USA Today gave Christopher Nolan's upcoming WWII epic about the battle of Dunkirk a great review, except for the fact that the movie had too few "people of color" and "women."
Though Brian Truitt praised Dunkirk, which stars Mark Rylance, Kenneth Branagh, Tom Hardy, in line with the critics, he gave it a beating for its lack of wokeness.
"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," he says.
Breitbart has a perfectly good explanation for the high volume of European males, because Dunkirk was an historical event fought mainly by -- wait for it -- European males.
Sure it might have provided valuable comic relief if Amy Schumer or Rebel Wilson – or perhaps even both – had been cast as, say, two brilliant battlefield surgeons who insisted on staying behind with the troops when all their male counterparts had fled.
Also, it would definitely have added a new dimension had James Earl Jones been cast as the salty old Royal Naval officer called out of retirement for one last trip across the English Channel, or if Ice T and Snoop Dogg had been given the role of two aging rappers who parachute from a Dakota to administer weed to the desperate troops, or if Oprah appeared in a cameo as Queen Mary welcoming the returning troops after their desperate voyage.
But it wouldn’t have been historically authentic.
Similar complaints were made by filmmaker Spike Lee about the lack of black people in Clint Eastwood's Flags of Our Fathers, but the openly conservative director responded that "a guy like him should shut his face."