I am an enthusiastic amateur historian with a particular interest in World War Two. When I heard this film was being made I was both excited, and apprehensive. I was thrilled that one of the great military evacuations of history was coming to the screen, but worried about how the sheer scope of covering an exodus of around a third of a million troops, with the successful ending known, would be tackled.

Early reviews praised the spectacle, but criticised the narrative.

It is a very good looking film with plenty of panoramic sweeps giving it an epic feel. Director Christopher Nolan has produced a film with an authentic, defiant, heroic , tinge. Understandably, Nolan eschews trying to tell the whole story. There is no Goering, Rundstedt, Hitler, Churchill or Gort. Instead the story is told in three micro stories on the sea, land and air. This has advantages, and disadvantages.

There is an intensity and visceral energy to the aerial dogfights, the plight of foot soldiers desperately trying to leave the beaches, only to find themselves torpedoed, and back on the beaches again, and hose manning the flotillas of small boats. However, those stories are vignettes, and not enough time is given to develop an emotional connection with the protagonists. The absence of input from the respective national and military leaders also fails to join the dots of individual heroism and tragedy.

Thus the early praise and criticism is both justified. This is a fine looking film, spectacular, and compelling in its presentation. But the narrative, and characterisation, is weak, making it fall short as one of the great war films.