Better Movie: Dunkirk or Hacksaw Ridge?

Which movie is better and why?

IMO: Hacksaw Rige

12 Answers

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago
    Favorite Answer

    Definitely "Hacksaw Ridge".

    Both films are based on real events, but IMO, "Hacksaw" is far more compelling.

    It has a stronger story line, better character development and better acting than "Dunkirk" has. In "Dunkirk", Tom Hardy and Jack Lowden were particularly good, but Andrew Garfield was outstanding in "Hacksaw Ridge". It's a great film.

  • Gonzo
    Lv 5
    4 weeks ago

    both were good. IMO

  • 4 weeks ago

    I would have to agree with Hacksaw Ridge. 

    Dunkirk got a lot of early hype.......but then fizzled pretty quickly.  It wasn't getting good word of mouth. 

  • 1 month ago

    Hacksaw Ridge is 100% better.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 month ago

    I like both. But I'm leaning towards to Hacksaw Ridge. It has better true story about the World War II.

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    Hacksaw Ridge, easily, better movie, better story.

    Dunkirk was an over hyped movie that was disappointing to many and rightly so because there is no story, just a boring blank movie.

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    I saw both. I prefer Hacksaw Ridge. Dunkirk just showed fighting or a battle. There really wasn't a story going on. I think the movie Pearl Harbor focused more on the story element though, causing many people to think of it more of Romance movie in a war setting. Dunkirk just felt like I was watching a battle with not much else going on story-wise. 

  • 1 month ago

    Hacksaw Ridge. I thought Dunkirk was boring as far as war movies go. I was expecting Dunkirk to be a lot better, and Hacksaw Ridge was a lot better than I expected.

  • JuanB
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    Dunkirk.  I find it sticks to the facts better with fewer inaccuracies, hype and plot holes.

  • 1 month ago

    Yeah man, Hacksaw Ridge. 

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.