Dunkirk’s clinical exercise in film form

After going to the cinema twice to confirm, I'm now sure that "Dunkirk" is a dud (for me).

I know that it's major flaws have been pointed out before, but my thoughts are of almost complete disinterest. I went in "tabula rasa" which is always best, but left the IMAX theater wondering why I couldn't be immersed in the story. 

How could this be? This is the same guy that brought us Inception after all...

So this is what I figure: Christopher Nolan films have left me cold since The Dark Knight Rises. As the scope of his films has gotten larger, I have felt that his stories have become less ambitious and his storytelling more clinical. In The Prestige he invited us to look as closely as we could. Now it seems that we are to follow the emotional ark, to bite into it, but if you can't do that, like me, the artifice breaks apart at the seams.

Yes, his films retain the visuals and the awe-aspiring endings, but I now see these aspects of his film as tricks that have been done before.

Take the music for example. Right now opinions seem divided but here is a more universal take: The music functions solely as an emotional cue. In other words, it is utilized for it's basic effect -a clinical approach- and this is why it leaves a lot more to be desired for some and completely engrosses others. 

Even In Atonement's attempt at Dunkirk I see more humanity, more cinema - that is not to say that Atonement is a better film. In Nolan, I see that railing set piece on the mole opening and closing, and I feel as if he was improvising, which can be good at times, but not at the core of a war/survival epic.

Yes, yes, he is trying to do something brave which is to refrain from taking big artistic licenses with the story but maybe the choice of storylines is not that strong. Also he claims to be refraining from digitally manipulating his images, but that seems to be irrelevant at best.(I can explain if anyone is interested)

Can this trend be similar to late De Palma films collapsing under their own weight?

I know that Nolan and the gang can create groundbreaking and engaging pieces of work that introduce a larger audience to smarter films but if the box office keeps rewarding what is in my personal opinion mediocre works utilising the same techniques, then we might be witnesses to the decline of a prominent Hollywood filmmaker into widely-perceived mediocrity. A filmmaker that is also a powerful and vehement defendant of original authored work and practices like shooting on film.

I hope I'm not alone in this... Please let it not be just me looking too closely...