own boat to the soldiers’ aid. Commander Bolton (Kenneth Branagh) also attracts attention; he wants to save the men stranded on the beach at all costs, but is powerless against the German attacks that thwart every attempt at retreat. Each character presented in the film is a separate story, a small tragedy they must face on their own.
Christopher Nolan divided the film into sections: “One week”, “One day” and “One hour”. This allows him to present the entire story from different perspectives.
Comparing this film with the aforementioned “Hacksaw Ridge” is a mistake. Two different films, presented in completely different ways, cannot be compared. Nolan’s use of fewer dialogues is intended primarily to focus viewers on the drama of the individual characters and the desperate situation in which they find themselves. The director portrays the soldiers without pathos or excessive heroism. Above all, they are young people experiencing immense fear and stress.
The sound in “Dunkirk” deserves particular attention. The film has outstanding sound design. It allows viewers to feel the emotions during the various attacks. When German Ju 87 dive-bombers plunged downward, preparing to attack, I think more than one viewer identified with the Allies, who were easy targets on the beach.
It is worth recalling what the evacuation at Dunkirk was. The operation was called “Dynamo” and lasted from 26 May to 4 June 1940. Its aim was to transport the British Expeditionary Force, along with part of the French and Belgian forces, to Great Britain. Nearly 400,000 Allied soldiers were in Dunkirk. The Germans were capturing the city, while the French tried to hold their defensive positions for as long as possible. On the open ground of the beach, the Luftwaffe had an easier task of eliminating British, French and Belgian units.
The rescue operation succeeded thanks to Hitler’s decision not to use armoured forces. He believed that the difficult terrain around Dunkirk could cause heavy losses. The attack was conducted mainly from the air. Some historians also believe that halting the German advance was a gesture toward Churchill. Hitler hoped to conclude peace with Great Britain. Killing so many English soldiers could have been a serious political obstacle to reaching such an agreement.
Although the rescue operation was hailed as a great success, Prime Minister Winston Churchill stated that “wars are not won by evacuations”. He nevertheless admitted that without Dunkirk, England might have suffered defeat in the war against Germany.
“Dunkirk”, directed by Christopher Nolan, is a truly excellent film. It has attracted considerable attention. In the West, it received very strong reviews. It is promoted in the media as a major cinematic hit. Things are worse in Poland. The film is also discussed extensively online. If you have watched reviews on YouTube, for example, please do not let them influence you at all. The internet has the characteristic that everyone can say whatever they want. The quality of these statements or reviews is not always genuinely adequate.
I admit that I watched many reviews. Before the screening, I tried to get into the film’s atmosphere. Well, all the material I watched had little to do with this film. All the online reviewers seemed to have watched a completely different film from the one I saw. Above all, people emphasize Nolan’s lack of plot, the small amount of dialogue and the excess of music. After the screening, my colleague himself remarked that there were no Germans in the film, although the film had made a good impression on him. Indeed, German soldiers do not appear until one of the final scenes. Nevertheless, it is good cinema. The film is not meant to portray lofty, morally perfect heroes. It is stripped of strongly defined characters, but that does not mean the characters have no moral dilemmas. They do—and they are quite serious. The action is not “lame”, as some claim. A war film of this kind contains a great deal of it, while Hans Zimmer’s excellent music creates an extraordinary atmosphere.
Should you go and see this film? Definitely. It is above all for lovers of good cinema and people interested in history. Nolan’s film is the kind of film missing from Polish cinema. Unfortunately, Polish war cinema is mostly burdened with grandeur and excessive heroism among its characters. In “Battle of Warsaw 1920”, although the realities of war were presented very well, a good plot was missing. The love and combat storyline was too simple—simply boring. This does not change the fact that Polish cinema has reached a very high level in recent years. We merely have a problem with depicting history, which we treat very emotionally.
“Dunkirk” contains many beautiful shots and wonderful scenes. The film was shot on film stock, giving it the additional charm of realistic, vivid colours.
So I invite everyone to the cinema. The film is still available at Multikino cinemas (Zgorzelec) and Helios (Legnica) until 10 August.
Paweł Skiersinis
The author is a blogger and a history enthusiast, particularly passionate about the history of Lower Silesia and Poland. Why Lower Silesia? As he himself says: “Why not? The most interesting history is the history around us, concerning us and our ancestors.”
And he adds: “I try to present history from a different perspective, in an interesting way—not in the typical textbook style, full of dry dates and facts. My articles concern facts that we will not find in textbooks and well-known publications. The history of Lower Silesia is undoubtedly interesting and fascinating, so it is sometimes worth devoting at least a brief moment to it.”