100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

July 27, 2017 - Image 6

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

6

Thursday, July 27, 2017
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
ARTS

Christopher
Nolan

(“Interstellar”)
has
wedged

himself between two starkly
different subgenres of film:
cerebral, understated thrillers
and large-scale blockbusters.
His earlier movies, like the
masterful
“Memento,”
forgo

grandiose special effects in
favor of mind-bending plots,
whereas his recent releases
favor mind-bending cinematic
techniques rather than tightly
structured plots. Sometimes, it
feels like he writes messy plots
to appear complex and cerebral
without actually having much
substance

Nolan
fanboys

can leave the theater feeling,
like,
“totally
mind
blown,

bro”
without
understanding

anything about the movie. But
nonetheless, Nolan has a vision
perfectly suited for the summer
blockbuster; he deserves all of
the credit he gets, reshaping the
action movie genre as we know
it.

“Dunkirk” is an amalgamation

of his greatest talents jampacked
into 106 minutes of some of
the most inspired filmmaking
in
recent
years.

Undoubtedly, this
is Nolan’s finest
movie
and
the

most
compelling,

honest war film
since 2009’s “The
Hurt Locker.”

The
movie
is

set
during
the

Battle of Dunkirk,
where hundreds of
thousands of Allied
troops were forced to retreat to
the French port town’s beaches
along the English Channel after
suffering horrendous casualties
to the Germans. Its British
perspective
is
a
refreshing

take on the war genre and an
obvious reminder that World
War II was being fought years
before American involvement.
“Dunkirk” does not shy away
from the overarching sense of
hopelessness and defeat Allied
forces felt in the earliest years
of the War, and the entire movie
focuses on the effort to evacuate
the
thousands
of
stranded

British troopsx.

“Dunkirk” is split into three

locations — the beach, the
sea and the air — all focusing
on different perspectives of
the evacuation. What’s most
compelling, though, is Nolan’s
storytelling
technique.
Like

“Memento”
and
“Inception,”

Nolan experiments with time,
but in this case, with much
more subtlety — “Dunkirk” still
follows chronological order, but
with a slight tweak. The movie’s
three
parts
show
separate

efforts
of
the
evacuation

process occurring over different
amounts of time. This addition
is just enough to make the
story that much more dynamic,
ultimately becoming a collage
of three heroic tales that are
dependant on one another.

The story along the beach

occurs over one week and
focuses on Tommy, a timid
British soldier played by Fionn
Whitehead in his first on-screen
appearance. Here, the troops
dodge frequent bombing runs
while waiting for Naval rescue
ships, many of which end up
sinking anyway. On the water,
Mark
Rylance
(“Bridge
of

Spies”) stars as Mr. Dawson, a
mariner who agrees to take his
private boat across the Channel

to
Dunkirk

in an attempt
to assist the
evacuation
effort. He is
accompanied
by
his
son

Peter
(Tom

Glynn-
Carney)
and

George (Barry
Keoghan,
“71”), another

teenage helper. These events on
Dawson’s boat occur over one
day. The story in the air occurs
only over one hour and revolves
around three RAF pilots as they
provide air support during the
evacuation. By creating three
perspectives, Nolan leaves us
anxiously awaiting to discover
how each story connects with
the other.

Along
with
Rylance,

“Dunkirk”
boasts
some
of

today’s top actors. Tom Hardy
(“Mad Max: Fury Road”) stars
as Farrier, a heroic RAF pilot,
and even though his dialogue
is
nearly
indistinguishable

over the noise of the plane, his

performance is still, somehow,
compelling. And as much as
it pains me to say, even Harry
Styles’s performance as Alex, a
British soldier, is solid. However,
the characters are never the
movie’s focal point: Nolan uses
them simply as buffers to tell
the story, characterizing them
enough to still be interesting,
though never diving too deep
into their personal lives. We
grow to care about the main
characters, like Mr. Dawson and
Tommy, but never get distracted
from the underlying tension that
builds throughout the movie.

Nolan’s screenplay sticks out

as the movie’s strongest point,
even considering the visceral
practical effects and stunning
cinematography. There isn’t one
scene that feels superfluous:
It’s Nolan’s tightest and most
concise story to date. In many
ways, “Dunkirk” could have no
dialogue and still be equally
gripping. We care about the
characters, but what they have
to say is of little importance.
Instead, we care about what
happens to them, and this lends
itself to some heartbreaking
moments. Ultimately, the movie
is
a
slowburner

tension

continuously builds until it
boils over — but it doesn’t have
a dull second. Even from the
opening scene, where Tommy
avoids enemy fire, every bit of
action enthralls.

From watching a massive

boat
sink
into
the
ocean

to a dogfight between two
airplanes, “Dunkirk”’s action
sequences are stunning yet
haunting. It shows the horrors
of war without needing to be
excessively gory. Some of the
most vivid imagery comes from
scenes where no explosions are
occurring, and Hans Zimmer’s
score only adds more depth to
the underlying tension.

Nolan
pioneered
the

superhero
subgenre
with

his
“Batman”
trilogy
with

no prior experience in this
genre beforehand. And now,
“Dunkirk”
is
as
equally

innovative for the modern war
movie.
Nolan
is
frequently

talked about as a visionary
genius, one of modern cinema’s
most influential directors: I
now completely agree with this
assessment.

‘Dunkirk’ is Nolan’s best

WILL STEWART

Summer Managing Arts Editor

MOVIE REVIEW

Lana finds ‘Lust’

Lana Del Rey — originally one of

pop music’s most debated figures —
has created a lane of her own after
five studio releases in just as many
years. Following a rocky outset with
nearly spiteful reviews of her debut
Born To Die, Del Rey has steadily
released ever-evolving work: each
consecutive
project
adding
to

her catalogue like a new book in
a series, each one unmistakably
written by the same author and
told through the same protagonist’s
eyes, swapping out plot points for
production techniques.

Born
To
Die’s
trip-hop,

Ultraviolence’s
brooding
rock

and Honeymoon’s baroque jazz
are singular in their productions,
but they approach life from the
same place: mourning the past,
sulking in the present or altogether
dreaming up an alternate reality.
One of Del Rey’s greatest strengths
as a storyteller and
vocalist is her ability to
blur the line between
biography and fantasy
so
flawlessly
that

listeners are forced to
take all or none.

Lust for Life is Del Rey’s longest,

most diverse album. Though it
incorporates production techniques
from all of her previous releases,
Lust for Life seems like a direct
follow-up to Born to Die. Aside from
the obvious title dynamics, the
albums’ covers parallel one another
with Del Rey standing in the center,
title above head, name below, with
a pick-up truck behind her. One
key difference: She smiles on Lust
for Life, a first for any of her album
covers.

As a whole, Lust for Life isn’t

as striking as Ultraviolence or
Honeymoon because it’s not an

exploration of genre and tone in
addition to one of Del Rey’s psyche.
Lust for Life holds itself together
across a varied production of
trap drums and folk strings by
blurring lyrical lines instead of
instrumentals, carrying phrases
and images across the album (She
rhymes “summer” and “bummer”
in the opening lines of “White
Mustang,” endless references to
beaches outside of “13 Beaches” and
she even slides in “It’s more than just
a video game” on “Beautiful People,
Beautiful Problems”).

Lana’s
unshakeable
self-

awareness is the cornerstone of this
record; it not only allows her to troll
the audience with meta-hipster
lyrics delivered with a wink and a
smile, but it also allows her to shift
her perspective into the very real
Trump-era, talk about her hope for
the future and confront both the
demons and the men she’s toyed
with for the past four releases.

Lust for Life is full of firsts for

Del Rey. It’s the first time she’s

approached
unadulterated joy
and
expressed

hope for the future
(“Love,” “Lust for
Life,”
“Change”).

It’s the first time

she has had features on her own
albums,
perfectly
representing

the genres from which she pulls
inspiration (The Weeknd, Playboi
Carti and A$AP Rocky) and the
iconography she has always called
on (Stevie Nicks and Sean Ono
Lennon).

”Who’s tougher than this bitch? /

Who’s freer than me?” she breathes
on “In My Feelings,” one of Lust For
Life’s standout tracks. For the last
five years, Del Rey has pretty much
done what she wants when she
wants and that has yet to fail her —
Lust for Life is a worthy addition to
her stacked catalogue.

CHRISTIAN KENNEDY

Online Arts Editor

“Dunkirk”

Rave Cinemas, Quality

16

Warner Bros. Pictures

Lust for Life

Lana Del Rey

Interscope Records

INTERSCOPE RECORDS

Lana Del Rey and The Weeknd standing confidently

MUSIC REVIEW

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan