1917
Universal Pictures | Release Date: December 25, 2019
8.3
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 954 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
846
Mixed:
69
Negative:
39
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
5
DeathravenJan 26, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Mediocre
TL;DR Dull and boring but nice cinematography.
Fail to make me feel the horros of war.
Have a lot of cliche like every river in any movie have a waterfall.
They basicaly walk.… Expand
4 of 4 users found this helpful40
All this user's reviews
7
TyranianJan 24, 2020
Epic war-opera with some amazing scenes, the screenplay won't win awards but the visuals should.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
7
etoppJan 16, 2020
While the (almost) one shot technique is clever, this movie sometimes felt like a first person shooter video game. I was never really invested in the characters. The score was also overblown in places taking me out of the scene. For a trulyWhile the (almost) one shot technique is clever, this movie sometimes felt like a first person shooter video game. I was never really invested in the characters. The score was also overblown in places taking me out of the scene. For a truly memorable film about WWI, watch "Gallipoli" instead.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
8
DukeJonFeb 7, 2020
A powerful and moving war film showing the folly and futility of war. A few gripes I would have though; the distances and time required to get everywhere seems to have been shorted to move the film along, so from their starting point throughA powerful and moving war film showing the folly and futility of war. A few gripes I would have though; the distances and time required to get everywhere seems to have been shorted to move the film along, so from their starting point through the trench through no mans land through a German bunker to the German rear artillery positions takes no more than half an hour. Not quite enough mud and destruction everywhere either, the landscape would have been almost lunar in its desolation. Other than that a gripping and interesting film.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
9
vusal_iskandarMar 24, 2020
A deadly drama. Breathtaking war film. I dont know who was the director, but they depicted 1st world war very well. There were 2-3second moments in the film which it can take you to think about it for 3-4hours, there were 2-3 seconds momentsA deadly drama. Breathtaking war film. I dont know who was the director, but they depicted 1st world war very well. There were 2-3second moments in the film which it can take you to think about it for 3-4hours, there were 2-3 seconds moments in the film that you can dive into it and stay here for 3-4 hours.. Yeah really deserved to take time and watch it !!… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
Mauro_LanariJan 24, 2020
(Mauro Lanari)
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play" ("Wargames": Badham, 1983)
A (suicide?) mission as an existential journey in the "no man's land" between two (enemy?) trenches, a "zone" which lies between the ghostly(Mauro Lanari)
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play" ("Wargames": Badham, 1983)
A (suicide?) mission as an existential journey in the "no man's land" between two (enemy?) trenches, a "zone" which lies between the ghostly landscape of "Stalker" (Tarkovskij, 1979) and the endopsychic one of "The Dead Zone" (King, 1979; Cronenberg, 1983), a borderline area between life and death. This is the fascinating fulcrum of "1917", not the inevitable technical virtuosity in "Oscar bait" function and still less a too often shameless playstation perspective, but the odyssey to deliver the counter-order to cancel an attack, the sense of spatiotemporal suspension, the deliberate following of (almost) empty moments, the persisted stalemates, "The Wrong Move" ("False Bewegung") of circularity, and that's what differentiates it from the journey of the soldier Bardamu, of Captain Willard, of Commander Bowman, of Captain Miller (Spielberg continues to produce Mendes with DreamWorks). "I am a poor wayfaring stranger / While traveling thru this world of woe". A little beyond sufficiency.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
7
MovieRiffingJan 25, 2020
Sam Mendes' 1917 delivers some truly awe-inspiring set pieces with the aid of its one-shot effect, but fails to take advantage of it when trying to bring stress levels back down to Earth for its quieter scenes. Not only does it not take fullSam Mendes' 1917 delivers some truly awe-inspiring set pieces with the aid of its one-shot effect, but fails to take advantage of it when trying to bring stress levels back down to Earth for its quieter scenes. Not only does it not take full advantage of it, but at times the one-shot becomes truly distracting and out of place due to wonky camera work. 1917's spikes of gorgeous tension make it a must-see film, just one that does not live up to its potential.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
10
michajsenJan 20, 2022
TikTok TikTok.

In the age of the cell phone, TikTok, meme & the quick & dirty convenience of it all, it's no wonder certain directors pine for the big screen. And if there's ever a movie made for that big screen, it's the cinematicTikTok TikTok.

In the age of the cell phone, TikTok, meme & the quick & dirty convenience of it all, it's no wonder certain directors pine for the big screen.

And if there's ever a movie made for that big screen, it's the cinematic masterpiece, 1917.

Between the direction of Sam Mendes as well as his writing along w Krysty Wilson-Cairns, the immensely massive cinematography from living legend Roger Deakins, to the tick tock of a ticking clock score by Thomas Newman & the burning heart of British Lance corporal William Schofield played by George MacKay; their collaboration created a singular unique film which slows the heart as it races into the next second & then melts to a chill all the while it's exploding.

There are a rare breed of film which fully submerge you into another world that once the closing credits roll & you walk out of the theatre in a daze, you're still there, in that other world.

1917 is that film.

And it's befitting to be the last great film released just before the pandemic & theatre shutdowns. If you missed it, purchasing the largest television you can afford is apt & necessary. After all, 1917 was made for IMAX, not iPhone. Run don't walk to view this instant classic, tick tock tick tock.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
10
RobobobJun 6, 2022
I haven't been in awe of a movie in a long time. Everything in this film is top notch from the real life locations to the huge cast of extras, but what really sells it is that the entire movie is essentially one big long take. Every time II haven't been in awe of a movie in a long time. Everything in this film is top notch from the real life locations to the huge cast of extras, but what really sells it is that the entire movie is essentially one big long take. Every time I notice this movie on TV I'm enthralled and have to watch it to completion. It's just amazing how from the first minute you are watching every step in the journey of these men and it's fun to rewind in your mind and think back to which steps came before. A work of art.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
BroyaxMay 16, 2020
C'est l'un des films de guerre les plus reposants qu'on puisse voir, voire même un peu soporifique... mais un peu seulement ! je ne voudrais pas entendre ou sous-entendre qu'il s'agit d'un film chiant à dormir debout, non pas, que nenni...C'est l'un des films de guerre les plus reposants qu'on puisse voir, voire même un peu soporifique... mais un peu seulement ! je ne voudrais pas entendre ou sous-entendre qu'il s'agit d'un film chiant à dormir debout, non pas, que nenni... (malgré tout de même quelques lenteurs inquiétantes) ! mais sa réalisation et son approche font que l'on survole tout cela de plus ou moins haut, détaché, ce qui conduit je présume à l'effet inverse de celui qui était recherché : loin d'être immersif, "1917" reste impersonnel et déconnecté des évènements...

Comment est-ce possible lorsqu'il s'agit pourtant ici de l'une des guerres les plus sales, dégueulasses, meurtrières du XXème siècle ? eh bien, tout simplement à casue de ce long, très long plan-séquence de presque deux heures ! on a des films qui sont surdécoupés et montés comme des merdes, genre clip MTV kikoolol ou sale publicité pour je ne sais quel sous-produit de mon cul (emballé dans du papier-cadeau, s'il-vous-plaît) et ici, c'est tout l'excès inverse...

On suit comme un hydroglisseur ou comme sur un tapis volant ces deux gars qui traversent la dévastation de la guerre totale : caméra souple et fluide, cadrage impeccable, travellings parfaits... mais pendant deux plombes ? on finit par se lasser et pourtant, c'est vraiment reposant... et un peu soporifique... à force. Mais quel beau défi technologique en tout cas, c'est assez sidérant à voir cette fluidité de tous les instants !...

Hélas, la forme a fait oublier le fond, le propos et l'écriture elle-même... comme je le disais au début, on en ressort détaché et peu ou pas concerné... sauf peut-être à la toute fin, seul moment du film où l'on se sent connecté à ce monde (horrible !). Par ailleurs, on s'étonne de trouver ici un tel manichéisme, voire carrément une diabolisation, une stigmatisation des Allemands à chaque plan, chaque séquence... c'est réducteur et regrettable. C'est avec cet "état d'esprit" que la Seconde a vu le jour...

Du coup, ça fait encore un peu plus baisser la note... car après tout, que reste-t-il à ce film à part son reposant plan-séquence exceptionnellement long ? pas grand-chose...… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
KevinChau5Jul 28, 2020
One of the Greatest War Films I've ever seen! Best War Film of All-Time since Lone Survivor, Sam Mendes did an awesome job Directing this film, Heavy Praise for the Cast, Action Sequences! Must see film! 10/10!
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
9
KuggzMar 15, 2020
The first 30 mins is one story and one that might turn people off but the movie takes off and becomes a classic. Fans of The Revenant and Apocalypse Now should see this immediately.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
MarkHReviewsFeb 7, 2020
At the end of “1917,” Writer/Director Sam Mendes (“American Beauty,” the James Bond installments “Skyfall” and “Spectre”) dedicates the film to his grandfather, “who told us the stories.” For a film so presumably personal, “1917” isAt the end of “1917,” Writer/Director Sam Mendes (“American Beauty,” the James Bond installments “Skyfall” and “Spectre”) dedicates the film to his grandfather, “who told us the stories.” For a film so presumably personal, “1917” is surprisingly lacking in both passion and perspective.

Rather than offering any sort of commentary about WW I or the conditions surrounding it, Mendes settles for a formulaic thriller. Lance Corporal Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) is summoned by his commanding general. The allies have just received intelligence that their forces will be heading into a trap if they mount an offensive against the Germans the following morning. Blake and Lance Corporal Schofield (George MacKay) must go through enemy lines to deliver the message to the field commander, located nine miles away, to cancel the attack. If they fail, 1,600 men, including Corporal Blake’s brother, will be slaughtered. The film follows the two corporals’ peril-filled trek to hand-deliver the order and save the troops.

Technically, this film is impeccable. Long shots have been a Hollywood staple for years. They’re usually used to establish an environment. In this case, long shots are used consistently to follow the action, offering a vast visual scope that is sometimes breathtaking. The filming in “1917” is further complicated because Mendes often chooses to track the actors with a single camera that follows the action for several minutes and several hundred yards of movement without any apparent editing. Given these challenges, “1917” is in many ways Cinematographer Roger Deakins’ movie. Deakins has 80 credits as a cinematographer, dating back to 1975. His diverse body of work ranges from “Blade Runner 2049” to “Skyfall” to “Fargo” to “The Big Lebowski.” For “1917,” he is favored to win a second Oscar. His use of light and shadow in this film’s night scene is nothing less than a master class.

The acting is also first-rate. As Schofield, George MacKay’s haunted expressions, stilted gait and thousand-yard stare communicate clearly the costs of war, with no need for exposition to underline the point. Familiar faces Colin Firth and Benedict Cumberbatch lend their gravitas at key points.

But ultimately, Mendes has made a war movie with a surprising air of detachment. We learn little about the characters along the way, other than their single-minded determination to accomplish their goal. We come to understand that this “war to end all wars” was intensely personal, with enemies often shot up close, stabbed or even strangled with bare hands. But commentary about this fact, or any larger points about war or human nature, is absent. As a result, “1917” is a war film that’s surprisingly bloodless.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
9
Iann22Apr 5, 2020
Please not another WW2 drama! But while watching this movie I was glued to my seat. Main characters are interesting, relatable and captivating. Was really a pleasant surprise.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
Ubik08Feb 2, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Spoilers - I enjoyed 1917 and it moderately rather than fully conveyed the horrors of living and fighting in trenches. George Orwell's Homage to Catalonia or Beevors Stalingrad convey it more effectively. Or just watch old footage and photos. Soldiers in trenches always get live, are slee and food deprived. They all looked a little tii clean and healthy. I thought the plot had a few gaping holes Why didn't they just drop the orders off by and? Plus I don't think the German pilot would have stabbed his buddy in reality. However it's a rip roaring adventure with enjoyable cameos from many British actor s at the top of their game. I enjoyed it and best viewed in the cinemaalwayss get… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
jkatchesJan 11, 2020
It is truly remarkable how both cast and crew pulled this together. It’s a filmmaking experience and achievement that should be recognized.

I was able to catch most of where the cuts were hiding, there was one or two were I wasn’t sure howIt is truly remarkable how both cast and crew pulled this together. It’s a filmmaking experience and achievement that should be recognized.

I was able to catch most of where the cuts were hiding, there was one or two were I wasn’t sure how they did it. Very cool to see it all as a “one take”

The strongest point of the film was audience identification with the protagonists. You learned and experienced everything with them. In that way the movie reminds me a lot of a campaign video game. There’s interactions and action along the way. It was a very immersive experience.

The only part I thought was lacking was the emotional connection. I didn’t feel a great emotional high watching it. If someone is smart and applies this same way of filmmaking to a horror, apocalyptic, zombie survival type of movie then they will make big money. Because I believe this type of shooting shines in that suspenseful edge of your seat ride. Overall loved the movie! Well worth seeing in theaters!… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
NiroutleyAug 17, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. To be honest this movie is my favorite movie of all time.

I'd only suggest this if you're interested in this movie if you don't enjoy 1917 I can respect that.

This movie is 10 times better than my second favorite movie and I'd only suggest good movies and videogames to people when there interested.

in my opinion, it was worthed my money watching it a few months after launch and rented this movie once.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
8
azbaJul 16, 2023
Great movie. One of the rare war movies which does not glorify war, making it look like a cool fun adventure. Instead, it shows the destruction, the death all over the place, not only death of humans but also animals, even of the plants.
AlsoGreat movie. One of the rare war movies which does not glorify war, making it look like a cool fun adventure. Instead, it shows the destruction, the death all over the place, not only death of humans but also animals, even of the plants.
Also nice visuals. The only negative for me is that the plot is too predictable.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
9
FranzHcriticDec 25, 2019
Director Sam Mendes and the great cinematographer Roger Deakins give us an innovative edition to the war genre, with a one-shot style that has the effect of not only providing a captivating point-of-view of the young soldier, but also inDirector Sam Mendes and the great cinematographer Roger Deakins give us an innovative edition to the war genre, with a one-shot style that has the effect of not only providing a captivating point-of-view of the young soldier, but also in making the Great War seem claustrophobic. The two leads McKay and Chapman each have their breakout role here as two soldiers we follow and identify with throughout their journey, and the cameos of veterans such as Colin Firth and Benedict Cumberbatch elevate the talent of acting in '1917'. Mendes and Deakins are one of the better creative teams in our modern filmmaking. To breathe new life into a dulled genre like war movies takes a true marvel but '1917' is just the film. I was engrossed, and I actually felt as if I was with the young soliders through their whole ordeal.… Expand
8 of 9 users found this helpful81
All this user's reviews
7
tropicAcesDec 26, 2019
About as good as Dunkirk, so if you thought that was a technical masterpiece then you’ll love this. If you thought it needed a more complex story then this may not be for you. I think both are perfectly fine, albeit not great, war films.About as good as Dunkirk, so if you thought that was a technical masterpiece then you’ll love this. If you thought it needed a more complex story then this may not be for you. I think both are perfectly fine, albeit not great, war films. Deakins is still king, though.… Expand
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
9
Brent_MarchantJan 1, 2020
Despite a somewhat slow beginning, this otherwise-gripping World War I tale, filmed ostensibly as one long continuous shot, takes viewers on a first-person journey through battle-ravaged France as two British soldiers try to warn their fellowDespite a somewhat slow beginning, this otherwise-gripping World War I tale, filmed ostensibly as one long continuous shot, takes viewers on a first-person journey through battle-ravaged France as two British soldiers try to warn their fellow troops about an impending trap set for them by allegedly retreating Germans. By bringing the war to the front row of the theater, audiences get to experience the terror of the conflict up close, a story capable of genuinely frightening viewers better than any of the best horror flicks on the market. The fine lead performances of George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman, combined by the stunning photography of Roger Deakins, the riveting score of Thomas Newman and the expert direction of Sam Mendes, combine to make this truly one of the year's best. The effect may leave you feeling a bit claustrophobic and shell-shocked at times, but then that's a sure sign the filmmakers have done their job.… Expand
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
10
broydsJan 15, 2020
Sometimes, once every two or three years a film comes along that once you have watched it, you cant stop thinking about it long after the credits roll. A film so special that it tops everything you have seen in the last few years. 1917 isSometimes, once every two or three years a film comes along that once you have watched it, you cant stop thinking about it long after the credits roll. A film so special that it tops everything you have seen in the last few years. 1917 is one of those films, it is truly special

This is the story of two young soldiers who are sent out on a mission to stop a battle that will cost the lives of 1400 men. I will not talk about anything that happens in the film, as I dont want to spoil it for anyone.

It is one of the best paced films I have ever seen, you truly feel as though you are right there with the soldiers on their mission. It is unrelenting, gritty and you feel the horrors of war. It never gets boring and there is always something different happening.

This film has to win best picture at the Oscar's, as surely no other film from this past year comes close to topping this!… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
9
IndiefilmloverDec 26, 2019
A straightforward, but effective war movie about two soldiers who embark on a dangerous mission to save the lives of thousands of British soldiers during the height of World War I. In a general sense, 1917 is somewhat reminiscent of SavingA straightforward, but effective war movie about two soldiers who embark on a dangerous mission to save the lives of thousands of British soldiers during the height of World War I. In a general sense, 1917 is somewhat reminiscent of Saving Private Ryan in that it gives its characters a clear goal with an easily discernible outcome. The film employs a technique that creates the illusion that everything is happening in real time with long takes. While this technique has been used in films with both small (A Boy. A Girl. A Dream) and larger budgets (Birdman), often with mixed results, it is very effective in this film. Even without cuts in the middle of each scene, the camera and action work so well together that the audience is always seeing what they need to see. That along with a very sophisticated use of CGI, makes you feel like you are right in the middle of the action. The result is an emotionally satisfying film with strong performances that doesn't let its use of technology get in the way of telling a good story. At just under two hours 1917 is the perfect length. You won't be bored and perhaps you will have a greater appreciation for the sacrifices made by soldiers in battle. Afterwards, checkout Peter Jackson's powerful documentary about World War I, "They Shall Not Grow Old."… Expand
7 of 9 users found this helpful72
All this user's reviews
10
MattyiceJan 11, 2020
1917 is a technical and cinematic masterpiece. Mendes masterfully shoots the grueling nature and aftershocks of World War I in an emotionally compelling and artistically moving way. The main leads are very likable and truly drive home the1917 is a technical and cinematic masterpiece. Mendes masterfully shoots the grueling nature and aftershocks of World War I in an emotionally compelling and artistically moving way. The main leads are very likable and truly drive home the film’s themes about war and death associated with it. The score is great as well and it’s truly hard to find any huge flaws about this film. My favorite film released in 2019 for sure and definitely one of my favorite war movies as well.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
9
twall3Jan 31, 2020
I gave up trying to figure out how the filmed it to look like the entire film was one continuous camera shot. Loved the courage of the 2 main characters, and the contrast of the young man on the mission vs everyone else who was just goingI gave up trying to figure out how the filmed it to look like the entire film was one continuous camera shot. Loved the courage of the 2 main characters, and the contrast of the young man on the mission vs everyone else who was just going along with war as usual. Wow. Quite a movie.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
10
Davrosdaleks1Jan 11, 2020
1917 is about two World War I soldiers (George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman) who are given a very important mission: travel across enemy territory and inform the leader of 1,600 of their brothers-in-arms that they're walking into a trap.1917 is about two World War I soldiers (George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman) who are given a very important mission: travel across enemy territory and inform the leader of 1,600 of their brothers-in-arms that they're walking into a trap. This is an incredible piece of cinema!!!

This movie is really a ride with sort of a dreamlike feel to it as the characters are taken from one unpredictable situation to another unable to know if they'll encounter friend or foe.

Director Sam Mendes already showed in Skyfall that he commands an excellent visual style but this is a whole other level. The movie is filmed to give the illusion of one full tracking shot. Every moment the camera looks like it's following the characters. It is quite an achievement. Besides the tracking, the film also does a great job of deciding what elements of the scene to focus on.

The scenery in this is a thing of ethereal beauty. The characters travel through a constantly shifting landscape, from trenches to abandoned farms and so forth. Even the worse of environments look good. In my opinion, the war torn town at night scene is one of the best images in film history.

The one aspect that didn't always quite work for me was the music. Don't get me wrong. it's not bad. The issue is that the tracking shot gives a very natural, engrossing feel to what's going on. Suddenly, the music will boom loudly and take you out it.

Overall, I highly recommend this. This is a truly stunning flick.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
5
xlt3000Jan 28, 2020
Has some good moments, but overall overrated.
It's not really interesting watching two men run all over the battlefield, surviving when they really shouldn't, and portraying the enemy in the typical way they are portrayed in the past 60 yearsHas some good moments, but overall overrated.
It's not really interesting watching two men run all over the battlefield, surviving when they really shouldn't, and portraying the enemy in the typical way they are portrayed in the past 60 years (automatons that can't shoot straight, are evil, and drop dead when the hero shoots at them once). If you're looking for a gritty realistic WW1 film, this isn't it.
And it's a bloody shame, because the director obviously was aware of how to create great war cinematography. The large scale assaults are great to look at. If only the film had been more of a classic realistic war film with such scenes, rather than a largely boring film of a single man running through Germans in enemy held territory like James Bond.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
8
TheEventsOf1989Jan 11, 2020
As far as war movies go, "1917" was a fantastic watch. The story was well written, it didn't blow my socks off, and while I anticipated some of the reveals (midpoint reversal), they still affected me, and it didn't at all take away from theAs far as war movies go, "1917" was a fantastic watch. The story was well written, it didn't blow my socks off, and while I anticipated some of the reveals (midpoint reversal), they still affected me, and it didn't at all take away from the experience. The dialogue was very well crafted, and there was only maybe one line that I thought was to on the nose. The visuals are from Deakins (a very well known cinematographer) and as always he is tremendous. While maybe not every frame is epic or grandiose, the visuals encompass the tone while also adhering to each scene's needs.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
6
Jason_bJan 9, 2020
This move does a lot of things really really well. The continuous shot concept is inventive and at times spectacular. Insanely detailed sets on a huge scale. MacKay and Chapman's performances are excellent. Sam Mendes and Roger Deakins createThis move does a lot of things really really well. The continuous shot concept is inventive and at times spectacular. Insanely detailed sets on a huge scale. MacKay and Chapman's performances are excellent. Sam Mendes and Roger Deakins create an intensely suspenseful and shockingly realistic version of World War I. However, it lags in a few crucial areas. Namely overall tone: It drums up a lot of suspense but then it also has a lot of repetitive and boring walking scenes. Production: The continuous shot concept kind of falls apart when it's not a huge action sequence. Especially when there's a lot of conversations happening at once. It's missing natural transitions and breaks in conversations. I get that it's based on a true story but aside from the soon to be famous climax this was a sort of interesting take on a largely uneventful story.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
7
marco34laJan 16, 2020
It's a good solid movie, but I felt was over-rated. The action is very predictable when it first happens - and too many stupid stops along the way. Ultimately, this is a short story that was made into 2 hrs. Didn't have the emotional depth orIt's a good solid movie, but I felt was over-rated. The action is very predictable when it first happens - and too many stupid stops along the way. Ultimately, this is a short story that was made into 2 hrs. Didn't have the emotional depth or courage as say a Private Ryan or other war movies.… Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
6
AxeTJan 17, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The simplest storyline against the backdrop of great war it's more an exercise in high concept moving camera bravura filmmaking than a moving great war movie. Wisely given a mission plot which creates suspense it also tries hard for emotion with the tried and true brothers in arms sentiment, but it seems the main motivation was to make a seemingly seamless one shot feature length motion picture with no editing which has been done before going back to at least Hitchcock but perhaps never to this level of technical achievement traveling through such distance and complex choreographed action. While very impressive it doesn't make for the most impactful experience which cutting across time and space affords. (There is one obvious cut and several transitions that certainly were used to disguise cuts, besides ability of VFX to now eliminate such.) Hands down it should win the Oscar for Best Cinematography, but with big British stars only in cameos and unknowns in the leads the ride is somewhat diminished.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
AverycrosslinJan 12, 2020
1917 is possibly one of the best war movies I have seen. The cinematography is awesome, the one shot feel does not feel like a gimmick, it looks great. Flawless performances and a powerful bond between Scofield and Blake. This is a fantastic movie.
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
leoterraJan 26, 2020
Let's talk about 1917, Sam Mendes' new film is certainly one of the best of the year. Sam Mendes' straight-forward direction is surprising, it's a beautiful job. The plot is intriguing and the soundtrack is perfect. George MacKay andLet's talk about 1917, Sam Mendes' new film is certainly one of the best of the year. Sam Mendes' straight-forward direction is surprising, it's a beautiful job. The plot is intriguing and the soundtrack is perfect. George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman are sensational, they are very clever interpretations that unfortunately did not get recognition in the awards season. Another aspect that deserves to be mentioned is the photography of this film, which is wonderful, the scenes are constantly showing the open and wonderful environment. The sound work is very well done. 1917 deserved the 10 Oscar nominations, it is an impeccable work of direction, acting, cinematography, sound, editing and soundtrack. 1917 is a film that deserves to be seen by everyone. Perfect.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
AilunchiuJan 19, 2020
The camera movement brings audience into the movie. The overall acting and scene are amazing. One of the best war film. Must watch
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
LawrenceCJan 13, 2020
Beautiful cinematography, but apart from it, it's only Call of Duty feat. Woody and chubby Leo DiCaprio
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
8
D_TTFeb 1, 2020
This movie does everything it's trying to do right but does something's it's not trying to do very wrong. The emotional wait of every scene in this movie is insane. Even though a lot of the movie is spent simply walking it somehow manages toThis movie does everything it's trying to do right but does something's it's not trying to do very wrong. The emotional wait of every scene in this movie is insane. Even though a lot of the movie is spent simply walking it somehow manages to make it incredibly interesting, when the real action starts it is really really good. The main issues I have with this movie are that it is quite slow to get going, it also has a very weird sence of time, they say it will take around 6 hours to make the journey but it is completed in 2. Lastly I absolutely hate how much motion blur is in this film, you cant look at anything except what the camera is focusing on, I actually came out of the cinema with a headache it was so bad (I didnt watch it in 3d) all in all a great movie with just some minor flaws.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
foxgroveJan 12, 2020
A film demonstrating style and technique over strong story telling. The result is actually quite slow and, dare one say, boring. This is a movie that does not match the sum of its parts. George Mackay is very good in the lead and Sam MendesA film demonstrating style and technique over strong story telling. The result is actually quite slow and, dare one say, boring. This is a movie that does not match the sum of its parts. George Mackay is very good in the lead and Sam Mendes direction, whilst to be applauded on an aesthetic level, is lacking in pace. He has to take the blame for this as the one shot gimmick leaves little room to blame it on the editing. Roger Deakins' cinematography is an amazing achievement, and the production design looks like it should for a war zone/ battlefield. Sound is great when dealing with planes and explosions but simple dialogue is sometimes hard to understand. The score, although not hummable, works very well within the film and is very effective in underlying what is going on screen.… Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
10
OrioniscoolDec 30, 2019
With all the precision of the takes and timing of weather and never using different locations for each scene is just a achievement itself. This movie did hit me on a personal note, my grant grandfather served for England in WW1 and he sawWith all the precision of the takes and timing of weather and never using different locations for each scene is just a achievement itself. This movie did hit me on a personal note, my grant grandfather served for England in WW1 and he saw clips of the movie and now he is hooked and can't wait to watch the movie. He hopes it like the movie Dunkirk in terms of the story line. Lastly he wants to say thank you to the highest to the lowest of the cast and crew who worked on the film.… Expand
9 of 18 users found this helpful99
All this user's reviews
9
KeithDowJan 10, 2020
The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The director, the actor, and the cinematographer. Sam Mendes, George MacKay, and Roger Deakins.

This trinity of artists has achieved something truly special with their World War War I masterpieceThe Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The director, the actor, and the cinematographer. Sam Mendes, George MacKay, and Roger Deakins.

This trinity of artists has achieved something truly special with their World War War I masterpiece ‘1917.’ There are good movies. There are great movies. And every so often—perhaps once a year at most, if we the audience may be so spoiled—there are movies that advance the art form beyond its present state, towards a loftier plane of existence. ‘1917’ is indeed one of these movies.

Upon seeing the film, words feel trivial in trying to characterize or describe in any meaningful way the experience that this movie provides. Give director Sam Mendes a pen and a camera and there isn’t anything he can’t do. Afford him the privilege of working with lead actor George MacKay and sublimity follows. Pair them both with legendary cinematographer Roger Deakins and transcendence awaits.

The “single take” effect in which the film is presented is not new. Others have also done it to great acclaim, such as Alejandro G. Inarritu with ‘Birdman’ or Ilya Naishuller with ‘Hardcore Henry.’ But no other film has done it better than ‘1917’ and quite frankly there are few, if any films in recent memory, that have been so thoroughly exceptional in every other facet of the filmmaking process.… Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
9
jaredwallace91Jan 10, 2020
Beautiful cinematography and a reminder of what consequences we face when our leaders play dangerous war games. Hopefully the War to End All Wars can give us the urgency to end our Endless Wars.
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
10
mrmonsterJan 11, 2020
There's movies, and then there's works of art. This is the latter. 1917 is nothing short of a masterpiece that is so real and visceral that you'll feel like you are a soldier in the war, and yet so beautiful that your breath will be takenThere's movies, and then there's works of art. This is the latter. 1917 is nothing short of a masterpiece that is so real and visceral that you'll feel like you are a soldier in the war, and yet so beautiful that your breath will be taken away by every shot. Watching 1917 will emotionally-drain you, but in the best way possible.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
8
Gods_Son23Jan 18, 2020
"There is no sense of real danger, because the mission has to continue, if only to keep this impressive long shot going..." I won't be clicking on a The Atlantic or a David Sims link again. SPOILER. One of the two soldiers on the mission"There is no sense of real danger, because the mission has to continue, if only to keep this impressive long shot going..." I won't be clicking on a The Atlantic or a David Sims link again. SPOILER. One of the two soldiers on the mission die... How can you say there is no sense of danger. The other one nearly dies numerous times. Some critics are as dumb as a box of hammers.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
LoyolaProp1Dec 31, 2019
I don’t know if you’ll find a feature film that more properly captures the carnage left behind by trench warfare. The images are haunting and convey the horror of war more than any movie I can remember. Some complain the story is simple, butI don’t know if you’ll find a feature film that more properly captures the carnage left behind by trench warfare. The images are haunting and convey the horror of war more than any movie I can remember. Some complain the story is simple, but it really doesn’t need to be more complicated. The visuals are masterfully achieved, but I’m not sure the camera technique used was necessary or particularly affective.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
5
DeanomiteJan 17, 2020
Roger Deakins is the most famous cinematographer working today, he gets movies made (finally got an oscar after numerous Coen movies, for BladeRunner 2049). The big thing here is that it's supposed to be 1 long take, Birdman pulled it off aRoger Deakins is the most famous cinematographer working today, he gets movies made (finally got an oscar after numerous Coen movies, for BladeRunner 2049). The big thing here is that it's supposed to be 1 long take, Birdman pulled it off a few years ago to great trophies, Children of Men is the gold standard of long takes. Sam Mendes is a talented guy, he made the gorgeous Road to Perdition, then a lot of forgettable Bond movies, this is not impressive as a work of direction. Colin Firth is always brilliant (best movie is A Single Man). Honestly i got bored about 20 minutes in and just stayed there, the song ending the second act really drove that home. I liked the Rudyard Kipling quote "He travels fastest who travels alone." A much much better recent WW1 thing was They Shall Not Grow Old, it was amazing by Peter Jackson.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
djbattJan 12, 2020
Wow Great editing.. the feel of one (take) continues filming was different and nice
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
7
9261mcanJan 10, 2020
I saw it in an IMAX theater so it was great photography. However, I saw flaws such: 1) Who milked the cow - milk was in the pail but where did it come from? 2) All the building/houses were bombed out- didn't just one remain intact 3) WhenI saw it in an IMAX theater so it was great photography. However, I saw flaws such: 1) Who milked the cow - milk was in the pail but where did it come from? 2) All the building/houses were bombed out- didn't just one remain intact 3) When his friend died, the field took the military ID and later gave it to the brother - but one purpose of the ID is to identify the dead - ID is put into the mouth in order to identify him later on. Not Oscar best picture material - only won the Foreign Press Golden Globe Best Picture due to British relevancy.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
MurphyBrandonDec 31, 2019
1917 has a constant nervous tension that will grip your attention and refuse to let go. I think it must be mentioned among the best World War I films from now on. Aesthetically, the cinematography will remind people of Dunkirk, plus they1917 has a constant nervous tension that will grip your attention and refuse to let go. I think it must be mentioned among the best World War I films from now on. Aesthetically, the cinematography will remind people of Dunkirk, plus they blended long clips together to make it look continuous. In my opinion, that core concept does not cause pacing issues. The story keeps up at a decent pace and rarely lingers too long. With one main goal in mind, the plot is powerful and easy to follow.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
1
WhitepopeMay 1, 2020
So WW1 biggest war of history....
no action... in the biggest war of history No politics as every army had mutinies in WW1. People were slaughtered by millions for kings and generals. The WW1 ended with russian and german revolution. ThisSo WW1 biggest war of history....
no action... in the biggest war of history No politics as every army had mutinies in WW1. People were slaughtered by millions for kings and generals. The WW1 ended with russian and german revolution. This movie has nothing of WW1. Lost 2 hours of my life.

They should have used this movie for indiana jones instead of aliens. THis is isn't a war movie ... or a movie . It's a spam… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
10
RedskillJan 12, 2020
The movie was flawless, the one camera technique was EPICNESS, and by the way score of the year too
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
10
PulpfictioneJan 12, 2020
This was truly an amazing movie, and I loved the one shot camera technique too, And by the way George McKay was amazing in the film
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
Bruteforce037Jan 24, 2020
Visually stunning, moving, frightening, heartbreaking, exciting and breathtaking. Go see for yourself, I did. You will not be disappointed.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
TVJerryJan 10, 2020
During World War I, two young British soldiers are assigned to cross enemy lines and deliver a message that will keep 1600 of their troops from being ambushed. While the mission seems virtually impossible, it's rendered even more incredibleDuring World War I, two young British soldiers are assigned to cross enemy lines and deliver a message that will keep 1600 of their troops from being ambushed. While the mission seems virtually impossible, it's rendered even more incredible by director Sam Mendes' decision to shoot the film as if it were one continuous shot. Not only does this lend an urgency to the journey, but it boggles the mind to consider how some of the scenes were even staged/captured. The trek itself is full of setbacks that make the mission even more challenging for the soldiers and the viewer (if not a bit strained on credibility). Even though there is a continuous level of stress, the drama never has the poignant power that the story demands. As a result, this is a masterful piece of filmmaking that's impact is more technical than emotional.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
cag345Jan 20, 2020
95/100 We have in front of us one of the best movies of the year and no doubt a multiple Oscars worthy at the next ceremony. I have been a fan of Sam Mendes, who conquered me before with his first film "American Beauty" and with95/100 We have in front of us one of the best movies of the year and no doubt a multiple Oscars worthy at the next ceremony. I have been a fan of Sam Mendes, who conquered me before with his first film "American Beauty" and with "Revolutionary Road" and "Skyfall". These movie at the first instance do not share any obvious elements that allow us to characterize Mendes filmography, but what we can see is that in each of them and especially with 1917, it is that he is creating something so personal, proper, bright and at the same delicate, that as a spectator my only job is to sit and be marveled by his creations. He is a brilliant Director and one of the best for his generation. But not every triumph belongs to Mendes, because Roger Deakins is spectacular, perceptive, intuitive and performs the cynematography with brilliance and pure perfection (of course in the accepted limits, because that's where 1917 can have a bit of flaws and is that it does not have as much surprise factor as gender can sometimes merit it, it can be judged as too safe, but it doesn't matter because you see all the time surprised on how beautiful the film is). On the other hand, his cast led by the George Mackay promise is top-notch and the production design deserves multiple awards (the best of the year). In conclusion, it will be a epic war classic movie for further generation. Just as simple as that.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
matthewmirlianiJan 10, 2020
1917 is an achievement in immersive filmmaking - with its impressive cinematography, film editing, and set design. It’s a near-perfect film - deftly balancing the tension and coldness of war with deep human emotions - but suffers from1917 is an achievement in immersive filmmaking - with its impressive cinematography, film editing, and set design. It’s a near-perfect film - deftly balancing the tension and coldness of war with deep human emotions - but suffers from less-than-stellar dialogue and segments that slow down rather than propel the story.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
Terbo49Jan 24, 2020
A tremendous achievement - the point of the single-shot technique is made subtly, and devastatingly. It is the perfect example of technique enhancing story.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
LincsJan 10, 2020
1917 was as beautiful as it was gritty. Do not go into this expecting it to be the next Saving Private Ryan. It is a vastly different movie, and that's a good thing. One of the few movie worth your time (and money).
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
moviemitch96Jan 11, 2020
A jaw-dropping and undeniably impressive achievement! This film is set in the midst of World War I in France, and follows two young British soldiers tasked with hand-delivering a message to their 2nd battalion that warns them to call off aA jaw-dropping and undeniably impressive achievement! This film is set in the midst of World War I in France, and follows two young British soldiers tasked with hand-delivering a message to their 2nd battalion that warns them to call off a planned attack that will lure them into an ambush set by the Germans. First off, what truly makes this film stand out is the nifty cinematography technique it employs. The film is 2 hours long, and it's filmed and edited to appear like one long continuous 2-hour shot (not unlike the best picture Oscar-winning film 'Birdman' from 5 years ago.) We literally follow these two young soldiers in real time from start to finish, with no cuts in between, adding to the film an even bigger sense of realism. But even setting aside this impressive technique, the cinematography is absolutely gorgeous, and if this film deserves an Oscar for anything, it's the impeccable camerawork! Other great highlights of the film include its majestic musical score, as well as the acting from the two young soldiers, who make you feel like you're right in the middle of war with them with their realistic fear and performances. There were a couple of moments and stretches where the pacing slows down a bit much, but the one-take appearance does a solid job of making up for this and helped me stay fixated and invested in everything happening, and there was definitely a fair share of tense moments throughout too. Overall, it's undoubtedly a grand and truly unique war film, and one of the most harrowing and memorable ones I've seen in quite some time.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
radixlecti84Jan 19, 2020
Pheonominally shot war epic, though the events that take place are a little larger than life the manner in which the tale is presented really draws you in, the movie is shot as if it is one long nightmare rarely stopping for you to take aPheonominally shot war epic, though the events that take place are a little larger than life the manner in which the tale is presented really draws you in, the movie is shot as if it is one long nightmare rarely stopping for you to take a breath. Defintely see this in your local cinema.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
JambobbybJan 28, 2020
Immense! Maybe the best ww1 movie of the past 40 years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
ApolscJan 27, 2020
A war masterpiece, the way it is made to look as filmed in one shot, the music, the story, the photography, the acting, I hope it gets the Oscar.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
EliascJan 27, 2020
One of the few war films that captures the experience of being trapped in combat. Mendes captures the confusion and uncertainly of real combat. No Rambo's here. The use of a simulated continuous one shot take contributes enormously to theOne of the few war films that captures the experience of being trapped in combat. Mendes captures the confusion and uncertainly of real combat. No Rambo's here. The use of a simulated continuous one shot take contributes enormously to the sense that there is no escape and choice other that to continuously move forward. Vets will know what I mean by this. Watch the end credits to see to whom the film is dedicated.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
moviecritic68Jan 15, 2020
A worthwhile film to attend but hardly worthy of a Best Picture award. Great prop scenes & photography but basically the story is a repeat of Saving Private Ryan only in a hard to understand at times British dialogue. I'll score it at 7.8 forA worthwhile film to attend but hardly worthy of a Best Picture award. Great prop scenes & photography but basically the story is a repeat of Saving Private Ryan only in a hard to understand at times British dialogue. I'll score it at 7.8 for those who follow me.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
RalfbergsJan 19, 2020
While the story in the movie is not the most interesting I would have ever seen, the cinematography is so great in this one as it is all made to be like one shot so just for that it is already worth watching. If not that, probably movieWhile the story in the movie is not the most interesting I would have ever seen, the cinematography is so great in this one as it is all made to be like one shot so just for that it is already worth watching. If not that, probably movie itself would get a bit lower score.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
VancomycinJan 12, 2020
A rare war film that captures a specific geography, tension, and pacing in an unprecedented way. With just enough speed and gory realism to remind you the ugliness of battle while advancing the viewers' investment in the missionA rare war film that captures a specific geography, tension, and pacing in an unprecedented way. With just enough speed and gory realism to remind you the ugliness of battle while advancing the viewers' investment in the mission near-perfectly. The only thing this movie is missing is a seatbelt in your theater chair.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
jeffw38Jan 19, 2020
I didn’t think anything was going to touch “Joker” during awards this year. I was wrong. This is a great movie. Without giving anything away, there’s a scene near the end where the troops are in the woods. It was an incredibly powerfulI didn’t think anything was going to touch “Joker” during awards this year. I was wrong. This is a great movie. Without giving anything away, there’s a scene near the end where the troops are in the woods. It was an incredibly powerful scene. See “1917.” You won’t be disappointed.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
SKDJan 20, 2020
As the protagonists weave their way through a labyrinth of trenches overflowing with thousands of allied soldiers and slowly trek their way into the no-man's land, it hits you. Dead horses, rotting corpses being picked clean. Flies, maggots,As the protagonists weave their way through a labyrinth of trenches overflowing with thousands of allied soldiers and slowly trek their way into the no-man's land, it hits you. Dead horses, rotting corpses being picked clean. Flies, maggots, rats, and birds scavenge the bodies that litter a barren wasteland, which is poignantly juxtaposed against the peaceful grasslands and forests just a few hundred feet away.

And then you realize that no one being portrayed here is still alive. This movie (and others like it) is society’s collective memory of these wars.

The music is perfect and drives this story all the way through. It never misses a beat and keeps the tension coiled.

In searching for something this movie did wrong, or was in dire need of changing, I found nothing. It is the perfect cautionary tale of the price and horrors of war. 10/10… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
TachJan 25, 2020
Veramente un capolavoro, nient'altro da aggiungere... Opera d'amore verso il cinema.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
Ben86Feb 2, 2020
This is now probably my favorite movie of all time. The cinematography, soundtrack, and story are all amazing.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
alejandro970Jan 24, 2020
The dangerous mission of two soldiers who have to deliver a message that would prevent a carnage, it´s an experience that envelops the viewer by experiment the odyssey in real time, in one shot editing, with no time to blink or rest. one ofThe dangerous mission of two soldiers who have to deliver a message that would prevent a carnage, it´s an experience that envelops the viewer by experiment the odyssey in real time, in one shot editing, with no time to blink or rest. one of best of WWI movies.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
Creeper3455Jan 26, 2020
1917 is not the next big step for movies, besides the craft put onto it, and it's simply devoid of technical achievements. So there.

Now yes, there's the cinematography by Roger Deakins that is, indeed, nice to look at, and makes the movie1917 is not the next big step for movies, besides the craft put onto it, and it's simply devoid of technical achievements. So there.

Now yes, there's the cinematography by Roger Deakins that is, indeed, nice to look at, and makes the movie flow flawlessly, therefore making it a Videogame Movie of sorts, especially in some impressive moments, like Ecòust in the middle of a light **** that also acts like an Escape Level.
But it's also really awful at times. Never have I seen cutaways from people and/or objects as lazy as that.

Look, the thing about 1917 that confuses the hell out of me is why did Sam Mendes work (and boldly direct this big scale epic) with a script that feels like either a Jerry Bruckheimer movie or a Michael Bay movie, since sometimes it makes way for some unnecessary humor to it all because, I guess, we can't replicate the tone of Dunkirk or Hacksaw Ridge.
Characters are just as one note as you'd think, sometimes it's overly serious (like, serious without making sense) and again, about Ecòust, there's a scene that literally stops the plot for no reason other than "squeeze the runtime more".

And what's most disappointing about this movie is Thomas Newman's Score. Now, I love the dude, he's made some of my favourite scores for Animated Movies (Finding Nemo and WALL-E), but there's almost no score in here. It has its moments (its few tension setups, and the character running scene seen in the trailer), but most of it is an annoying bass fest full of "DUN DUN DUN DUNs" that go on and on and on forever.

But I salvage the movie nonetheless because the Artistic craft (Production Design and everything) is oh so gravy! From abandoned German mines to No Man's Land and just a **** of dead bodies surrounding the piece altogether...

So, uhh... yeah. I'm shocked. I wanted to love 1917 as much as everyone else did, and I still hope it gets some Oscar attention, but if this really is the movie they went for...Mah. At least Deakins will be a 2 Time Oscar Winner?… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
SquaredRenJan 19, 2020
This movie is a masterpiece, the plot is pretty simple. But the cinematography, film editing, and acting is this film is top quality. The single-shot illusion makes the viewer feel things more personal, given the fact that the viewer isThis movie is a masterpiece, the plot is pretty simple. But the cinematography, film editing, and acting is this film is top quality. The single-shot illusion makes the viewer feel things more personal, given the fact that the viewer is pretty much travelling with the protagonist. Highly recommended.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
fifi3Jan 16, 2020
Between the magnificent one-shot cinematography, the twist and turns and extraordinary acting, this is one of the most complete war films in recent memory and certainly amongst the best films of 2019.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
estonismJan 12, 2020
The camera work was stunning, the acting was excellent. Aside from some obligatory, non-essential scenes, this was an enjoyable movie. Some sequences were really edge of your seat and amazing in their ability to draw you into the movie.The camera work was stunning, the acting was excellent. Aside from some obligatory, non-essential scenes, this was an enjoyable movie. Some sequences were really edge of your seat and amazing in their ability to draw you into the movie. Others seemed like a short-cut was taken to piece the movie story-line together. A must see on the big screen with Dolby Sound for a fully immersive experience. 10/10 for me cinematography, but overall a 9/10.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
thatpowerFeb 5, 2020
Great soundtrack, cinematography and visuals. Generic and uninteresting plot.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
JLuis_001Jan 18, 2020
Finally yesterday I was able to experience 1917 and I ended up doing it at IMAX, something I didn't plan on, but after seeing it there, I can say this film deserves to be seen and heard in an IMAX room to remember why movies still need to beFinally yesterday I was able to experience 1917 and I ended up doing it at IMAX, something I didn't plan on, but after seeing it there, I can say this film deserves to be seen and heard in an IMAX room to remember why movies still need to be lived on a big screen.

The visual odyssey of Sam Mendes and Roger Deakins is an incredible journey. Yes, the story is very thin but that's something that made 1917 a somewhat different film
It's not a war epic, nor does it try to be one. It's kind of a lone wolf war story, though at the beginning it wasn't like that, and that's good because despite everything that happens, the film doesn't lose that sense of camaraderie at the task that remains after the loss.

1917 is a story of survival and that although it could not be considered completely original, that's totally the least of its problems because after all the experience is just spectacular.

I admit the film has certain rhythm dropouts that I didn't like, especially the scene where Schofield loses consciousness, but at that point we are given the extraordinary night sequence, so my discomfort ended up disappearing.

1917 is not a perfect film, but it's a reminder of how wonderful is to enjoy a film as they should be, even if it's a film that deals with the horrors of war.

This is the kind of film that should be lived and experienced that way, otherwise it loses its resonance, so if you have the chance to see 1917 at a big screen do it.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
MallRat15Jan 31, 2020
This movie is so beautifully shot, with a crazy attention to detail. The score also plays with the movie very well. Movie flows so well it keeps your eyes locked to the screen the entire time. A very simple story but paced well and shot soThis movie is so beautifully shot, with a crazy attention to detail. The score also plays with the movie very well. Movie flows so well it keeps your eyes locked to the screen the entire time. A very simple story but paced well and shot so well turns it into one of the years best movies. Going to win many awards this awards season and maybe even take home best picture of the year.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
CharlieSGJan 28, 2020
The simple story made this all together a great movie. The acting was just there, very good by all the characters, but the cinematic pulling together of the tale made it well worth watching. Could be well enjoyed on a small screen but inThe simple story made this all together a great movie. The acting was just there, very good by all the characters, but the cinematic pulling together of the tale made it well worth watching. Could be well enjoyed on a small screen but in the theater really makes to grand.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
DOLLAR_376Jan 22, 2020
Possibly the best war movie since Saving Private Ryan, a milestone for cinema in technical terms that works in favor of the movie, adding to the immersion. By the end, it felt like I had been part of this emotional and frenetic journey.Possibly the best war movie since Saving Private Ryan, a milestone for cinema in technical terms that works in favor of the movie, adding to the immersion. By the end, it felt like I had been part of this emotional and frenetic journey. Amazing cinematography, permorfances, score and art direction. There is a lack of character depth, following the line of Dunkirk, but it doesn't affect the connection with the movie in any way. Try to watch it in the biggest screen you can, you won't regret it.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
blassterJan 21, 2020
the technical aspects in this movie are perfect, the long scenes in one shot are great, the cinematography looks beautiful, the music is something very different from any other war movie, maybe because it doesn't really focus on war but onthe technical aspects in this movie are perfect, the long scenes in one shot are great, the cinematography looks beautiful, the music is something very different from any other war movie, maybe because it doesn't really focus on war but on the camaraderie of the characters and the determination with which they act, feels some tension in not knowing what awaits them. It has a sequence in which we can't see where the shots come from that reminds of a video game like Metal Gear Solid thanks to the camera angles and the music that indicates that there is danger. On the negative side, it's a topic that has already been very explored although with a new vision and some scenes feels like a choreography in which the camera simply follows them down a long corridor full of extras.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
revan117Jan 17, 2020
good movie. the actors where great and played their roles excellently. a good thrill and experience well worth the watch.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
Bertaut1Jan 22, 2020
Although partly a technical showcase rather than a story, it's still a terrific Great War movie

Written by Sam Mendes and Krysty Wilson-Cairns, and directed by Mendes, unless you've been living under a rock, you'll know that 1917 has beenAlthough partly a technical showcase rather than a story, it's still a terrific Great War movie

Written by Sam Mendes and Krysty Wilson-Cairns, and directed by Mendes, unless you've been living under a rock, you'll know that 1917 has been done in such a way as to give the impression that it all takes place in two shots (the marketing material says one, but it's two – there's a time-jump where no attempt is made to hide the transition). In reality, there are a lot more than two shots, but the edits have been digitally 'hidden', much like Birdman (2014) or Utøya 22. Juli (2018). And although I have some issues with it, I think Mendes has made an exceptional film, one in which form and content are tightly matched, with the style effectively delivering the story in a thematically justified manner.

April 6, 1917; the Western Front. German forces have fallen back, and a pursuing British colonel believes that if he attacks now, he can turn the tide of the war. However, he's unaware that the Germans have fallen back to the heavily fortified Hindenburg Line and are lying in wait. With communication lines cut, two British Lance Corporals, Will Schofield (George MacKay) and Tom Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) are assigned to physically carry an order calling off the following morning's attack. If they fail, 1,600 soldiers will be slaughtered.

So, the film's big selling point is its aesthetic design. The use of the single-shot format is such a noticeable type of form that whenever it's used, it automatically places pressure on the content, which must justify why the film is shot this way, or the form becomes gimmicky. Think of Rope (1948) which was edited to look like one shot, or Victoria (2015), which was legitimately one shot. Very little in either film justifies the stylistic design. Compare this with one-shot films such as Russkij Kovcheg (2002) or the aforementioned Utøya 22. Juli, both of which tie form to content. And I think Mendes and cinematographer Roger Deakins achieve like synergy.

Is the one-shot effect distracting? At first, yes, it is a little, especially if you're trying to spot where editor Lee Smith has hidden the transitions. But after sussing two edits in the first twenty minutes, I stopped looking, because I was just pulling myself out of the film unnecessarily. In essence, once you go with the aesthetic on its own terms, you forget about trying to spot the edits, instead letting the cinematography do exactly what it's supposed to do – immerse you.

The opening scene is a superb introduction to the technique. The film starts with a shot of a daffodil field, before pulling back and revealing Schofield and Blake taking a break. They rouse themselves and begin walking, first past more resting soldiers, then the mess, then down a ramp into the trenches. We see the tactile transition from Edenic to hellish because we're moving in real-time through the milieu; we see the boundary between peace and war because the characters walk along that boundary. You shoot this sequence conventionally, and you undercut that.

Along slightly more conventional lines, one has to commend Deakins's work during the nighttime scenes in Écoust-Saint-Mein. As we pass through the ruined town, the only light is from flares creating very hard shadows in constant motion. The whole thing is almost otherworldly, and as the light traverses the sky, it's as if the ground itself is in motion. You won't find a better study in how to compose a sequence using light and shadow.

Thematically, by its very nature, 1917 is far more focused on the micro than the macro – you might learn something about life on the front, but you'll learn nothing about the politics behind the conflict. Partly because of this, it avoids, for the most part, the kind of cartoonish jingoism that make films like Saving Private Ryan (1998) so obnoxious. Indeed, the protagonists' nationality is largely anonymous, which is not something you can usually say of a war film. On the other hand, you shouldn't expect too much psychological insight. The Thin Red Line (1998) it most definitely isn't.

The story is unquestionably paper-thin, but that's by design. One criticism I did have, however, is how well-groomed Scholfield and Blake are. One only need watch They Shall Not Grow Old (2018) to see how unrealistic this is. Indeed, they look like they've just stepped out of the makeup trailer most of the time, and it's glaring enough to pull you out of things on occasion.

All things considered though, I thoroughly enjoyed 1917. The single-shot strategy worked well, and even if the film is weak from a character/storyline/theme perspective, it didn't really matter when form and content are this well matched. It could have been an empty technical exercise, but Mendes hasn't allowed that to happen. The Great War was hell on Earth. 1917 doesn't make us feel what that hell was like. Because no art form can do that. But it's a very fine approximation.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
SandyCameronJan 16, 2020
This was an excellent film, almost pure cinema. It's time some critics checked in their preconceived notions about what a film is as they pass the box-office. This was not a "war is hell" movie. The so-called "single take" was not a gimmick.This was an excellent film, almost pure cinema. It's time some critics checked in their preconceived notions about what a film is as they pass the box-office. This was not a "war is hell" movie. The so-called "single take" was not a gimmick. In fact, this was less a war movie than an allegory about life itself. Slow to start, the first person perspective draws in the viewer,so we share the unfolding events and incidents alongside the two Tommies charged with their mission. It bears many similarities with Dunkirk (which was also more than just "a war film" and certainly not just a recount of a historical event).

I was gripped, moved, drained, not just during the movie, but afterwards as well. It was not an easy watch (as Little Women was, also excellent, but for different reasons) , but I will want to see it again.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
BulgarianCriticFeb 2, 2020
This movie for me is one of the most beautifully shot films ever made. Every scene was aesthetically pleasing and surrounded with beauty and despair. Every time they went into trenches you could see and feel the paranoia and claustrophobiaThis movie for me is one of the most beautifully shot films ever made. Every scene was aesthetically pleasing and surrounded with beauty and despair. Every time they went into trenches you could see and feel the paranoia and claustrophobia just from the way it was filmed. The movie also keeps you constantly on your toes by relaxing you in a scene and beauty and then something tragic or intense happens. The cinematography and music was amazing and the story was beautiful.I suggest for every movie watcher to check this film even if you are not a fan of this genre.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
ahmedaiman1999Feb 3, 2020
I won't say anything about how immersive and impressive on a technical level this gritty yet moving film is; I just want to say that I can't remember the last time I identified with and was emotionally invested in a character in a war film asI won't say anything about how immersive and impressive on a technical level this gritty yet moving film is; I just want to say that I can't remember the last time I identified with and was emotionally invested in a character in a war film as I did with George MacKay's William Schofield. What a talent! (9/10)… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
Bcap1415Jan 11, 2020
Great movie. Best picture? Not sure, haven't seen them all yet, however I feel Joker is a movie that sticks with you, and 1917 is a great movie but one I don't feel I'll remember all that much in a few years.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
DIO69Feb 1, 2020
An absolute masterpiece, one of the best movies i have ever seen and one i think everyone should watch.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
JordanJonesYallJan 8, 2020
This is a fantastic film. Saw it three times already. The amount of team work that had to happen is astonishing to think about. This is why I love movies. Everything works together for one purpose. Could not tear my eyes from the screen theThis is a fantastic film. Saw it three times already. The amount of team work that had to happen is astonishing to think about. This is why I love movies. Everything works together for one purpose. Could not tear my eyes from the screen the whole time it played.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
notor12Jan 10, 2020
Unfortunately, the one-shot gimmick seemed to limit the scope of the story to a point which ultimately harmed the film overall....Many of the sequences and plot points come across as being in service to maintaining this one uninterrupted shotUnfortunately, the one-shot gimmick seemed to limit the scope of the story to a point which ultimately harmed the film overall....Many of the sequences and plot points come across as being in service to maintaining this one uninterrupted shot instead of the shot being in service to the story. That would have been fine if this problem arose here or there, but it is a pervasive throughout.

That said, the film does what it set out to do and it does it well. It carries great emotional weight in certain places in part thanks to the uninterrupted shot style. It is highly suspenseful in places. It just doesn't tell much of a story; It's sort of like designing an entire movie around a chase sequence. People may be in imminent peril at all times, but there are no stakes for the audience unless you develop your characters so that we know them, empathize with them, and care about them.

That is why the comparisons to Saving Private Ryan don't make sense to me....There was much, much more character development and story in Saving Private Ryan than in this film. There was a simple objective in both, but far less plot linearity towards that objective in Saving Private Ryan. Being limited to two characters in an unbroken shot also caused some awkward moments where the characters had to basically tell the audience what was happening instead of the film showing them, which was jarring and took me out of the moment.

This isn't a bad movie.....but it isn't an all time great war movie either. World War I was such a disastrously stupid war and it boggles my mind that no film to take up the subject to date has quite captured its utter folly or causes. This film carries such a narrow focus it does not really do the war justice, in a sense. It focuses on the glory and the bravery of the individuals who fought it (of which there was plenty) but glory can obfuscate the truth when it is removed from its context; That truth here, where millions died for little to no good reason at all, and they knew it too.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
kozel1Jan 18, 2020
This is one of those very rare occasions when after the movie is finished, I just sat in the theater and repeating "wooow!" over and over again. I went to see it twice so far. Just amazing! This movie is flawless. I don't give out 10 out ofThis is one of those very rare occasions when after the movie is finished, I just sat in the theater and repeating "wooow!" over and over again. I went to see it twice so far. Just amazing! This movie is flawless. I don't give out 10 out of 10 stars but this piece of art deserves it. Just simply fantastic! Every second on screen deserves full attention, you can't take a break from it and you don't want to.

Probably the greatest filming and editing masterpieces ever made, even better than Birdman in my opinion. Mr. Newman's score puts you in the mood with the story, fantastic script and acting from every major character and extras. Do yourself a favor: just go and see it on the big screen. You won't regret it!… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
IlovemoviesssJan 12, 2020
I watched this movie last night, and I think that everyone should see this film. And I really loved George McKay and Dean Charles Chapman in it I think he should be nominated for best actor. So I think it was an amazing movie
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
v1ntageJan 12, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. To be honest, I went into this movie thinking it would be some Hollywood blockbuster spun on a WWI theme. I was quite wrong and was moved on this master piece of adventure and suspense. The personal connection of director Sam Mendes helps form the on-edge story of two men set out on a journey to deliver an order to call off a predetermined attack. One of the best films of the year.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
DonChristopherJan 20, 2020
Holy Cow, this movie was fantastic – my heart was really pounding and I felt transported into the action!
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
THCJan 26, 2020
1917 offers a World War One true story epic, featuring events that are almost realistic and historical. 1917 gives viewers an opportunity to feel and see just what it was like during the First World War, making it truly inspiring.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
CPNJan 30, 2020
Excellent storytelling. Good ensemble performances all around. Although a simple story I was gripped throughout. The camera work was fantastic and there were some beautiful moments.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
jeannefrancoiseJan 28, 2020
This movie has one single shot camera to portrait the journey of an English soldier, who had duty to give important message to other regiment. I think this is Sam Mendes expertise to give all stories united in just one single shot, so theThis movie has one single shot camera to portrait the journey of an English soldier, who had duty to give important message to other regiment. I think this is Sam Mendes expertise to give all stories united in just one single shot, so the audience can feel themselves to be like that main role, to see the war, to face the combat, or to fall down, shooting, etc. This idea of camera can be trend for movie industry, especially in war movies in the next 10 years. This movie is helped by the appearance of several actors who are serving in war movies, such as Benedict Cumberbatch, Mark Strong, and Ralph Fiennes. This movie was so deserved to have high appreciation like Oscar or Golden Globe, although there are many critics and doubters upon it, this movie is still the masterpiece in its genre. Thank you camera crews!… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
akhilanJan 29, 2020
We have crossed across many war movie but 1917 might be a total different for you. For me, it's something a strange way of execution and portrayal. The uninterrupted shots make us believable as a single one hop on me to the edge of the seatWe have crossed across many war movie but 1917 might be a total different for you. For me, it's something a strange way of execution and portrayal. The uninterrupted shots make us believable as a single one hop on me to the edge of the seat many more times on the theater. Roger Deakins was exceptional with his photography along with Lee Smith's brilliant hide way editing. That was in my mind that the film is formatted in one single shot but I just want to experience the truth inside and there is something in my mind that it might have the same pattern as Birdman and Rope. Exactly, it was right. Poetically we can say, the film flows like a river. It has that kinetics from the first frame to the end. Into the list of brilliant war epics, I must add 1917 and give a prominent role there.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
fiftywordreviewJan 30, 2020
Sam Mendes takes a simple story and turns it into a technically stunning cinematic masterpiece. Likable leads, gripping action, and unrivaled cinematography come together for a movie-going experience unlike any other, and one of the best warSam Mendes takes a simple story and turns it into a technically stunning cinematic masterpiece. Likable leads, gripping action, and unrivaled cinematography come together for a movie-going experience unlike any other, and one of the best war films of our generation.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
niemaddFeb 1, 2020
1. This movie should definetly be seen.
2. This movie should definetly be seen at cinema.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
kasaletkaFeb 1, 2020
Good afternoon, come here. I want to say some of my thoughts on the film. I think the film deserves this assessment because it strongly touches on the theme of the horrors of war, which should now be shown in any movie about the war. Also,Good afternoon, come here. I want to say some of my thoughts on the film. I think the film deserves this assessment because it strongly touches on the theme of the horrors of war, which should now be shown in any movie about the war. Also, the plot here is not bad enough, but at the beginning we are somehow not brought up to date with everything that happens at the front. Therefore, a solid eight, I really liked the film, I advise everyone to go down who has at least some representation of the Great War… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
brunodecFeb 2, 2020
A must-watch movie. 1917 is not just another war movie with explosions and gunfights: it's a masterpiece. The directing and acting is superb! Emotionally intense and really brings out the unexpected.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
prev
Page:
More From This Movie

78 Critic Reviews

8.3 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 81 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple
2 77 Project Hail Mary
3 75 Send Help
4 73 Hoppers
5 72 The Sheep Detectives
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL