Download Dunkirk movie 2017, movie Dunkirk 2017 download, 2017 movie Dunkirk download.
USA, UK, France, Netherlands
Drama, Thriller, Action, History, War
IMDB rating:
Christopher Nolan
Constantin Balsan as French Soldier 3
Michel Biel as French Soldier 2
Damien Bonnard as French Soldier
Luke Thompson as Warrant Officer
Lee Armstrong as Grenadier
Jack Lowden as Collins
James Bloor as Irate Soldier
Billy Howle as Petty Officer
Barry Keoghan as George
Aneurin Barnard as Gibson
Tom Hardy as Farrier
Mark Rylance as Mr. Dawson
Storyline: Evacuation of Allied soldiers from Belgium, the British Empire, and France, who were cut off and surrounded by the German army from the beaches and harbor of Dunkirk, France, between May 26- June 04, 1940, during Battle of France in World War II.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x1080 px 8947 Mb h264 11730 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x404 px 1007 Mb h264 1319 Kbps mkv Download
Good Attempt But Lacks Impact
This was a good try to be sure, but in truth I felt underwhelmed when I left the studio. The film is technically near perfect but it fails to show the true scale of the evacuation or the civilian and military fleet that pulled it off. Also it totally failed to show the heroic defense by the French who held the Germans back for those vital few days and allowed the British to escape.

Early on Kenneth Branagh's character states that there are over 400.000 men on this beach yet we fail to see any more than 200 or so in any shot, the rest of the time the beach feels near deserted. Now I understand that hiring 400.000 extras for a film would be financially and logistically impossible yet without this kind of scale or even some clever CGI work this film feels like a few dozen guys running about on a beach being rescued by a handful of boats. Anyway, it was still a good try and the aerial dogfights with the Spitfires was magical, that alone made it almost worth watching, almost.
Underwhelming and myopic
The evacuation of Dunkirk was one of the most important moments in history, and a pivotal part of WWII. This movie had the opportunity to express the greatness and the gravity of this event, and it failed.

The flyover shots of a few dozen soldiers on the beaches, when there should be ten of thousands, failed to express the enormity of the situation. Similarly the dozen or so civilian boats, when there should have been thousands, underwhelmed their contributions. The attempt to humanize the story by showing a few individual vignettes, in one case a single incident shown from multiple perspectives, also failed.

No one character was engaging enough to impress the tension or magnitude of the situation. In essence this movie made a momentous and terrifying event a little boring. In doing so, it does a disservice to those that have experienced combat.
Another overrated movie
I do not understand why this movie gets such good reviews when it does not reflect how it really was. Where are the 400,000 people? Where are all the planes, the boats? The big ships that are hit by torpedoes or bombs roll over to the left side right away and sink, quite strange. Then you have a spitfire that runs out of fuel at a fairly low altitude, yet it's flying around forever and shooting other aircraft down before it lowers the undercarriage and lands well on the beach. They have also added a noisy background sound that becomes quite annoying in the long run. A disappointing movie that's not worth watching at the cinema.
Not really a movie about Dunkirk
******* this review may contain spoilers *************** If you are like me, a WWII history buff, and excited to see a new movie about the battle of Dunkirk, you will be totally disappointed.

It feels like a low budget movie, you don't see any German soldiers for the whole movie. What?? how do you have a war movie where hundreds of thousands people fought and you don't show what's going on the other side?

It would have been better named as 'some side stories during the battle of Dunkirk', because that's what it is. The title is misleading, it's called Dunkirk so people would see it.

There is this endless air battle between couple of airplanes that's like half the movie, totally unnecessary. Nobody need that much detail about a fight between couple of fighter planes.

The other half the movie is about a little fishing ship going to Dunkirk to carry some troops back, I don't really care about that either.

I feel like I wasted my $12.
The film company must have spent the $150M on setting up false ratings
The subject matter provided so much potential, so much opportunity - but instead it is unbelievably bad in almost every possible respect. It may have been closer to a Battle of Britain film than about Dunkirk.

For a film about Dunkirk I would watch the old one from the 1950's which is a little slow at the beginning as they develop the characters - but in the end the film so so much better having characters in it.

I guess the budget must have run out though - they didn't have enough money to buy any German uniforms. You don't see any German troops fighting. Even when they are in the boat all you see is bullet holes appearing but you don't see the Germans. Then at the very end of the film you see the pilot being taken prisoner by two Germans who are blurred out! Why was that?
Did I see a different movie than everyone else that has raved about how good it is?
I was very disappointed with this movie. I have liked previous Nolan movies but this one left me feeling cheated that I had spent that much money to see it. It was boring and unrealistic.One scene had a ship getting hit with a bomb and immediately rolling on it's side then remaining afloat.At the end a plane runs out of fuel and seemingly defies the laws of physics by gliding forever and ever shooting down a plane before landing on the beach. They kept showing shots of the beach with lines of soldiers that nowhere approximated over 400,000 soldiers. Same with the amount of ships and boats and planes. The hype of this being one of the best war movies ever had me expecting something special. Instead it had me sitting there wondering when the fantastic movie was going to start. I waited in vain. Instead I left the show with a headache from the noise bombardment from the soundtrack.My biggest sense of wonder was that they had spent that much money making it. I wanted to like this movie but it never happened for me.
Save yourself the time: Just watch the trailer.
*Please understand my rating is to compensate for the absurd amount of high ratings this film has gotten based on what I suppose is mere hype and anticipation. Because nothing in the film is more interesting than a silent WWII Documentary.

I'm a huge fan of Nolan's work. I was excited to see his latest in Dunkirk. It may be the worst film he's made. And I think- if you place any director with half the notoriety on the bill... this movie gets a 7.0 rating at best. But. With Nolan's name attached, people decide it's a masterpiece before viewing it- and they wouldn't change their opinion after.

There's no story. There's no character worth noting or caring about. There's no way to know what exactly is happening in many of the scenes due to the choppy editing... and every character seeming to be from the same clone-machine. (seriously- how many dark-haired guys with the same haircut can you squeeze into a single casting?)

It's monotone, it's repetitive, it's essentially the same scene for 2 hours... and that'd be fine if something notable happens- but it never does. There's never a moment where you care. Never a moment that hits you in the form of empathy, suspense, etc. It's essentially like Nolan wanted to play with a few boats, planes, and do it at the beach... and he filmed it.

It's been a long time since I've ever looked away from a screen and twiddled my thumbs wondering if something was going to happen or if it would just end if not... but I caught myself looking around the theater often. If I had a watch, I would have checked it.


About the only notable moment that SHOULD draw some sort of reaction from audience members, is an extremely odd scuffle on board where a boy falls what looks to be 5ft to the floor below... and somehow loses his eyesight, somehow seems on his deathbed, and then dies... None of it makes sense, and the execution seems lazy and forced at the same time. The dad doesn't care. The guy responsible doesn't really care. The brother seems to care... for about 10 seconds. This part could have been cut from the film completely and wouldn't change anything. Much like a lot of the film.

The film is essentially the trailer... over... and over.... and over again. Even Hans Zimmer, who is usually brilliant, completely misses the mark on this one. He's trying to force suspenseful sounds and noise where the film simply doesn't match up with action.

How do you show the harshness of war while basically showing no one in pain? The closest thing we get to that is a few people drowning- but is flooding the real nightmare of war? You'd think so. It's truly the only fearful antagonist in this film. Water. And how many times can we watch soldiers stacked in bundles stare up at the sky, seemingly as bored as I was watching them, only to have a few water-balloon efficient bombs fall around them?

The editing was all over the place. Continuity issues everywhere. Daylight one second- dawn the next, back to daylight... the cuts would randomly shift to another area of soldiers that look exactly like the previous... sometimes in repeat scenes (which wasn't consistent enough to read), sometimes in time shifts... and none of it is really justified other than Nolan stroking himself to the millions he suckered everyone for here.

Possibly the most boring film I've seen in years. Incredibly disappointing effort by Nolan.

OH! Positive: It's pretty. For about 30 minutes. Then you're pretty tired of watching the monotone screensaver'esque takes that never seem to vary, with no contrast.
Hipsterish affectation of an "artistic" war movie.
This movie is so paper thin I really can't write much about it. So many missed opportunities in a film about one of the most spectacular and complex battles of WWII. I can see what Nolan tried to do here, a kind of British "Thin Red Line" (there's even wind in the grass, lol, i kid you not), but he failed spectacularly. There are no memorable characters to be found here, and one wonders even if there are any actual characters at all. Not one, not one of them has any semblance of a character arc. Not one. Again, I see how Nolan tried to convey the impersonality of war and insignificance of the individual but he did it with such a heavy, clumsy hand, providing us with no counterpoint with which to drive the point home. It's basic screen writing stuff really. I'd expect such ineptitude from a first year film student but not from a supposed "master of the craft".

But anyways, this could have been forgivable if the film was more about the event itself, but it fails at that too. After watching the film, you'd be given to believe that the Battle of Dunkirk was fought by three Spitfires (100 were lost over the beeches alone), 1 German heinkel, a couple of stukas, 2 destroyers or a dozen or so boats... Oh yes and maybe a few hundred men standing quietly on a beach, doing nothing except desperately trying to look morose and dejected in a faintly passive-aggressive way. It's ridiculous. We are talking about total and absolute chaos happening there, hundreds of thousands of rifles alone discarded on the beach, not to mention guns, artillery, trucks... Burning and sinking ships of all sizes all across the horizon, parts of beaches inaccessible from rotting corpses washing up with tides. This was actually way bigger than D-Day landings in terms of men and equipment stuffed in a very small patch of land. Half a million desperate men stuffed in a small town, bombarded incessantly and under constant attack from bombers. Where did all those people defecate, what did they eat ffs? I wanted to know that, really. That at least would have given some much needed humanity to the so-called-characters Nolan keeps yanking around like so much puppets. So many missed opportunities there...

If Nolan wanted to do a tight little film about isolation and desperation of being on the loosing side of the war, he had plenty of other places and battles to choose from. Just ask around. Or if he simply had to insist on Dunkirk, then we should have seen this total chaos all around our protagonists, in the background at least - that would have served as a really powerful, so desperately needed counterpoint to the individual suffering and heroism.

And this brings me to the final point. The movie is one tone only. A monotone repetition of sights and emotions we've seen and experienced before. No one cracks a joke. No one really breaks down. No one has an embarrassing moment. There are no ups and downs, it's just some morose faceless robots performing obvious actions leading towards a bleedingly obvious goal. One single emotional and narrative tone from the beginning to the end. The entire emotional and narrative content of the movie would have fit snugly into a 20 minute short, and that is pretty much how long it takes before you start yawning. The best thing that can be said about the movie is that individual scenes are well directed and worth experiencing. But that is the real problem here - the film is constructed as a series of impressive "experiences" rather than cohesive piece of drama (And this particular historical event is almost uniquely stuffed with dramatic opportunities. It's almost as if golden-age Hollywood writers wrote the script for the actual event.) In other words, it's a Dunkirk theme park rather than a movie. You take rides. And that's it. And even those become repetitive after a while.
Need CGI & better music(or less)
Music tempo was overpowering,the exhausted cowardly Brit trying to take a dump on the beach in the beginning of the movie with ear piercing somber music while his pants are down around his ankles was an ominous sign of things to come.

The siege of Dunkirk (historically crammed with 300,000-400,000 vacating France with at least 10,000 on the sand at one time) seemed empty for lack of CGI & modern day reservist extras, Nolan went cheap & only hired 500 weekend warriors plus a dozen vehicles from a local car club. The civilian boat flotilla numbered a half dozen borrowed from the London Maritime Museum , CGI was needed badly...I cant believe I wrote that!

Also scenes kept repeating themselves,like the movie was stuck in a loop ( going cheap again using one day aerial footage) Two Spitfires against two Messerschmitt Bf 109's escorting a bomber trying to make a bomb run on a tugboat,trawler or small freighters must have been reused 3-4 times. A lone war museum Heinkel He 111 lining up like a pregnant fat duck seems rather suicidal even with Mr. Bean manning the ack- ack or is WW2 now in the mythology/fantasy realm & Nolan must not be critiqued while misusing the last flyable HE111...probably as not to tear off the wings doing fancy maneuvers & upping the price tag of this Turkey to $200 Million .

Plus that annoying music to camouflage the reuse of the footage was pure trickery & was getting blatant in the middle,even the lone CGI of the Stuka dive bombing the pier was reused many times with the music blasting in the foreground ...the same with the overturning Grey tugboat & swimming extras.

Nolan's soldiers seemed hauntingly bored & extremely selfish (Putting to much of today's persona in a movie is not a good thing) The somber cowardly Lion characterizations made the British retreating army an army of fools with the French soldiers looking on with grim contempt as the Brits throw them under the bus ( E.U blow-back propaganda even infects Dunkirk) The antiquated "Hold the Line!" isn't what one hears from today's metrosexual British males & it reflects badly in how one perceives history in today's age.The Brits at Dunkirk were climbing over each other backs to get out ...that is how I perceive Nolan's Crayola Kindergarten scribbles to be & not Churchill's heroic histrionics with his empire on the line.

Now since WW2 is now a distant memory with half of millennial iPhone humping narcissistic dolts rather clueless about anything concerning reality of historical placement, the story/movie did an awful job of explaining Dunkirk in the grand scheme of things . How many movie goers later Googled Wikipedia 'WW2' for an explanation of the Battle of France? ... not many if I know my fellow citizens. Nolan could have exchanged the Spitfires & Messerschmitts with the Millennial Falcon & X-Wing fighters I doubt any of today's citizens would have noticed nor cared.

The Germans (Nazis) were shadow figures & the explanation of why Hitler paused in pushing the Brits into the sea was brushed off like so much sand... Adolf was a cunning diplomatic in the first year of the war & Churchill didn't bite the Carrot while Adolf halted the tanks letting the Brits vacate without being massacred mercilessly while awaiting England come to terms(But that is politically incorrect to question motives or think outside what is acceptable .. now back to Star Wars sequel #9)

In conclusion the movie left me empty just like the sands of Dunkirk & any residue interest in 'WW2' was latter replaced by me digging through the closet looking for a dusty VHS copy of "The Bridge to Far" & reminiscing /realizing how far Hollywood has sunk & now sucks.
Download Dunkirk movie 2017, Dunkirk movie 2017 download. Joseph: I am very pleased download Dunkirk AVI is my favorite for quality films and generally for the whole video. Especially when the director of the film Christopher Nolan, this picture failed to fame. * Jessica: I can tell you that download Dunkirk dvdrip was a very even super-duper and quality as always on top. Generally, I think that for the 2017 is the best movie! Someone can certainly argue with me, but this is my personal opinion and some of you may not be able to share. Although I as a woman can be and forgive my statement :)