Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1917

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    1917

    As someone who has studied WW1 for his whole, adult life, I was really worried that I was going to hate this.

    Watching the trailer, I was terrified it would imply in Hollywood war film style that certain characters were much better at dodging bullets than others when under random machine gun fire.

    I was also worried that it implied there was actually serious movement in the trenches in 1917.

    But neither fear was justified. Main characters were not indestructible, and the clever device of setting it in the wasteland, immediately after the Germans' tactical withdrawal to the Hindenburg made the movement idea credible. Although I found myself continually thinking don't touch that, don't lift that throughout the whole film once they had arrived in the first German trench.

    I found the continuous filming technique wonderful, but I'll leave discussion of that to others better qualified to do it.

    One thing that pleased me the most was its refusal to go rampaging down the usual "lions led by donkeys" route.

    The Generals at either end of the film were human, even flexible, but it was the portrayal of the captain / major level officers that impressed me the most.

    The main characters came across a number of these during their passage, and invariably, (with one notable exception), they demonstrated how well most of these men reacted to an almost impossible situation.

    On both sides, most of these officers may have been misinformed, they may have been motivated for the wrong reasons by their society and education systems but they really were an exceptional generation, and the best of them were virtually wiped out.

    Andrew Scott's portrayal of the cynical, efficient captain on the verge of insanity was just wonderful.

    Anyway. A massive thumbs up from me. My daughter who sits through the most vile horror films without even a wince said she was exhausted by the end. Both my daughters cried at different stages, even though the film never blatantly pulled at the heart strings in the way that many other WW1 films do.
    Last edited by Logan Mountstuart; 12-01-2020, 12:43.

    #2
    Sounds promising LS. How graphic is the violence?

    Comment


      #3
      Watched this today and really enjoyed it. The continuous effect of the filming kept me on the edge of my seat all the way through and I have to admit I was welling up by the end.

      Last edited by Greenlander; 12-01-2020, 22:03.

      Comment


        #4
        Saw this tonight. It's truly epic. The violence isn't graphic although there are wounds and dead bodies in several scenes. And rats everywhere.

        There were lots of scenes I think will live with me. There were also a couple that felt a bit forced. However I can't really complain. Overall it's fantastic cinema.

        In terms of the much talked about "continuous shot", I think that really worked to bring about the sense of a race against time.
        Last edited by Patrick Thistle; 13-01-2020, 11:04.

        Comment


          #5
          Is it set in the Fromelles campaign? A great uncle of mine died there, one of Granny’s brothers. He was an ANZAC, having been Australian for all of five years.

          Comment


            #6
            I saw it tonight and it is a very impressive piece of work. The faux single shot filming is done incredibly well with the score accentuating the visuals and air of tension & fear perfectly. I feel the film loses it's way a little (pun unintended) during the nighttime scenes but either side of that it is absolutely compelling.

            Both leads play it in a nicely understated manner (no surprise in George MacKay's case, he's done it all his career) and the cameos from major names and well used character actors work surprisingly well. It's not really a very actorly film though, it's driven on by the scale and achievements on the technical side (it wouldn't surprise me if Mendes wins the Best Director Oscar with the film failing to win Best Film).

            I wonder how far along it was in the making before 'Dunkirk' was released. It does seem to owe a debt to that film in terms of narrative and mood, though doesn't quite match it for me. That's no real criticism as I think 'Dunkirk' is a masterpiece.
            Last edited by Ray de Galles; 18-01-2020, 23:57.

            Comment


              #7
              Cinematically I think it compares with Dunkirk, but this is a heroic quest movie so feels a different type of story. I agree about the night scenes in the town not really working.

              Comment


                #8
                I admired it more than I loved it. It's brilliantly executed and I did particularly enjoy the first half, but the second less so. It was tense, like a good horror film and looked absolutely fantastic.

                Comment


                  #9
                  One odd note: neither of them has a proper accent and seem to be coded as lower middle class (or for the US market...?) but then we get Jock, Geordie and Kamaljit in the back of the truck (what’s he got against Taff, eh?) which was very clunky indeed

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Couldn't help but feel that they could have just sent a carrier pigeon, like Blackadder Goes Fourth.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Ray de Galles View Post
                      I saw it tonight and it is a very impressive piece of work. The faux single shot filming is done incredibly well with the score accentuating the visuals and air of tension & fear perfectly.
                      Thomas Newman for you, innit? I've loved his work ever since American Beauty (and retrospectively finding out he did Shawshank too).

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Patrick Thistle View Post
                        Cinematically I think it compares with Dunkirk, but this is a heroic quest movie so feels a different type of story. I agree about the night scenes in the town not really working.
                        Oh I actually thought the night scenes were even more tense than the daytime ones. That was the point where I knew if it had been me in that situation I'd have just given up, and milked the concussion.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I agree with what's been said about the scope, the technical aspects and the acting.

                          From a military point of view, it showed the mundane boredom of warfare, with the troops resting and trying to sleep, the tension of frontline life and the frantic mayhem of just about to go into action.

                          It always makes me roll my eyes when I "movie troops" mooch around no mans land not spaced out and not using cover, shadow and shade. As I understand, it WWI British troops weren't in trained in field craft, but still...

                          I doubt Schofield would have made in reality.

                          I thought the night time action was the best actually, showed the confusion of moving around at night and the sheer terror that night time can bring.

                          Anyway, I could go on, but it was ok, not good, or great, but ok.

                          In many ways it was just a good old fashioned boys own adventure.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            That was, impressive.

                            And I liked it more than Dunkirk, and associated more with it as there was a single timeline.


                            Yep.

                            Bits of it didn't chime true, and far fetched in the interest of the story (the bits at night for example?)

                            But overall, hell yeah


                            Comment


                              #15
                              I saw it this afternoon and agree with the feeling that I admired it more than I liked it. I spent the first part of it watching to see where the possible cut-points were - once you start looking they're pretty obvious, even if you exclude the two or three really big clunky ones. The trouble is that I shouldn't be focusing on that - I wonder if all the talk of the "single shot" stuff actually detracted from the film because I was too focused on that aspect. Impressive tension, at least one impressively surprising curveball. On the other hand I felt there were too many coincidences and contrivances designed to move the plot along, which made it feel non-realistic, when the rest of the film seemed designed to be ultra-realistic.

                              Comment


                                #16
                                I tend to agree with the single shot filming taking away from the film a bit at the start and it would have been nice to have gone in without the knowledge of it. Having said that, it soon wore off and I was enthralled in the movie. Indeed, the fact that it was centred entirely on the two soldiers was something that I thought would bore me at the start but that feeling soon dropped. I agree with much of the positive contributions on here but did have one criticism but it may be something Logan can explain. Having done a WWI project with the kids recently, I went through a lot of photos from the trenches and they all looked a great deal filthier, muddier and wetter than the film. Would that area at that time of year and in that year have been as dry as it was portrayed?

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Saw this earlier this week with daughter (at her request not mine), and would join the ranks of "admired rather than loved" - it was certainly engrossing but felt it lost a bit in the night-time scenes and got a bit too cartoon-y in one of the scenes towards the end (won't say exactly which for fear of spoilers). It was more than worth the trip though and George Mackay was excellent.

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Just been to see this film. Wow!

                                    Mrs. NS and I were right in the middle of the front row and the screen completely dominated our field of vision which, along with the nature of the action, made me feel like I was there in the trenches, scrambling over no-man's-land and so on. It was an pleasantly odd sensation and added to my immersion in the plot and sharpened the tension.

                                    I had one or two quibbles about the film but they're not really worth mentioning. The night scenes didn't strike an odd chord with me at all, in fact the explosions and lighting reminded me of certain scenes in Apocalypse Now.

                                    Strongly, strongly recommended but probably not for the squeamish - there's plenty of blood and corpses.
                                    Last edited by Nocturnal Submission; 10-11-2021, 23:23.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Saw this last week (Mrs hoc and my valentine's date in fact. Not exactly the most romantic film ever given the date, but that's when it was on). I thought it was excellent. I was absolutely exhausted at the end of it. At one point I looked along the row of seats and about 75% of the audience were literally on the edge of theirs (me included). I sort of saw it as pitched somewhere between realism and stories told years later which grew in the telling, and this worked (I felt - and it provides cover for some of the more cartoony/unbelievable bits). Very glad that we now have a cinema so i can watch things like this. It needed the big screen.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        I'm hoping to get the score tonight. I love Thomas Newman and am looking forward to listening to it in isolation.

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          I saw it last night and found it stunning. It's even slightly renewed my faith in cinema itself ; I had teenage girls just along from me, and teenage boys in the row behind, all of whom were clearly absorbed by it.

                                          I think there's a comparison to be made with Saving Private Ryan in terms of the scenario, but 1917 is better since Saving Private Ryan couldn't resist beating it's verdict into you in its last 10 minutes.

                                          There were bits that didn't quite convince, but I'm with those who say the city at night scenes were among the best in it.

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            Finally got round to this tonight - it's trending on Netflix, I guess remembrance day, etc. Just fucking wow. It's not much of a comedy, is it?

                                            And yes, spoilers - I too spent most of the first twenty minutes and the end thinking "so most of the senseless WW1 carnage could have been avoided if they'd had phones".
                                            Last edited by Rogin the Armchair fan; 10-11-2021, 20:40.

                                            Comment

                                            Working...
                                            X