What an experience! Incredible cinematography and directing, made to be like it was one-take. The hidden cuts were well implemented and in some cases very hard to spot. This film was very well done. The reason I gave it 9/10 was because I felt it had a weak story, otherwise it would be a 10/10, and I don't even like war films which is the surprising part. Definitely worthy of the golden globe win.
1917 is a really nice gift in the most incredible fucking wrapping paper ever developed.
The story is simple, the actors are all on point and the entertainment value is high, but the real reason to see 1917 is cinematographer Roger Deakins. He's already won the Oscar for Blade Runner 2049 and the visuals in 1917 are so breathtaking here that if he doesn't win it again we need to start another war. 1917 is a feast for the eyes and needs to be seen on IMAX if at all possible.
I know a lot of people are comparing this to Birdman, but if you liked this film, watch Utøya July 22 (the story of the 2011 shooter on an island in Norway who killed 69 people with an average age of 20 y.o.). Utøya was also filmed with a single camera and edited to look like one cut (its also filmed in real time and has more action than you're ready for).
(1917 also reminded me of Apocalypse Now, with the journey through the war aspect, and the killer cinematography. Watch that one again if you haven't recently!)
3 Thoughts After Watching ‘1917’:
How the hell did they even film this? A cinematic achievement, indeed. The scope of it all is insane.
The two young actors were fantastic. Cared about them and their fate almost immediately.
Other reviews mention the film lacking despite its technical marvels. I wholeheartedly disagree. The storyline may have been simple, but I found it compelling, emotional and inspiring. And the score was fantastic. It wasn’t only filmed well.
This is my favourite film about 2 men walking non-stop and telling wank Jokes. 9/10.
Sherlock and Moriarty fighting on the same front? Hell yes!
This is an incredibly personal movie. Everything in the picture is designed to make you an intimate witness: the writing, the performances, the cinematography, the editing (or lack thereof), the uniqueness of all the exteriors which never repeat, and it is incredibly effective. You find yourself holding your breath as the action plays out. The seed of this film came from the stories Sam Mendes heard his grandfather tell of his time as a message courier in the First World War. The partnership between Mendes and cinematographer, Roger Deakins, to create the movie as one long shot is award worthy and completely elevates the film above its genre. It's not just a war movie, or an action movie, or a thriller, or a drama. It's all of this things, and more. A truly intimate experience, I give this film a rating of 9 (superb) out of 10. For a behind-the-scene look: https://youtu.be/pBiq2EXxNXo)
Every time I think we’ve seen it all when it comes to the world wars, a movie such as this comes along and moves you in a new, different way. Clearly an immense effort was put into the making of it. Totally deserving of all the recognition it got. An absolute pleasure to watch.
Almost everything I want to say about this movie, I can't say at the risk of sounding overly cliché. But all those things people say about how immersive this movie is... It's true. People saying how good the cinematography is... Uh, yeah, it's Roger Deakins. Of course it's going to look gorgeous.
There are three things I was most impressed by, though:
I pride myself in being able to figure out when a movie uses something to hide a cut in order to make a shot seem like it was done in one take. Starting out, I thought I'd make a game of pointing out all the hidden cuts I could find. I actually found very few of them, partially because they did an excellent job of hiding them, but mostly because I became so engaged with the movie that I stopped paying that any attention.
The blocking is masterfully done! The way we constantly see the camera move from in front of actors to behind them matches perfectly with what the scene requires, and paces each scene very well. It makes me wonder just how this was shot to make it flow so smoothly together.
It's difficult to think about just how much gets lost from cutting thousands of times in a movie until you see 1917. I'm not saying every movie should be made like this one, but I don't think this movie would have worked nearly as well if it had been edited normally. Every frame is brimming with detail, and it manages to always have the camera at the right angle looking at the right thing. The cinematography is perfect, essentially.
I so, so, so wish I saw this movie in theaters instead of brushing it aside as an artsy gimmick in a genre film with which I'm not well acquainted. It doesn't matter if you like war movies or not, if you like movies at all, you'll be sure to enjoy 1917.
It's not an action war movie, it's a drama/suspense war movie.
Visually stunning; the cinematography is on another level. The choice to hide cuts to make it look like one long, almost unending take is brilliant. The camera is constantly on the protagonists, giving a sense of poignancy to their journey. I honestly don't know how much of it was visual effect, but the scenarios were very well designed. That trek in no man's land might be one of my favorite sequences ever. So tense, so gruesome, so real. And that scene at night in the abandoned town: that alone justifies the Best Cinematography award "1917" won. Just brilliant.
The soundtrack was great: never over imposing, but present with subtle notes to increase the immersion. Also great sound design, from the squelching of the boots in the mud to the sound of the rifles. I wish I had seen the film in a nice movie theater instead of home.
The story could be a hit or miss. I can see how somebody could find "dull" for a lack of a better word, but to me it felt just right. Only two small things I didn't like. First, the completely lack of aim of the german soldiers (come on, talk about plot armour). Second, the theme of backstabbers germans: it didn't feel right to me, especially the pilot.
I liked the overarching theme of the movie: futility. The colonel receives the message and he stops the attack, but he knows nothing really has changed. The protagonist ends the story in the same way he started: against a tree.
Definitely a must watch, even if just for the visual aspect of it. 8.5/10
Truly amazing direction, totally worth the Oscars!
what a great movie it deserve all the raves ++
I don't watch many war films and usually prefer strong writing over cinematography. This movie seems to be an exception for me. While the plot was simple, it didn't come off as silly or insignificant. Even though I don't know much about cinematography, I still found myself admiring it through all the continuous shots. Somewhat paradoxically, it shows a very ugly world in a beautiful way. There's also a sense of futility and meaninglessness, particular in Blake's death.
The way it's shot is truly amazing but other than that it's just another war film.
The film is an incredible technical achievement--it's one of those films where you spend half the film wondering how they pulled it off. The cinematography, coupled with the seamless editing between "scenes" makes this feel like one long take, with only a few recognizable breaks. If I had to nitpik anything, it would be that the story itself felt thin, but I've read that the producers were going for something simple and timeless. A complicated story would have made production even more of a nightmare--as it was, I can't believe they pulled this off. The pacing never lets up and never lets you catch your breath. I think Sam Mendes is probably a shoe-in for Best Director, even though I liked "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" better. Best Film Editing is also probably a lock--except it didn't get nominated, when films like Joker and Jo Jo Rabbit did. Confused? Me too! And the score was haunting and memorable. Catch this on the big screen if you can!
A technical achievement yes, but it's an acting one too, with George MacKay carrying the film through the long takes used within the story. With a great story, wonderful music, and all-round great acting, this is an excellent film that surpasses expectations on multiple levels.
The absolute mastery in film making alone deserves a 10.
[Amazon] An excellent technical achievement that has its highest level of expressiveness in Roger Deakins' masterful cinematography. But the technique stifles the narrative, the camera is too present, it shuns its invisibility to be more of a protagonist than the characters. Even though the story doesn't really go too deep, the artifice is very transparent.
Wow, what a picture, some good action, it felt so real and great work on the one shot effect.. sound cast..
My mom really wanted to watch this movie, 2 hours of mind-numbing boredom, don't bother.
Shitty show, nothing to see here
The one-shot look of this movie was interesting. Wasn't sure if I was going to like that that approach to filming but it worked for this film.
The movie looked fantastic and the scenes and shots were breath taking. Sound and music score really helped a viewer on an emotional level as well.
While I was engrossed and drawn into this film from start to finish, after it was over and I had time to reflect on it, I found it not the profound masterpiece others have stated it as.
The plot in general was unrealistic - there are better ways to deliver a message than sending two soldiers across enemy lines and relying on luck and hope.
Some of the scenes dragged as well, which caused the movie to lose momentum for me. Felt the build up often yes, but then there would be scene that made me lose interest (truck ride. French woman & baby).
Acting wasn't spectacular either, from anyone in the film. You can have all the explosions and battle scenes you want that look great, but if the actors can't carry the script along it won't work as a whole. This is why the comparisons that mention Saving Private Ryan don't work for me - those actors drew you in with their performances. That didn't happen here, and between the acting and the momentum losing scenes, is why I cant rate this film any higher.
Close, but missed the mark for a perfect film, but a good watch none the less.
Incredible cinematography made to be like it was one-take. Simple story, but beautifully made.
8/10
Shoulda watched at the theatre
This was like an early 00s Medal of Honor story :pensive: disappointed :unamused:
Not that I put everything into oscar wins as they don't often tell you about the movie but in this case I agree. A picture-perfect film with incredible sound and score. The script however could fit on a sheet of paper.
By no means a bad movie but obviously not for me. Shame, I really had very high expectations, didn't even watch a trailer so to not spoil anything. I never immersed into the movie and therefore was out about halfway through.
The one-shot continuous technique in this movie was amazing to see. This movie once again demonstrated the complete insanity and horror of not just WWI but any war. The story itself was not bad. overall a very watchable movie.
Is there any reason for that rating, except of the one-shot visual effects!!
A really good movie with beautiful cinematography. It was ugly and dirty yet attractive at the same time. A great achievement. I am not a fan of war movies but this is a movie I enjoyed although it lacked in story and that is really my only criticism.
A cinematographic masterpiece, must watch if you simply like movies.
Story wise kind of dull. Would have been better if it was just a random experience of soldiers with no real story.
Action wise kind of OK but not great.
The filming technique reminds me of Revenant and Birdman, though in Revenant I found some of the action scenes to be way more immersive.
Still worth the watch, it's not bad, it's good/decent, just not great.
Then there's that part of me that always catches these details and moments that makes little sense to me. And that antenna of mine was glowing red.
What a remarkable cinematic experience. Simply outstanding.
One of the best anti-war war movies and I think it's the best 2019 movie that realy deserves Oscar for Best pircture of the year and definitely will won the best cinematography
Seen it twice already and I have to say this is something truly special... The score, cinematography, and the sets are all breathtaking. A simple story with a great impact.
breathtaking, incredibly gripping watching experience fit for such an inspiring and formidable story!
"Immersive, and an impressive technical achievement. It captures the trench warfare of World War I with raw, startling immediacy."
For sure an epic movie with great directing and great scenes..I am not quite sure if this is the best movie of the year or parasite but the battle is on. 8.7/10
So basically this whole movie plays out like a hardcore main mission on a video game where you control the character and try not to die. Powerful movie. Only bad thing is the script. JUST FUCKING KILL THE ENEMY DUDE. Fuck trying to be a better person.
Also music is phenomenal.
93%
Positives:
This movie was an amazing milestone for cinema. The One Shot actually works in this film. The sound effects of the bullets were the best to date in a film. The acting was very strong and I fell in love with the characters. The way this movie was shot was amazing. The film is a roller coaster of emotions and you get sucked in and can’t keep your eyes off.
Negatives:
There isn’t too many negatives in this film just some smaller things that would be spoilers so I won’t include it in the review. The way the film changed between day and night was a little confusing but they had to do it that way.
Overall:
This movie is a must watch in the theaters to get a full cinematic experience with this film. This is one of the best films I’ve seen and even though this movie will be awhile before I see it again because of the emotional punch, it is a must watch.
I thought this movie was completely riveting. I loved every second of it. Just amazing. I hope this one gets the Academy Award for Best Picture.
Pros
+Looks Beautiful and Ugly at the same time (Ugly as in portraying the ugly circumstances of the war)
+The way it is shot is incredibly fluid, it's very much a long shot movie but there are maybe 5 actual like hard cuts in this and the hidden transitions are seamless. It really feels like you're walking alongside these messengers while still also giving the viewer an impression for how much time is passing in the story.
+Characters were all believable and likeable. There's some funny banter, there's some emotional release, a bit of fear, some kindness, and it's well acted so it gives the viewer a good impression of who these men are and it makes you want to care.
+Music and general sound design was nearly perfect
+ The story in general is solid. There are some things that I feel won't please everyone (which I'll mention) but I think overall it's a good story. The beauty is kind of in the simplicity. It's all about getting from point A to point B, but having it be that simple it makes room for the viewer to appreciate everything that happens in the journey.
+ You've probably guessed it from the things I've already said but the overall atmosphere is great without feeling like it's up it's own ass
+Very purposeful film. Lots of efficient scenes which seem disconnected at first but end up communicating an aspect of why the messengers are doing what they are and reflect the importance of this mission and/or increase the urgency of what is happening.
Neutral
*The movie is partially about will power and the main character's name is Will lmao
Cons
-I think Tommy's death happened too soon I understand not wanting to waste too much time but I feel like just a few more scenes would have done a lot for that part of the movie. (FYI this is not a big criticism I kinda knew it was going to happen since the trailer had so many scenes where Will was alone but it didn't quite mean as much as I would have liked)
-Predictable. This isn't honestly a criticism for people like me who don't really need any twists but I feel like some people would be bored with how straight forward and unapologetically predictable it is.
- in the German trench it says on one of the rafters "I <3 Elsa" a clear anachronism since Disney's Frozen (tm) had not come out in time for WWI soldiers to be fanboying Elsa smh btw I'm joking lol but I did see that in the trench
Definitely worth a watch
Fantastic cinematography. The continuous take with the camera moves was well done. But the climax left a lot to be desired. Just thought there would be a better finish.
Loved those long unedited shots...
I don't see why he won the academy award ... he has nothing .. there is no script, you only see a man running, nothing more than one effect.
One of the best films I've ever seen in my life! For me, it does not glorify anything about war. In the end, we see that all this effort was basically for nothing. the war is still going on Blake is dead and there are no heroes, he is just a survivor with another scar for the day. When he sits on the tree, we also feel the relief and rest that we long for throughout the film, but we are still afraid for the next day: "Will I survive tomorrow? Will I be able to go home?" we are not sure! that's just brilliant !!!
Impeccable picture and sound mixing. Deserved all the Oscars it won. I absolutely love it.
So glad I watched this at the cinema, it was so tense,
Overall a visual masterpiece with the one cut like edit; made this a joy to watch
As a high concept film – two soldiers are tasked with reaching a Colonel in enemy territory to prevent 1600 men being massacred – the plot is very simple, something which means you can focus on the characters and the actors rather than any narrative complexities.
The bulk of the film is designed to look like it is one single shot, something done with remarkable skill by Sam Mendes, cinematographer Roger Deakins and all the camera operators and the crew. It's underpinned with a wonderful score by Thomas Newman and it's clear a lot of work has gone into the design, costumes, and by every part of the art department to faithfully recreate the numerous aspects of First World War combat in northern France.
This is a brilliant film, one which is gripping from beginning to end, two parts of the film which mirror each other, and sucks you in at the outset and does not release its hold until the credits roll at the end. I hope to see it again at the cinema that, if not, I'll buy it when it's released and look forward to watching the film and the bonus features about how it was made.
Highly recommended.
I thought about the first 3/4 of the movie were great. But the last 1/4 of the movie took a few too many liberties for my liking. But the cinematography was great in that the entire movie looks like one long take.
Passible war flick. At moments lost immersion as the artifice shouted out like a herd of elephants troubled by a pride of lions. Some of the decisions of the protagonists looked very foolhardy traversing the landscapes, I'm surprised the ending wasn't even more tragic. They also looked quite well fed, and didn't look nearly as haunted as I would have expected watching the docs about it. Even the modern All Quiet was better. From the scoring I'm guessing there are a lot of fanboys out there.
Sometimes all it takes is a memorable setting and simple motivations to make a story work. 1917 offers a great example: stationed near the front lines of World War I, a pair of British soldiers are sent on an urgent mission to halt a friendly regiment before it advances into a trap. Intel claims the enemy has abandoned their nearest posts, part of the ruse, and since time is of the essence, the runners are sent straight through yesterday’s hostile terrain to accomplish their objective. Apart from a few minor character-related subplots and side encounters, that’s really all there is to it. Get from A to B, as quickly as you can, and try not to die along the way.
This bare-bones plot allows 1917 to really focus on the gruesome scenery, and unique pressures, of life amongst the harried soldiers of the western front. Rattled and terrified as they are, our couriers must learn to trust their lives to unseen information, speed run through no man’s land, escape an abandoned enemy trench system without triggering any snares and come to grips with the constant, unavoidable presence of rotting corpses around every corner. Like macabre tourists, the audience ogles at these sights and, gradually, comes to understand the sense of hopeless, mutual futility that must’ve been so overwhelming for these young men.
Deftly stitched together and presented as one long, uninterrupted take, the film thus feels intimate to every viewer; a truly immersive experience. The seams are there if you really want to look for them, but the effect is undeniable. We’re experiencing the chaos of war in real-time. This is the kind of intense, enveloping filmmaking that’ll make you hold your breath without realizing. A real audio/visual showpiece, it’s also got one hell of a knack for gut punches. I don’t know why I waited so long - it’s exactly what I was hoping it would be.
Started out so great, it started to fall off towards the end when the main character suddenly became a video game character that learned he had plot armor/respawns. Cinematography was great, loved the one-shot feel and the moments of tension it added.
The cinematography was really amazing, the actors almost everyone who played on a Show was there and epic score.
Other than that we have a guy walking for two hours making some irrational and stupid decisions. All was on his favor, he got shot but he always survived, i mean he had the German guy right behind him in 1 meter but he couldn't shoot straight. Also literally bombs dropping in front of him, all people around dead, he is still standing.
It is a nice war film but a bit rushed in order to make him a hero.
Lest we forget.
Masterful cinema here.
Liked it but contrary to what others say, I felt like the long one shot is distracting rather than immersive. Constantly reminds you you are watching a technical feat rather than letting you enter into the story
四星半, watched at 2020-02-09, imported from douban
Sam Mendes' direction paints a strikingly poignant tale of war that grips you from the get-go, moving with the same frenzied pace as our heroes - Lance Corporals Blake and Schofield - charge through the hellish landscapes of World War I. The meticulous choreography of the one-shot technique is like a ballet of cinematography; it's almost like Mendes and legendary DOP Roger Deakins are waltzing us through the annals of history. And it's not just a treat for the eyes, the soundscape in this movie - the deafening booms, the terrifying silence - transports you right into the trenches. It's not often we get such a visceral, boots-on-the-ground war movie that also manages to touch on the human elements of courage and sacrifice.
1917 is a flawed but visually intense movie with great performances and score.
Director Sam Mendes can be hit or miss for some people, but he is a fantastic filmmaker.
1917 had me blown away by how much better it was than I expected going in. The film's use of a continuous shot gave it a unique sense of urgency that made it feel like I was right there on the front lines with the soldiers. The cinematography in 1917 is nothing short of phenomenal. The camera work is masterfully done, and the film's use of lighting and color creates an atmosphere that is both gritty and beautiful. The action scenes in the film are excellent, and the pacing keeps you on the edge of your seat throughout. The tension never lets up, and there are several moments that left me breathless. Overall, 1917 is one of the best war movies I've ever seen, and definitely the best World War I movie.
really very good nice is
This is hands down one of my favorite war movies. The cinematography is absolutely amazing. This movie will definitely satisfy the eye from beginning to end. The movie also moves at a very good pace. If you haven’t seen this movie yet, and it’s on your list, than bump it all the way to the top. You’ll be glad you watched it sooner than later.
This film was an absolutely phenomenal technical achievement. Visually stunning, it also had just enough heart to let you connect to our main character who you will spend the entirety of the movie alongside. The only downside is that the climax is...not that much of one? After a tense, adventurous, and intense 90 minutes, things end with you knowing this is just a tiny slice of life during wartime, which makes sense, but still leaves you a tad empty, when looking for closure. Despite that, this is still a must-see, especially if you can watch it on a big screen with good surround sound as you'll feel like a part of the story.
Although partly a technical showcase rather than a story, it's still a terrific Great War movie
Although I have some issues with it, and I certainly don't think it's the greatest war movie ever made, by and large, I think Sam Mendes has made an exceptional film, one in which form and content are unusually tightly matched, with the style extremely effective at delivering the story in a thematically justified manner.
For my complete review, please visit: https://boxd.it/WPPdz
Quite unfortunate. A brutal time and despicable war. The long takes and impressive visuals made this movie quite special.
I prefer fully fictional stories though. They feel much less brutal/horrifying (since it didn't actually happen) and more appropriate to "enjoy".
Speaking of the story: I didn't really like it. Many things didn't make much sense to me and felt unlikely, plain wrong, or just stupid. Overall it was ok/good but just due to the suspense/action.
The soundtrack and audio effects were good as well.
Impressive, takes you with the boys from start to end. Well done for the director.
It's an art. Many might not like this but you should at least watch this once.
Let's start with something that all or almost all of us will agree on. "1917" if it is not the best visual experience of 2019, it has been very close to it, because technically it offers a very detailed vision of how it must have been lived during the battle of Passchendaele, although, of course, it would have to be analyzed to what extent it is truthful.
However, there are certain aspects that do not convince me. For example, the lack of continuity in the story makes the sequences look like independent plots, isolated events (although they have a connection) that juxtaposed together make up the footage. On the other hand, the story lacks a climax, and for this very reason, there is no memorable scene that differentiates it from other war films (not to mention that this film is more of a road movie than a war film). The most striking, to say the least, is when William Schofield arrives at the trench of the 2nd Battalion of the Devonshire Regiment, due to the photographic similarity it has with Stanley Kubrick's "Paths of Glory".
1917 is a captivating and immersive experience of events during World War I. With a magnificent combination of excellent editing, superb acting, and an outstanding score from Thomas Newman, 1917 is a rare example of absolute cinematic perfection. Sam Mendes's film is unique again as this is something you may not have experienced before, an Epic On Shot Film. Watch this on your biggest screen if you haven't already.
Sex and Nudity : None
Violence and Gore : Severe
Profanity : Mild
Languages Available : English
Streaming : Sony Liv
Telegram : @streamgenx
Full Reviews :
www.instagram.com/stream.genx
1917 manages without a single visible cut (apart from a lengthy blackout of one of the figures)
The shooting in long, continuous shots, in which the lens is attached to the two soldiers, required an immense logistical effort.
Huge sets were specially built so that the camera could traverse them in long scenes without interruption.
From a purely technical point of view, this is without question a breathtaking masterpiece.
But that's exactly where the dog is buried.
Because you have to like these long tracking shots.
There are many "loooong" scenes with little text or music that seem like eternity, but on the other hand also build up a certain arc of tension.
Apart from the rather thin and logic-free story (why not take a pilot who delivers the message, would you go faster than two foot soldiers who trailed through the battlefield all day?), You should definitely watch the film. (Best if it is technically feasible in UHD)
"1917" is no doubt an outstanding technical achievement, to the point I spent the whole film admiring the camerawork and riveting photography instead of empathizing with the characters (Deakins, you did it again!!). The film really succeeds at giving the illusion of being shot in a single take, with lengthy yet incredibly fluid and suggestive tracking shots that let you discover the world at the same pace as the main characters. It's an immersive experience but ultimately felt more like a horror-tinged virtual tour of the battlefield rather than an example of emotionally resonant storytelling. There are a few engaging moments along the way indeed, but it always seems like the director's ultimate objective is to impress and keep making you think: "how the hell did they shot that!". Gimmicks can make a difference in certain films, but at some point, you are supposed to forget about them so that you can get lost in the film's world.
Still, I do appreciate that the film tries to point out the absurdity and monstrosity of war without being preachy and maudlin. The beginning can be a little misleading, but eventually, there is no hero to glorify nor big speech to make. You just follow an ordinary soldier in his journey and let the images speak themselves.
Pretty much an all star cast of the UK:s finest. Great movie. I know I only gave it an 8, but even though it was great, it was just missing something. Not the action, not the acting, not the script. But Just can't put my finger on it. It just doesn't get all the way to 9 for me. Maybe how fast it goes, or seems to. Not sure. But it's still well worth the watch.
A tale of selflessness and heroism during one of the most horrific and senseless conflicts in the history of man. If you've ever played any first-person shooters, you will notice the similarities with this film as the characters walk into danger. The one-take method was something that I was always conscious of while watching.
Deserves a big, beautiful HDR display and immersive audio. A stunning technical achievement in two shots. Phenomenal set and costume design and acting. Moving score and acting. Wow, wow, wow.
"Time is the enemy."
The combo of Roger Deakins' cinematography + Sam Mendes' storytelling of this World War 1 event is simply beautiful. One of my favorite movies of 2019, and possibly my favorite war movie.
I should say up front that I watched this on a "small" screen (40") but after the way it had been built up by some critics i was really disappointed. The plot has no surprises whatever - in fact it was a collection of World War 1 clichés, the characters were uninteresting, and as for the scenery itself which was meant to be I think what grabs the attention was far too obviously a series of stage sets. In addition there were at least two totally implausible moments which took me all the way out of the film.
I know this movie is predictable and simple blah blah blah.
for me a movie needs to have good cinematography, music, cast and sound. this movie has them all, I was teary at the end. one beautiful movie, this is. absolutely loved it.
Sam Mendes killed it one hunnid percent!
LCpl Blake: Bloody hell! Even their rats are bigger than ours.
Exceptional film! Raw, gritty and breathtakingly well filmed with a seemingly continuous take.
Watching this movie is like watching a game of Call of Duty
Impressive movie with a gripping story and amazing cinematography. Definitely never got boring.
Best Mendes movie since American Beauty.
I'm torn on how to rate this film. The extremely clever "single-take" opens up a world of praise for technical achievements so I understand so many 8 ratings.
If we out that to one side, let's look at the other constituents:
- plot: simple concept, predictable events, ultimately anti-climactic ending.
- acting: patchy. One of the main leads is better than the other. Neither are great when acting against seasoned cast members. Accents are all over the place - some sound like 1910 BBC announcers, some sound fresh from Dalston High Street circa-2015.
- cinematography: looks and feels very authentic to the time as I imagine it to have been.
As much as you're tracking these characters, I felt there was little jeopardy throughout. Clearly the film wouldn't happen if there isn't a successful finale...
It doesn't describe the horrors of combat as well as something like Saving Private Ryan. Perhaps it is more honest - boys enlisted to fight bumbling through scuffles and shooting rifles badly due to fatigue, hunger and no real training.
I enjoyed it overall. It could have been 10 minutes shorter in the middle for me. I'd recommend it to my cinephile friends but wouldn't to someone wanting a general "what's good for me to watch".
7.5/10
I expected to be awed by the production of 1917. But it is much more than that.
Make no mistake, the pseudo-single-take filming style is unbelievable. The sheer logistics of the production boggle my mind. And the single camera effect impart a unique personal quality to the story of our two main characters in the midst of chaos, but its gimmick is never distracting.
1917 is the most honest, brutally honest and horrible depiction of war I’ve seen on film in quite some time, if not ever. This is magnified by the choice of World War I, a particularly unglamorous war, but it’s uniquely communicated through long, sweeping shots through grisly landscapes.
The movie is not afraid of its subject, pays due deference to it, and hits you hard when it needs to.
1917 is a uniquely excellent movie, in ways both haunting and triumphant. I guarantee you’ve never seen anything like it.
Just watch it for the cinematography!
Cinematography 10/10, absolutely wonderful. The story is also good.
Quite the massive undertaking and quite the adventure it was. Although incredibly predictable at times, it was still beautiful to watch and unfold.
The long take is very impressive
For the way it was filmed I have to rate by ten stars. I was totally amazed and never seen anything like that. Highly recommending.
George Mackay. That's it. That's all I'm going to say.
3.0 points -> Cinematography (0-3)
1.7 points -> Acting and Characters (0-2)
2.4 points -> Plot (0-3)
1.0 points -> Score (0-1)
0.9 -> enjoyed the movie. (0-1)
Aka. 9.0 points
Shows the evil of war, not in the form of a gore.
There was nothing positive about the war, and the film was subtly conveying that message.
The level of achievement is spectacular.
Score, Screenplay everything is of a quality well above normal.
It is predictable, but what does that really matter.
The beauty of 1917's continuous shot storytelling isn't the technical feat itself, but raison d'être behind it. Continuous shooting allows the movie to be told in real time.
Before Sunset, Gravity, High Noon, and Run Lola Run are among the notable predecessors. When it is done right as in Sam Mandes's 1917, we are pulled into the story participating in unfolding events.
The story of 1917 is simple -- it is essentially two men Saving Private Ryan in World War I. Action and violence are sparse, but danger and shock are all the more potent for it. Performance is restrained and words are rarely spoken. But they carry more significance and devastation when actors finally allowed themselves to be vulnerable.
My immediate reaction after watching the film was how technically brilliant it was made.
But as days go by, I was reminded of just how depleted I was from having to experience World War in the trenches, no man's land, and war torn village -- all in real time for 2 hours. When one of the British soldiers ride in the truck for few minutes, I was finally resting with him. When he spends brief moments with war victims, I, too, was allowed a brief and much needed distraction from looming danger and running against the clock.
Simply a marvelous film and one of the finest examples of a movie told in real time.
2 / 2 directing & technical aspect
.5 / 1 story
1 / 1 act I
1 / 1 act II
.5 / 1 act III
1 / 1 acting
1 / 1 writing
0 / 1 originality
1 / 1 lasting ability to make you think
0 / 1 misc
8 / 10
Good movie, and suspenseful at hell, highly recommend it.
“I hoped today would be a good day. Hope is a dangerous thing.”
- Colonel MacKenzie
George Mackay is incredible and it is a beautifully shot film. It just felt like every other war story. I really wanted to like this and had been looking forward to seeing it. Just a big miss for me.
:movie_camera::projector::heavy_check_mark:
There's one thing you're gonna see in every comment!
CINEMATOGRAPHY
It's a directors movie!
Is incredibile, it have some sad moments but the action was to good
Roger Ebert once said that all movies should be seen on a large screen. I can think of few movies where this is more true than 1917. I can't tell you how many times (especially in the middle of the film) I was struck by just how beautiful the movie was to look at. I can think of five or six scenes that wouldn't be out of place when put next to some of the all-time great scenes in cinema. At some point I am going to seek out the behind-the-scenes extras (something I never do) to find out how they were able to have scenes that lasted several minutes at a time from a single camera. I think some people stayed away from the movie because they feared at would be as violent and as personal as Saving Private Ryan. While the film certainly had war as a backdrop there was actually very little fighting.
follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook IHateBadMovies
Overrated, and I rarely use this adjective, but in this case it's pretty clear people are rating it based on technical aspects of film-making rather than their level of enjoyment watching it. The movie felt like an excuse to showcase technique, leaving storytelling and screenwriting as an afterthought, as well as wasting a strong cast.
Definitely Oscar-worthy! Should've won the Academy Award for Best Picture too!
I generally don’t watch films like this; I find them too emotional. However, my son desperately wanted to see it.
And it was very difficult to watch, deeply emotionally, but I’m glad I did. It was a truly brilliant film on so many levels.
The cinematography was outstanding. The colours, scenes, audio etc where artwork. Almost immediately you are left speechless with the ‘one’ shots; something you rarely see, especially to this standard. It helps you feel like you are there, second by second.
A phenomenal line up of actors who gave it their all.
The story based on true events was told so simply, but yet had such incredible impact.
I’m glad I watched this; not only to see such a unique cinematographic achievement, but to be reminded of all those who served...each one a hero. And how we should all be thankful and grateful for what we have today.
Shout by Neal MahoneyVIP 8BlockedParent2020-01-10T03:55:15Z— updated 2020-01-26T00:27:23Z
An incredible technical achievement. Roger Deakins's cinematography elevates this decent war story to something that is one of a kind. There is hardly anytime to catch your breath. The score is fantastic. I need to see the making of documentary.
Seeing this again it is still very impressive. The story is fine but the way we are always with Schofield and Blake with almost no relief makes this super tense. The score really is great.