Read User Reviews and Submit your own for 1917 - Page 2

9

SoulWarfareFeb 27, 2020

People call this film "The Birdman of WWI" and to be fair that is a justified assessment. This entire film is filmed like it is one camera shot and it is AWESOME! think one of the most impressive thing apart from the one looking shot is thePeople call this film "The Birdman of WWI" and to be fair that is a justified assessment. This entire film is filmed like it is one camera shot and it is AWESOME! think one of the most impressive thing apart from the one looking shot is the AMAZING CINEMATOGRAPHY. This shouldn’t be no surprising since it is the legend himself Roger Deakins (Blade Runner 2049 Cinematographer). Every scene feels like a painting and it is absolutely stunning. There is a scene at night where the lighting was done in such a creative way that heighten the tension of the scene. On that note there must also be praise for the score by Thomas Newman who somehow manages to make a score that somehow manages toe elevate every scene and help tell the story. There is also some amazing sound design that manages to make the War actually scary with moments that give horror movie jump scares a run for its money. Additionally, the props and set design should also get praise for creating such large,realistic but elaborate sets to accommodate for a more natural one shot scene. Everything in this film just feels like a technical achievement. We haven’t even touched on the acting or story yet but just for the way this was filmed is already engaging enough. Nevertheless, the two main actors George MacKay as Lance Corporal William "Will" Schofield and Dean-Charles Chapma as Lance Corporal Thomas "Tom" Blake manages to do a phenomenal job in showing the horror of war and giving authentic,believable characters. The story, while relatively simple, is engaging enough to keep you invested in the objective of the main characters. They must send a message to allies stop them running into a trap. It’s simple but works well for the aim of one shot as now it makes the audience a part of the journey.

There isn’t much negative to this movie but I guess if I have to be quite nitpicky it is the fact that halfway through the movie there is a obvious cut. So this movie is actually really a two shot film. The cut was necessary to make the situation more desperate and allow for a unique change in scenery even though it was a bit of a jarring cut. Another sort of nitpick is that we don’t really get much info on the main characters. We get their names and we know what their mission is but their backstory is just given in tidbits. It goes in a Dunkirk route in which we care about these characters because of the situation they are in rather than the fact that we are invested in the characters. It can be argued that the tidbits more than gives you enough info about the characters but it’s really up to the audience in the end. Personally, I don’t find it too much of a fault but can see how others could consider it so.

Honestly my negatives are just nitpicks. This movie is amazing and it is definitely worth watching right now.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

prashant99084Feb 23, 2020

I liked the movie very much it has lot of emotions and screenplay is engaging direction is upto the mark

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

ArthuuFeb 21, 2020

Impressively well directed, very atmospheric with stunning sound design and convincing play - a must watch

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

Snowden111Feb 19, 2020

Masterpiece. You have to watch this movie. The way it was shot was mind blowing. You have to watch this movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

skyhelper0505Feb 19, 2020

지위가 있는 간부도 아닌 일개 두명의 병사가 영화 전체를 긴장감 안에서 풀어나가는 전개가 상당히 흥미진진했다. 특히 독특한 촬영기법으로 마치 잘 만들어진 비디오 게임속에서 전쟁을 직접 체험하는 듯한 느낌을 선사해주고 영화가 끝나고나서 안도의 숨을 내쉬었던 작품.지위가 있는 간부도 아닌 일개 두명의 병사가 영화 전체를 긴장감 안에서 풀어나가는 전개가 상당히 흥미진진했다. 특히 독특한 촬영기법으로 마치 잘 만들어진 비디오 게임속에서 전쟁을 직접 체험하는 듯한 느낌을 선사해주고 영화가 끝나고나서 안도의 숨을 내쉬었던 작품.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

DiptanshuFeb 19, 2020

Wow!That ending was heart warming,literally from starting each and every moment was engaging but after sometime pacing was somewhat disturbed but tension and gripping was to the point great score,cinematography and good acting performances asWow!That ending was heart warming,literally from starting each and every moment was engaging but after sometime pacing was somewhat disturbed but tension and gripping was to the point great score,cinematography and good acting performances as well cameos were great!at last a good movie with crazy camera shots especially felt we are living in it!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

Dcuniverse101Feb 19, 2020

The cinematography is beautiful and the single shot visual is an amazing feat, however with this comes a long winded plot with a lot of empty unnecessary scenes which deeply affects the overall pacing of the film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

ThePeruvianPostFeb 18, 2020

"Director Sam Mendes employs distinctive but extraordinary shots in the first person during the two-hour footage, which makes the production work in many different ways. Although it sometimes results too shaky, it is thanks to George MacKay"Director Sam Mendes employs distinctive but extraordinary shots in the first person during the two-hour footage, which makes the production work in many different ways. Although it sometimes results too shaky, it is thanks to George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman's performances that 1917 preserves both sombre but optimistic tones throughout the montage. In short, this is an exceptional approach to memorialise the hundredth anniversary of the end of the First World War".
...
We are somewhere in France during the Trench Warfare [1915 - 1917] with a depleted British Army; the atmosphere, alongside with the dialogues, can define by itself how was life at the front: scarce water and food, despair between soldiers to go home, endless weapons and corpses scattered on the floor, and so forth. Corporals Blake and Schofield are told to attain a severe/impossible mission despite not having any reinforcements. Before achieving this goal in sending General MacKenzie [Bennedict Cumberbatch] the infamous fallback letter, both privates must penetrate the frightful No Man's Land and experience horrendous life-and-death encounters in many places.
...
Regardless of the silent second half, the absence of preeminent performers and the woozy experience of watching the film in one sole perspective director Sam Mendes and executive producers deliver an eloquent portrayal about surprising facts of the four-year global conflict. For example, both soldiers are bewildered by the superiority of the German trenches in proportions and in quality considering that historically they were far better equipped than the Allied ones which allow the audience the opportunity of a lifetime to analyse the condition millions of innocent citizens were facing. The result improves with some accurate shots at landscapes, underground warfare channels, entire villages pulverised, etcetera. I must acknowledge the last fifteen minutes of the film; it has been a long time since I spotted such an imposing ending. Countless emotions appear regardless of having reached the climax. What a masterpiece ladies and gentlemen!
...
What amazes me the most is that despite being a World War film, 1917 does not give the impression in duplicating the ordinary details of previous same-genre releases such as Hacksaw Ridge [2017]. Once Mr Gibson introduced a brief biography of Desmond Doss [the main character] he began recording some ultraviolent scenes as though you were spotting the most savage state of humankind. As an alternative, 1917 delivers some innovative procedures in creating a war film without increasing the brutal strength of instant classics as Saving Private Ryan.
...
Congratulations!
...
[80/100]… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

DiegoDFFeb 16, 2020

Filme incrível, com roteiro e cenas grandiosos, impecáveis. Para os brasileiros assistam legendando deu uma emoção maior em varias cenas!

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

andyfilm24Feb 16, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Finally got to see 1917. A film I was hoping to see in IMAX. Thank goodness I didn't. It was a real disappointment. Great visual effects and art direction, but I lean more to watching a good story, with characters I care about. 1917, didn't have the latter. I think more time was spent on the blocking and building eye-popping sets than on the script. The character of Lance Corporal Blake was killed off WAY too soon. I would have like to have seen more time with him interacting with his friend, Lance Corporal Schofield. I think this made the film mostly cold and unfeeling. I didn't really make me feel anything when Blake was killed or the meeting of Blake's older brother. Want to see a good, emotional war flick? See Saving Private Ryan, or try to find Gallipoli.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

tayvoodooFeb 15, 2020

this movie was something else. the plot, the cinematography, the ambience, the score, the cast, ugh everything is perfect. also george mackay and richard madden own this b*ssy. go see 1917 on theaters.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

akyla2077Feb 15, 2020

Игра года и тысячелетия и десятилетия и столетия и тысячелетия

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

NiallHayesFeb 15, 2020

This is the best war movie Ive seen for a long time. It takes over an hour for a bullet to even be fired but i was on the edge of my seat the while time. The one shot style of the movie keeps you grounded and there with them for the entireThis is the best war movie Ive seen for a long time. It takes over an hour for a bullet to even be fired but i was on the edge of my seat the while time. The one shot style of the movie keeps you grounded and there with them for the entire journey. Its very impressive to experience. Shame it missed out on the best picture award. Wouldve been a well deserved win… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

KatanaVoidFeb 13, 2020

1917 has one of the best photographies and editing that Hollywood has ever seen, but Sam Mendes doesn't make a good plot or an interesting debate about WW1 and its surroundings, instead, he makes a beautiful and technically impeccable movie,1917 has one of the best photographies and editing that Hollywood has ever seen, but Sam Mendes doesn't make a good plot or an interesting debate about WW1 and its surroundings, instead, he makes a beautiful and technically impeccable movie, but with an almost unimportant story.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

donelsonFeb 13, 2020

Truly astonishing filmmaking. The long take woth camera leading then following then side tracking seamlessly, fluidly brings us close to the players in a way that I've never seen before. Roger Deakins is a magician, far beyond a master. SamTruly astonishing filmmaking. The long take woth camera leading then following then side tracking seamlessly, fluidly brings us close to the players in a way that I've never seen before. Roger Deakins is a magician, far beyond a master. Sam Mendes vision is astounding, yet tempered by some truly intimate moments, truly poignant. Especially loved "the miracle of the milk". Oscar worthy in many ways. Must see.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

eutohiusFeb 12, 2020

This movie is definitely a must-see. Dickins' work is as stunning as always. A pure pleasure to an eye.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

Timmy121Feb 10, 2020

Если не лучший, то один из лучших фильмов которые я смотрел когда-либо, все говорят “Конечно не Хокиан Феникс, но актёрская игра не плохая”, люди, это совсем другой фильм, по вашему актёры должны играть в этом фильме Джокера, актёры играютЕсли не лучший, то один из лучших фильмов которые я смотрел когда-либо, все говорят “Конечно не Хокиан Феникс, но актёрская игра не плохая”, люди, это совсем другой фильм, по вашему актёры должны играть в этом фильме Джокера, актёры играют охуенно, даже когда один из них умирает, а другой не плачет, но на его лице больше чем слёзы, ты чувствуеш их игру… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Voodoo123Feb 10, 2020

1917 looks stunning in places, I was really impressed by the 'one shot'style and some very clever 'impossible camera' moments (esp drifting down into the crater!). Overall impressive production value to be seen here. The story was basic yet I1917 looks stunning in places, I was really impressed by the 'one shot'style and some very clever 'impossible camera' moments (esp drifting down into the crater!). Overall impressive production value to be seen here. The story was basic yet I never quite felt connected to any of the characters and I felt the modern film score was inappropriate in places over blowing the more emotional sequences. To get so much so right within an over saturated genre like this is in itself an achievement so there's that. Worth a look IMO.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

BRJacobsFeb 10, 2020

What a great film, this is an intense, heartbreaking, thrill ride of a movie from beginning to end. This is how you put the audience on the edge of their seats. Does a fantastic job of making us feel the times as they are. The characters areWhat a great film, this is an intense, heartbreaking, thrill ride of a movie from beginning to end. This is how you put the audience on the edge of their seats. Does a fantastic job of making us feel the times as they are. The characters are fun, active, and relatable. Color pallet and cinematography are all great to establish tone and message. Some scenes are profoundly unnerving in a good way. Worth everyone's time to see a glimpse of history.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

JagzzFeb 10, 2020

There are plenty of stunning sets and visuals all strung together into one continuous shot that puts you front and center of the story. This film is all about the journey rather than the destination as we see later on that, not unlike the warThere are plenty of stunning sets and visuals all strung together into one continuous shot that puts you front and center of the story. This film is all about the journey rather than the destination as we see later on that, not unlike the war itself, some things never seem to change.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

AJGo85Feb 9, 2020

There are not many films about World War I. The most well-known ones are anti-war dramas: All Quiet on the Western Front (1930), Grand Illusion (1938), Paths of Glory (1957), Gallipoli (1981). On the surface 1917 is a well-done, thrillingThere are not many films about World War I. The most well-known ones are anti-war dramas: All Quiet on the Western Front (1930), Grand Illusion (1938), Paths of Glory (1957), Gallipoli (1981). On the surface 1917 is a well-done, thrilling action-war movie. It is also such an immersive and intense experience that without making any overt political statement it is firmly an antiwar film. It may be a good, thrilling movie but it is never exciting in the way an adventure movie is exciting. Even in the quiet moments 1917 makes you want to be as far away from this war as possible and hope another one like it never happens.

The plot is simple and very straightforward. Two young British soldiers are selected to deliver a message to a distant regiment calling off an attack the next morning. If the attack goes forward 1,600 soldiers, including the brother of one of the messengers, will charge into a trap. The encounters Corporals Blake and Schofield (Dean-Charles Chapman and Georgy MacKay) have as they make their journey across enemy territory are what you might expect from a story about soldiers on a mission: attacks from the enemy, crossing paths with another group of soldiers, finding shelter that is actually dangerous, even stumbling across a villager trying to care for a child. 1917 isn’t a total onslaught to the senses for two hours though. There are respites here and there that allow us to get to know Blake and Schofield. There are some surprising cameos by well-known British actors along the way too (or unsurprising if you’ve seen the trailer or the cast list on IMDb). Fortunately, none of these cameos take you out of the movie (Andrew Scott and Mark Strong could slip comfortably into just about any movie).

Director Sam Mendes employs long takes and expert, precise cinematography by Roger Deakins and stealthy editing by Lee Smith to make the film look and feel as though it exists in one long unbroken shot. This gimmick works well for the movie when it is not distracting. In its successful moments the one-shot effect is largely responsible for the film’s frantic, immersive effect. The climatic sequence of Schofield running like mad across the top of a trench as a battle begins to find the colonel to call off the attack makes excellent use of the one shot effect; it had me gripping the armrests of my seat. Also, the nighttime sequence in a bombed-out village where flairs illuminate the night with a bright, eerie white light and a fire rages in the distance is surreal and terrifying. Other scenes, however, like when a group of soldiers (and the camera) climb into the back of a truck, then get out to push the truck, then climb back in again feel like they are straining to keep the shot unbroken. Though I think there’s nothing in 1917 that couldn’t have been achieved with conventional editing, I understand why Mendes chose to present his film as a single unbroken shot. It puts us right there with the two soldiers and we are as unsure as they are of what will happen next. There are two consequences of using the one-shot/single-take gimmick in a war film. 1) Whether intentional or not, the one-shot effect, which keeps the camera right behind, or in front of, or over the shoulder of the characters, along with the nature of the story makes the film feel like a video game at certain times. This is not really a fault against the film. It is more likely due to video games being influenced by movies and then filtering back into the culture, but the comparison comes to mind nonetheless. 2) I think all of the focus and talk surrounding the one-shot effect actually diverts attention away from the harrowing experience of the characters in the film. 1917 has already won several awards and praise as a technical achievement (which it certainly is). I just hope people can get past the film’s style to fully appreciate and experience the events on screen.

1917 only tangentially touches on the larger scale of the war. One character makes a background comment on the unimpressive patch of land they’ve been fighting the Germans over for years. Mendes chose not to focus on the politics of the war but instead tell the story of the enlisted men that fought in the trenches and in open fields. This movie is based in part on the experiences of Lance Corporal Alfred Mendes, Sam Mendes’s grandfather, to whom the film is dedicated. Mends co-wrote the screenplay, his only writing credit. For all the unrelenting action in 1917, the final shot makes this an emotional and affecting movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

CMCFeb 9, 2020

Typical Hollywood fare, one long video game, overly sentimental manipulative music that does not even manipulate well, a series of contrived shots art-directed to give the cinematography visual opportunities, deeply unsatisfyingTypical Hollywood fare, one long video game, overly sentimental manipulative music that does not even manipulate well, a series of contrived shots art-directed to give the cinematography visual opportunities, deeply unsatisfying underdeveloped characters, lost opportunities for character interactions that could have communicated something deeper, predictable plot. The reviews by the New Yorker, Roger Ebert, New York Times and Los Angeles Times are all spot-on. How could so many other reviewers say those stupid things and award the movie a 100 score? I give it a 6 only because it is more watchable than most movies, but these days that sure is not saying much. Many cite Saying Private Ryan, but that film had much more humanity to it. It does not hold a candle to The Thin Red Line, or possibly more importantly, Paths of Glory.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

Mitya64Feb 9, 2020

Отличный фильм про двух пацанов. Сьемка просто вау, без склеек монтажа, почти весь фильм. При этом там происходит боевые действия, сменяются локации, люди погибают.Отличный фильм про двух пацанов. Сьемка просто вау, без склеек монтажа, почти весь фильм. При этом там происходит боевые действия, сменяются локации, люди погибают.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

markjamie20Feb 8, 2020

Technically brilliant with the cinematography and editing, but as an actual immersive movie experience it's lacking emotionally and is substantially hollow.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

zNeverSleepingFeb 8, 2020

Esse é um dos filmes que te deixam com uma interrogação na cabeça, mas não relacionada a trama, e sim a técnica.

Impressionante. O trabalho e dedicação do Sam Mendes aqui é notável. Todo o filme estava friamente conectado. A direção faz comEsse é um dos filmes que te deixam com uma interrogação na cabeça, mas não relacionada a trama, e sim a técnica.

Impressionante. O trabalho e dedicação do Sam Mendes aqui é notável. Todo o filme estava friamente conectado. A direção faz com que a cinematografia tenha um controle total de como tudo ocorre, como se fossemos um hospedeiro e/ou todo cenário fosse uma esteira, e falando nisso, que cenografia absurda - que contribui e muito para a atmosfera. E aqui vem uma curiosidade: como foi possível planos tão longos? É como se o cenário não acabasse mais.

O roteiro tem seus méritos. Sabe bem como familiarizar o publico com historias ou alívios cômicos - bem no inicio do filme; também consegue nos fazer ficar vidrado num gênero que já se tornou maçante há um tempo - quando não aproveitado da maneira correta; e traz justamente a possibilidade de fazer um filme com pouquíssimos cortes, se assemelhando a um plano sequencia por completo. E por ultimo, devo apenas mencionar o plano sequencia que ocorre próximo ao final do filme, que é simplesmente maestral e emocionante. Ver isso num Imax faz toda a diferença!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

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

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

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

7

JoeCoolFeb 1, 2020

The continouos one shot of the movie is it's main feature. It unfortunately also limits what can be done in storytelling. In a massive action scene it's really a phenomenal achievement, but in rather boring uneventful scenes you as a viewerThe continouos one shot of the movie is it's main feature. It unfortunately also limits what can be done in storytelling. In a massive action scene it's really a phenomenal achievement, but in rather boring uneventful scenes you as a viewer have to walk the distance. The one shot gimmick makes the movie less enjoyable than it could be IMO. Sticking with at least trying to make it look like it was shot in one go does have downsides. If you admire how movies are made you'll probably be extatic about this one. If you're just in it to see a good movie, you might be slightly disappointed. Don't let the hoarde of one-review 10's fool you. This is not a movie you just have to see for anything other than to marvel at the technical one-shot feat. While it is quite the remarkable achievement it's also it's achilles heel.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

irbeguiFeb 4, 2020

a great movie, the camera, photography, the tension of it, without any cut, I really had many years without seeing a war movie that shows raw that it is and above all that focused on that, it's not the typical shooting movie and a hero thata great movie, the camera, photography, the tension of it, without any cut, I really had many years without seeing a war movie that shows raw that it is and above all that focused on that, it's not the typical shooting movie and a hero that can against all , you see human suffering, despair and above all the decline of the first world war, it really is a film that one should see if or if.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

Lonewolf63Jan 22, 2020

1917,what can I say that others haven't already. Was it amazing, yes. Was the cinematography as good as described, yes. Did it feel real, yes. the only thing else I can say is .. War, war never changes.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

9

Kalele005Jan 13, 2020

i don't go watch movie in theater often in fact i don't go at all but i listenened what the director of the movie said it's a movie made to be experienced on a big screen so i did go watch it in theater and he was right, that movie is such ani don't go watch movie in theater often in fact i don't go at all but i listenened what the director of the movie said it's a movie made to be experienced on a big screen so i did go watch it in theater and he was right, that movie is such an emotive experience i'm quite young and can easy relate to the characters,i love both main character and i felt their friendship i just think that dean chapman death felt really early in the story they should have develop the friendship the two character more but life can be inpredictable i think it was the desire to the writer to shock peoples if it was i was really sad about his death,the movie other than that is almost a masterpiece not everyone will agree with me it's a movie to entertain people it did is job, i just think that other countries aren't the ennemy but in that movie they are shown as such it's war peoples were crazy as a human being that movie just shown me a reality that i hope will never be again, let's be wise humankind,that movie was entertaining,hearthbreaking and intense, sam mandes is really a good director and a good human being. I don't regret any second of it, i didn't seen time go by,it's a movie who would deserved a 3hours long experience! =) i hope sam mandes will do other movies with that high quality and emotion drive i'll go more often in cinema watch his work. He deserve the oscar 2020.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

Lone_Wolf_SonesFeb 3, 2020

Following They Shall Not Grow Old, 1917 is the latest WW1 film to hit the silver screen. While They Shall Not Grow Old is more accurate by virtue of the use of actual footage and documentary style? 1917 is still inspired by the real accountsFollowing They Shall Not Grow Old, 1917 is the latest WW1 film to hit the silver screen. While They Shall Not Grow Old is more accurate by virtue of the use of actual footage and documentary style? 1917 is still inspired by the real accounts of director Sam Mendes'grandfather. Mendes has made it clear that 1917 is a fictional story with fictional characters. However that doesn't mean it doesn't feel authentic. Much like They Shall Not Grow Old; 1917 gets much of it's authenticity from the way it is crafted. Filmed/manufactured to give the impression of one long continuous shot, you are made to feel like your right there with these characters. Your there in the claustrophobic confines of the trenches as well as the misery and muck of no man's land.

If the film has one flaw? It's that the characters themselves aren't all that well developed. But given the way the movie is filmed I am willing to forgive that because of how ambitious it is. It's also fair I think that these two men are just two ordinary men that are given a herculean task (as shown in the trailers). They are caught up in events bigger than themselves. We do get small snippets and vignettes that give us an idea of what these characters are like. But don't go in expecting something like Band of Brothers where you see characters grow and change over the course of several episodes. It's not the underlying point of this movie. There are some spectacular moments in the film that make you sit on the edge of your seat. Again I don't think you'd get the same experience if not for the way it was shot. This is a stunning technical achievement and a definite Oscar contender for cinematography.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8

condythugFeb 1, 2020

excellent ww1 movie; nicely shot without gratuitous blood and gore. actors are generally ok although it might be an even better movie if it had top quality actors to bring out the characters.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

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

8

AsclepiusJan 31, 2020

Something about continuous shot movies I really admire, but this film was particularly good in that I didn't feel it drag. Everyone involved with the production should be proud.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

felipguilera10Jan 30, 2020

HABEMUS PELICULÓN. Película en la cual se interpreta a dos jóvenes soldados británicos una misión prácticamente suicida en la cual tienen que salvar a una compañía británica que está a punto de caer en una trampa de los alemanes. AmbientaciónHABEMUS PELICULÓN. Película en la cual se interpreta a dos jóvenes soldados británicos una misión prácticamente suicida en la cual tienen que salvar a una compañía británica que está a punto de caer en una trampa de los alemanes. Ambientación increíble, banda sonora de 10, los actores lo hacen excelente. Empezamos fuertes el 2020. Ojalá sea un buen año para el cine.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

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

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

ecw0647Jan 28, 2020

Just a comment on the review by Orioniscool. He says:, "This movie did hit me on a personal note, my grant [sic] grandfather served for England in WW1 and he saw clips of the movie and now he is hooked." Assuming his great-grandfather wasJust a comment on the review by Orioniscool. He says:, "This movie did hit me on a personal note, my grant [sic] grandfather served for England in WW1 and he saw clips of the movie and now he is hooked." Assuming his great-grandfather was horribly young to serve in WWI he would be over 130 which has to be some kind of record.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

Stream2BigScreeJan 28, 2020

A Race Against Time in 1917

The Stream: The storyline is completely unimportant. The Big Screen: Tremendous filming, scenery and intense moments. The Final Bill: Travel down the intense path less traveled in 1917. -S2S Welcome backA Race Against Time in 1917

The Stream: The storyline is completely unimportant.

The Big Screen: Tremendous filming, scenery and intense moments.

The Final Bill: Travel down the intense path less traveled in 1917.

-S2S

Welcome back everyone! This week we were able to get an early screening of the movie, 1917. 1917 hits the theaters in limited release on Christmas Day, but it doesn’t go wide until January 17, 2020. Let’s get to the nitty gritty of this World War I spectacle.

Let’s get the plot out of the way, as it is the most forgettable part of the movie. 1917 features two young British privates during the First World War. Of course, the “powers that be” give the most expendable pawns with the most to lose the “impossible mission”. The privates must deliver a message deep in enemy territory that is necessary to save the lives of 1,600 men. And yes, of course, one of the privates has a brother among that 1,600 that must be saved from walking straight into a deadly German trap. Now that the first 5 minutes of the movie are out of the way, we can get to the brilliance.

To me one of the most awesome feats of this movie is the single shot filming. Now, we all know it is impossible to shoot a nearly two hour movie in one shot flawlessly, but truly the editing and camerawork is amazing. The single shot view enhances the feel of anxiety and urgency. Throughout the movie, I felt as if I couldn’t take my eyes off the screen. One thing I can be certain of is that this movie will definitely receive consideration during award season, especially for the cinematography by Roger Deakins.

The filming was great in the execution but also in the setting/scenery. While most of the movie is flat and barren due to the war-torn wasteland, yet the actors take us on the path less travelled. Seriously, through the ups and downs of bunkers, craters, farmlands, waterways, etc. the film moves us. Speaking of moving us, Chapman and MacKay provide a few moving moments, lame ones as well. Both do a very good job conveying the emotional rollercoaster that 1917 and war in general provides to our brave soldiers in the field. The viewer truly follows the ebbs and flows of the privates from beginning to end. We see you King Tommen.

Long story short, 1917 is an intense, watch your every step, war epic that will garner Oscar buzz from its incredible camera work and set management. The storyline is the most basic it can get but that’s not why you’re going to this movie in the first place. Get a bucket of popcorn and chow down while you race (pensively) to the end.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLADIADORJan 26, 2020

Filme muito bom, com cenas de ação incriveis, so acho ele lento ate demais, mais é um filme bonito de se assistir

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

10

PepeLobos1Jan 25, 2020

WENA PELICULA CULIA ENTERA DETONADA, UNA DE LAS MEJORES DEL 2019, CHUPA EL PICO PIÑERA, AGUANTE LA PRIMERA LINEA VIEJA.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

9

MaciejkamilJan 25, 2020

It's a great movie, since not only does it show that being humane during the war will be used by the enemy, but it also shows the enemy who is a real threat, not a stormtrooper.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

9

FerreAndradeJan 25, 2020

Beautifully crafted film. Editing was seamless. And felt as if In one shot it was filmed. Stunning

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

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

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

1

DoxdivaJan 24, 2020

After 45 minutes of boredom, we left. What we saw was painfully slow and uninteresting...the dialogue stilted. American Beauty on the other hand was so cleverly designed and executed...what happened, Sam?

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

9

SrPepeJan 24, 2020

1917 es una película excelente, la producción, el sonido, la fotografía, todo es excelente y personalmente me atrapo desde los primeros minutos.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

10

Sierra-117Jan 23, 2020

1917, the most recent film by acclaimed director Sam Mendes (skyfall, American beauty), is a phenomenon to say the least. With a magnificent combination of excellent editing, superb acting and an outstanding score from Thomas Newman, 1917 is1917, the most recent film by acclaimed director Sam Mendes (skyfall, American beauty), is a phenomenon to say the least. With a magnificent combination of excellent editing, superb acting and an outstanding score from Thomas Newman, 1917 is a rare example of absolute cinematic perfection. Like 2014s Birdman (A personal favorite of mine) 1917 has been, to my delight cut so cleanly it gives the illusion of a single take and like Birdman, it works exceptionally conveying a feeling of realism and desperation never before seen in a film. The movie is to my understanding shot entirely in Scotland, and Mendes makes use of the stunning landscapes whilst also creating his own sets providing a dramatic and even shocking contrast between the two. For example, The film opens in a luscious field full of plants and other wildlife, but very quickly as our protagonists enter the trenches you are introduced to the desolate wastes of No mans’s land. Thomas Newman really does a fantastic job with the movie’s soundtrack, which feeds wonderfully into the already immersive atmosphere. It strikes the perfect balance of being calm and soft in some instances, or extremely intense in others. Another thing that really stood out was the incredible sound design. Here, every gunshot has weight, causing each and every one to make you question whether or not it landed.
The cast is also brilliant, with each actor giving stellar performances and countless cameos from well renowned figures such as Benedict Cumberbatch, Colin Firth, Mark Strong and Richard Madden. The story remains consistent throughout the film keeping you guessing and on the edge of your seat at all times, but some could (maybe) argue that there were some minor pacing issues, but other than that there is no more I can say.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

9

DMLYxCriticJan 23, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Gritty, violent, emotional and cathartic. These are the words that comes into mind after watching Sam Mendes' World War I take, 1917. Unlike any other war movies of late, this film seems to take on a fresher approach with its "one shot" cinematography, although it became quite problematic in the long run as the audiences get frustrated, wanting to see the whole thing. It also affected the editing, as some scenes that were supposedly essential are sacrificed for the singular shot cinematography. But it also has its perks, though, as it made the film much more grittier. Overall, this film is a wild ride into the horrors of the first World War, something that isn't quite tackled in any other war films.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

9

BrunoVn00Jan 22, 2020

This movie isn't about the characters or the story...This movie is an experience. Really if you think about the characters, they are pretty weak and underdeveloped, but at least the performances of the main actors are pretty good. The storyThis movie isn't about the characters or the story...This movie is an experience. Really if you think about the characters, they are pretty weak and underdeveloped, but at least the performances of the main actors are pretty good. The story is pretty straight-forward get to point A to point B and there isn't anything too special to it, but, like I said, this is more about the experience. This movie achieves to make the viewer feel part of the war, which I think that was the intention of the one-continuous take "gimmick" (which it isn't). This movie is called 1917 instead of "The Adventure of blue-eyed blond Soldier" (that's why the characters are forgettable, I can't remember their names) because the long take is what adds to the experience. Sure, the long take isn't obviously anything new and movies like Birdman (I know, they are completely different genres) make it better, but for this movie it works. Some moments feel slow and all but, again, it adds to the whole point of feeling part of the war. The sound design and the cinematography are great and the score, while sometimes it sounds like generic stock music, sometimes it sounds amazing. Overall, this movie is more about the experience than the characters or plot. I recommend it because is still a pretty good movie. I don't think it's a masterpiece or the best of the year but it is certainly a really well done film.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

DubeauJan 21, 2020

Interesting style for a war movie. It is filmed in one shot sequence (you will know were they cut). The story is more of a journey. Emotions are established in an intimate settings most of the time. The FX are excellent. The acting veryInteresting style for a war movie. It is filmed in one shot sequence (you will know were they cut). The story is more of a journey. Emotions are established in an intimate settings most of the time. The FX are excellent. The acting very sincere. There some tense moments. The dialogues felt true to me. I would have like to know more about the main character. I give it 82%, Nothing bad to say. It's an interesting way to present WW1, not always valid but visually captivating.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

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

9

BeardedYodaJan 21, 2020

1917 is one of the best war films I have seen in a long time and the minor flaws in it don't hold back the film much at all. You have to see it.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

Cart3rJan 21, 2020

1917 is a masterpiece, breathtaking, it makes your heart beat fast from the beginning to the end. Great soundtrack.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

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

3

lunanulJan 20, 2020

Overall, this was an epic dud with an abundance of carefully-constructed visuals and set pieces that are mostly devoid of emotional impact (with a few solid exceptions, to be fair). File under 'one shot wonder': a filming technique that isOverall, this was an epic dud with an abundance of carefully-constructed visuals and set pieces that are mostly devoid of emotional impact (with a few solid exceptions, to be fair). File under 'one shot wonder': a filming technique that is practically guaranteed to land the director in the Oscars pool, regardless of content. Much of the time, the viewing experience was akin to watching a video game; sometimes, a quite silly, unrealistic video game. Those interested in WWI are advised to check out the superior "They Shall Not Grow Old" - a documentary on WWI by Peter Jackson.… Expand

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

9

ChrisM1979Jan 20, 2020

As just a movie maybe it wasn't a 10 but for people interested in film making this was a masterpiece. As a movie alone I will give it an 8 but for what it achieved from a film making perspective a 10 so overall I'd give it a 9.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

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

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

Rebecca31Jan 19, 2020

Set during WWI, two young British soldiers Schofield (George MacKay) and Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) are given an impossible mission, to deliver a message to call off a planned attack that would see 1,600 men walk straight into a trap. 1917Set during WWI, two young British soldiers Schofield (George MacKay) and Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) are given an impossible mission, to deliver a message to call off a planned attack that would see 1,600 men walk straight into a trap. 1917 follows these two soldiers on their deadly mission across enemy territory. You're going to feel every minute of this film because it's a outstanding story and a masterclass in film making.
MacKay and Chapman quickly meld into their characters, you can no longer see the acting and you're thrown headfirst into this incredibly tense film. Throughout 1917 you could hear a pin drop it was that quiet, and my local cinema generally tends to sound something like a zoo at the best of times so for it to be that quiet is almost unheard of. With a nearly sold out screen, every single person was fully immersed in this spectacular War film. Expertly directed by Sam Mendes and complimented by a haunting soundtrack by Thomas Newman. The score is beautiful and it looks like it will be a very close competition between Newman and Hildur Guðnadóttir's Joker soundtrack.
I should have known the cinematographer was Roger Deakins and his decision to film 1917 as a series of long takes is extremely bold and ambitious. At nearly two hours it plays out like one continuous shot, it's truly stunning and I can't imagine the amount of work that went into that. The sweeping camera work is skilfully done and it's near impossible to see the edits. All the behind the scenes work should pay off because I believe 1917 is going to clean up at the Oscars and rightly so. If you've made it this far without seeing the trailer then keep it that way because the trailer does this film no justice. It honestly gave me the impression that this was a generic Oscar bait war movie. This far from the case, 1917 is an original take on a war film and I know it's early in the year to say this but we've already seen one of the best films of the year. A film that needs to be seen on the big screen, so what are you waiting for, get to a cinema and see 1917. Highly recommended.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

10

GamerLifeeJan 19, 2020

Best movie of the year. cinematic photography in this movie is amazing, it hooks you into the movie and makes you feel like you are with the two young soldiers. The story was so well writen and kept me hooked all the way through, the film.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

9

Harsh657Jan 19, 2020

1917 is a film that takes you on a journey that you won't forget your entire life. You will feel like you are with these 2 characters and you will every every emotion they feel. It feels like a one continuous shot and it is done with such1917 is a film that takes you on a journey that you won't forget your entire life. You will feel like you are with these 2 characters and you will every every emotion they feel. It feels like a one continuous shot and it is done with such perfection that you won't even notice if there was as cut.
Cinematography is outstanding and I think this time Roger Deakins will win an oscar.
The thing that can bother you is that it feels like a video-game. Also there are no emotional backstory given to the characters which is the only think that I have an issue with.
It is a must watch in theatre and I think everyone should experience this in theatres.
Grade: A-… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

9

Jcummings2Jan 18, 2020

One of the most beautifully shot war movies I have ever seen. Nice story, very good acting. Great film.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

jacob4Jan 18, 2020

1917 is truly a marvelous fantastic war film like no other! You must see this movie to truly appreciate every aspect of this amazing movie. Everything about this movie is just magnificent, from the action, to the story, to the incredible feat1917 is truly a marvelous fantastic war film like no other! You must see this movie to truly appreciate every aspect of this amazing movie. Everything about this movie is just magnificent, from the action, to the story, to the incredible feat of filming the entire movie in like two long continuous takes! An absolute thrill ride from start to finish with plenty of thrills and some heart wrenching moments thrown in there as well. Definitely one of the greatest feat in cinematic history!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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