Reading that Lauren Schmidt and Greta Gerwig credit Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk (2017) with inspiring the temporal structures of The Witcher (2019–) and Little Women (2019) reminded me that I never wrote about one of my favorite moments in Nolan's movie, which exists only because of the cross-cutting of time.
I mentioned it in my original review: how the interplay of the three timelines that run in tandem on different scales "almost seems to recall a character from the dead." I should perhaps have said conjures. Someone we hadn't even known existed seems suddenly and hauntingly present, as miraculous and undeniable as the little ships themselves. ( Keep coming round. ) No wonder I associated the film almost subliminally with the Archers. That is, after all, the entire point of A Canterbury Tale (1944).
After I'd reviewed it, I actually went back to see Dunkirk for a second time in theaters. I wanted to observe the structure now that I knew the gist of it; what I felt I ended up observing was the emotion. It's not a cold movie for all its chronological complications; in fact much of its horror and poignancy is mined not from suspense but from the clicking into place of information gathered, as if accidentally, from later moments in time. It holds up to rewatch on more than the puzzle-level. I am curious now what similar effects The Witcher and Little Women derive from their juxtapositions and revisitings. Also I want to rewatch Baccano! (2007). Anyway, I don't necessarily think in linear narrative, so I always enjoy seeing other people also not do it. This continuity brought to you by my restored backers at Patreon.
I mentioned it in my original review: how the interplay of the three timelines that run in tandem on different scales "almost seems to recall a character from the dead." I should perhaps have said conjures. Someone we hadn't even known existed seems suddenly and hauntingly present, as miraculous and undeniable as the little ships themselves. ( Keep coming round. ) No wonder I associated the film almost subliminally with the Archers. That is, after all, the entire point of A Canterbury Tale (1944).
After I'd reviewed it, I actually went back to see Dunkirk for a second time in theaters. I wanted to observe the structure now that I knew the gist of it; what I felt I ended up observing was the emotion. It's not a cold movie for all its chronological complications; in fact much of its horror and poignancy is mined not from suspense but from the clicking into place of information gathered, as if accidentally, from later moments in time. It holds up to rewatch on more than the puzzle-level. I am curious now what similar effects The Witcher and Little Women derive from their juxtapositions and revisitings. Also I want to rewatch Baccano! (2007). Anyway, I don't necessarily think in linear narrative, so I always enjoy seeing other people also not do it. This continuity brought to you by my restored backers at Patreon.