Here we go again. A woman is crying that a historically accurate movie is too ‘manly’ because it followed… HISTORY.
The movie is epic and is being compared to the greats like “Saving Private Ryan,” “Hacksaw Ridge,” and “Black Hawk Down.”
Christopher Nolan really did an exceptional job with the movie.
This movie isn’t glorifying war, it displays the true struggle and reality that war is; a completely humanistic approach to it. However, because there is no ‘strong woman’ character in the movie the feminists of today are harping.
The Daily Caller reports ‘women’s magazine Marie Claire has seen fit to trash the film for “celebrating maleness”—asking instead why war movies aren’t being made for women.’
Columnist Mehera Bonner stated “Dunkirk” to be “basic.” “And look, it’s not like I need every movie to have ‘strong female leads.’ Wonder Woman can probably tide me over for at least a year and I understand that this was dominated by brave male soldiers. I get that,” she wrote, then proceeded to trash the film’s “general vibe.”
Despite enjoying the film’s intense moments and even the performances of its actors, including One Direction’s Harry Styles in his first big screen appearance, the Marie Claire writer slams Dunkirk for being “designed for men to man-out over.”
“The tenor of the people applauding it just screams ‘men-only’,” stating that male critics liked it only because it made them to feel ‘manly.’
Bonner continues: “To me, Dunkirk felt like an excuse for men to celebrate maleness—which apparently they don’t get to do enough. Fine, great, go forth, but if Nolan’s entire purpose is breaking the established war movie mold and doing something different—why not make a movie about women in World War II?” The Marie Claire writer argues that it’s the responsibility of top-tier directors like Nolan to make the films she wants more of.