A recent review from USA Today for the movie “Dunkirk” pointed out that some fans might not be pleased with the lack of women and black people in the film.
The review is titled, “Christopher Nolan’s excellent Dunkirk explores heroism in innovative fashion,” and is written by Brian Truitt.
It’s worth noting the review of Christopher Nolan’s epic World War II film as a whole is incredibly glowing, but one part is certainly causing some people to raise their eyebrows.
The review read in part:
The trio of timelines can be jarring as you figure out how they all fit, and the fact that there are only a couple of women and no lead actors of color may rub some the wrong way. Still, Nolan’s feat is undeniable: He’s made an immersive war movie that celebrates the good of mankind while also making it clear that no victory is without sacrifice.
Naturally in 2017 it’s borderline impossible to make a movie — even one based on a true story — without getting hammered if the cast isn’t insanely diverse.
Often times when I watch “Band of Brothers” I think to myself how much better of a mini-series it would have been if it had been an all-female cast instead of actors portraying the actual men that fought and died. Imagine how much more powerful the sniper scene in “Black Hawk Down” would have been if instead of the actual snipers that sacrificed their lives, it was instead a transgender black Muslim woman? That would have certainly showed the Somalis we meant business. It’s important to remember facts aren’t as important as pushing a social narrative.
Why send Delta Force to defend American soldiers when we can instead send the most diversified unit possible. After all, diversity is our strength and there is no biological difference between a man that weights 250 pounds and a 5’0″ woman who is under 100 pounds. If you think the woman isn’t equally capable, then you’re probably a bigot.
Either way, I can’t wait to see “Dunkirk.” It’s going to be awesome.