Read User Reviews and Submit your own for 1917 - Page 3

10

BradMorganJan 18, 2020

This movie touches you. A portrait of the terrible reality that once took place. Emotional, powerfully and portrayed in a beautiful way (like a "one-take"). This film will stay with you!

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

5

OlivierPielJan 18, 2020

Why set this movie in 1917? That year was the most immobile miserable part of the war on the Western front! Setting this aside, we are constantly reminded of the technical prowess ("look at this trenchline that goes on forever", "what aWhy set this movie in 1917? That year was the most immobile miserable part of the war on the Western front! Setting this aside, we are constantly reminded of the technical prowess ("look at this trenchline that goes on forever", "what a beautifully lit night scene"...) at the expense of any real sense of involvement and feelings apart from the death of the first protagonist. Some scenes are so caricatural and preposterous it reminded me of the worst in the Revenant. Some reviewers felt like in a computer game, and they are right!… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

10

Acoustic_TomJan 18, 2020

1917 is a visual storytelling masterpiece. The one shot camera is a visual feat that lends itself to the tragic tales of two soldiers delivering a message to a general on the western front.
Throughout the film there is a constant feeling of1917 is a visual storytelling masterpiece. The one shot camera is a visual feat that lends itself to the tragic tales of two soldiers delivering a message to a general on the western front.
Throughout the film there is a constant feeling of anxiety that you truly share with the characters as the camera never cuts. A true masterpiece of story, film… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

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

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

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

4

GinaKJan 17, 2020

A very long, very dull, more or less competent war movie. The only reason I made it through was the acting, which was believable if a bit naive in style and often bordered on the sentimental. Anyone who manages to sit through this movieA very long, very dull, more or less competent war movie. The only reason I made it through was the acting, which was believable if a bit naive in style and often bordered on the sentimental. Anyone who manages to sit through this movie deserves an Academy Award more than the director.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

9

RaventhornJan 17, 2020

From the moment the movie begins to the end, the movie shows you the horrors of World War 1 and keeps you in suspense as to what will happen to the men and the mission. Great pace and suspense!

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

10

wanted99Jan 17, 2020

This movie is a special war epic,its a simple story with a simple characters acted by the actors in a good way,not OMG!!,comparing it to the other perfomaces in this year,this movie if its shot in a regular way it will not be special,as iThis movie is a special war epic,its a simple story with a simple characters acted by the actors in a good way,not OMG!!,comparing it to the other perfomaces in this year,this movie if its shot in a regular way it will not be special,as i said its a simple story that consecncrete on those character mission that we connect with them by the one shot,its showing a different enemy in war not the germans ,the time and the atmosphere ,that shown in a beautifull way by roger deakens ,its not showing heroek stuff that make us want to go to war and be like them,its vs the war ,and its so entertainment ,i was near my seat in some scenes and the adranaline with connecting the event with the great music by this picture ,from certain angle its like dunkirk that show the reality of war ,and its vs the war like kubric's epic paths of glory,and this movie has to be written beside best war classics like the one that i wrote ,and its has some negaives because every movie has, but you avoide them and its the best war movie in the dicade .… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

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

9

Hwinter07Jan 16, 2020

Best movie of the year in my opinion. Excellent cinematography and score coupled with the spectacular "long shot" style of filming.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

10

Photog1Jan 16, 2020

Do not listen to the bad reviews...this is a masterpiece. There are always critics who have to be the one bad review. This should win Best Picture.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

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

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

10

DasWizzyJan 15, 2020

1 Take is all you need I guess, ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect ect

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

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

3

GimbuJan 15, 2020

3. Not much different than your average war movie..................................

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

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

3

netflicJan 14, 2020

The latest movie from a talented director Sam Mendes, who made "American Beauty", one of my most favorite movies. Nominated for 10 Oscars, it just won Golden Globe award. Our expectations were high, obviously.

How could Sam Mendes, afterThe latest movie from a talented director Sam Mendes, who made "American Beauty", one of my most favorite movies. Nominated for 10 Oscars, it just won Golden Globe award. Our expectations were high, obviously.

How could Sam Mendes, after "American Beauty", make a film like "1917"?
A question comes to my mind, Did the director watch that movie?
It only made sense when comparing to Nikita Mikhalkov.
A film that was supposed to be a serious war drama turned out to be a video game filled with all kinds of cliches.
"Saving Private Ryan" - 2 it is not.
To begin with the episode inside German bunker which made me think something like "WTF?!"
Two protagonists enter it, notice it is rigged with explosives, and immediately there is an explosion. Half of the bunker falls on top of one of the two, with pieces up to two feet each. He lied there, trapped under those rocks, not breathing. The other one starts digging him out. The way he was handling those rocks, their weight had to be a pound or two, with density of a pillow. When the first guy was finally completely out, he could not either move or see. In a few minutes his vision was back, and he could even run. As a person with first-hand knowledge what falling rocks do to a human body, my suspicion was more that justified.

Closer to the end of the movie, the same protagonist jumps into a river that looked like a calm small city river that after the jump turned into a white water torrent. Not every experienced rafter would be able to get out of it, not even mentioning wearing a backpack and high boots. Then the guy gets into a waterfall, falls 100 or so feet down and then quietly swims ashore in a nice freestyle stroke.
Even corpses of soldiers here and there cause laughter instead of horror. I do not think it was intended. A movie about WWI, a horrific and senseless slaughterhouse, that gobbled the whole generation, deserves better than a-la Indiana Jones style flick.
If you want to see what WWI really looked like, there is a documentary "They shall never grow old" made completely out of restored reels of that times.… Expand

2 of 9 users found this helpful27

All this user's reviews

9

MaksCoolJan 14, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. 9 из-за пары недочётов и фейл моментов. Но оно очень классное и великое и передоёт весь ужас войны… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

0

antoniomitJan 13, 2020

Muy mala la pelicula, justo llega el momento que crees que habra algo mas y cae en picado

3 of 25 users found this helpful322

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

5

zmgalen2000Dec 28, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Allow me to start with a disclaimer: 1917 is an excellently-acted and directed film whose aesthetics are visually captivating. It truly is worthy of the cinematic praise it is receiving. However, where it falls short is its historical significance and missed-out enlightening opportunities. With a one-dimensional plot solely focused on the trek of one soldier to deliver a letter (sans providing any relevant historical context), 1917 is a suspenseful, gripping film whose appeal slowly fades throughout its repetitive runtime of just under two hours. Don't get me wrong -- the film is a fabulous source of entertainment and certainly a cinematic masterpiece. As a historical piece, however, 1917 lacks the poignancy that would have made the film a complete home-run, stopping at around third base.… Expand

3 of 11 users found this helpful38

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

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

7

UridonJan 12, 2020

war is bad, not much more to it. not bad not great
;xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;xxfffffffffffffffffffffff

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

10

JPKJan 12, 2020

Incredible
1917 is brutal, brilliantly acted, and fantastically filmed and definitely deserves all the award nominations it's getting.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

10

Compi24Jan 12, 2020

It is a rare, rare thing for me to feel as though I need to unsheathe the "M-word" from my vocabulary after seeing a movie. Though, with Sam Mendes's "1917" freshly in mind, I find the experience impossible to describe without dropping it atIt is a rare, rare thing for me to feel as though I need to unsheathe the "M-word" from my vocabulary after seeing a movie. Though, with Sam Mendes's "1917" freshly in mind, I find the experience impossible to describe without dropping it at least once. I don't think I've seen a filmic narrative since "The Revenant" that's more adequately aligned itself with the term "journey" than this one has. It is a wild, traumatic, and relentlessly thrilling, near-real-time chronicling of a fateful day in the lives of so many that I find infinitely more epic in scope and theme than any movie I've seen in the past few years -- and some of those had more than triple the budget Mendes had at his disposal. This is what moviemaking is all about. So many moments come to pass throughout where not only the acting and writing, but the camerawork, production design, music, and thematics are firing on all cylinders, welling up feelings of wonderment, terror, anxiety, despair and grief at various points in a magnificently well-paced 2-hour running time. They absolutely do not make movies like this very often, so do yourself a favor and immediately treat yourself to viewing this masterpiece in the biggest theater you have near you.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

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

MartyscorseseJan 12, 2020

A movie that was far better than Dunkirk, love this movie and hope it wins many academy awards

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

10

Jamesbond008Jan 12, 2020

This is one of my favourite movies of all time, captivating performances by George McKay and Chapman, excellent cinematography and score wouldn’t be mad at all if this won best picture.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

10

ThebaynewazeJan 12, 2020

One of the best movies I have ever seen in my life, thank you and good job Sam Mendes

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

10

QueenloverJan 12, 2020

1917 really captures the first WW in a captivating way and is 2019s best movie along with The Irishman

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

TheTerminatorrJan 12, 2020

1917 is one of the greatest achievements of 2019 of not the greatest, have been listening to the score for days now

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

10

KingMercuryJan 12, 2020

1917 is one of the best war movies ever made, Hope it gets best cinematography and best score at the least

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

Cinemalover1Jan 12, 2020

The cinematography and the camera work wowww, this movie deserved best motion picture and best director at the globes

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

10

RaginglamottaJan 12, 2020

This movie is a classic which is hard to stomach and shows the horrors of war

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

10

TheJokerxJan 12, 2020

1917 is one of the best movies I’ve ever seen don’t listen to the negative reviews and watch it yourself and by the way it was WAY better than Dunkirk

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

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

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

10

DerekReideJan 11, 2020

1917...That's going to be a film I'll be talking about for a long time. Straight up, it's a war film masterpiece. It'll be the best movie of the year for a long time until I see more movies, but if anything, it'll be in my top 3. It's my1917...That's going to be a film I'll be talking about for a long time. Straight up, it's a war film masterpiece. It'll be the best movie of the year for a long time until I see more movies, but if anything, it'll be in my top 3. It's my favorite war film by far. The story is so humane, gutwrenching, and pure. The immersion and realism this film goes for is stunning. I swear, they shot the film in 2 halves. I don't think there was a single cut until a certain part of the film. And that's a very far point into the movie itself. If anything, there was probably one transition that I never noticed. My eyes were so locked on the screen and I just drifted into the movie as another soldier watching the events. My heart was pounding, I was fearful, but overall, I was so stunned and stoked that this movie lived higher than my anticipations. The climax sends chills, major intensity and squirms, and overall, sheer beauty with the cinematography. The visuals were incredibly captivating, the acting was stellar, and the production design was awesome. 1917 deserves all the awards it'll get. And that's saying something.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

10

PanchogulJan 11, 2020

Una instantánea obra maestra en todos los aspectos posibles, a nivel técnico es perfecta, el montaje de la película está hecho de forma tal que de la impresión de ser un permanente plano secuencia, lo que hará que el espectador se mantengaUna instantánea obra maestra en todos los aspectos posibles, a nivel técnico es perfecta, el montaje de la película está hecho de forma tal que de la impresión de ser un permanente plano secuencia, lo que hará que el espectador se mantenga atento a la pantalla pudiendo apenas pestañear, la banda sonora y edición de sonido son impecablemente asombrosos y el diseño de producción es maravilloso. A nivel actoral es inmejorable, al protagonista lo vemos permanentemente expuesto a la cámara por lo que podemos ponernos fácilmente en sus zapatos, su rango emocional es bastante discreto pero bien logrado, podemos ver cómo progresivamente es devastado por todas las situaciones vividas en la cinta, no es una actuación a nivel de grandes premiaciones, pero es muy buena sin duda alguna.

Le ganó el Globo de Oro a Mejor Película al Joker y siendo objetivo, merece todos los premios a Mejor Película, Mejor Montaje y Mejor Fotografía, quizás también Mejor Sonido y Banda Sonora.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

10

savvas1967Jan 11, 2020

Best film I’ve seen for years !!! A masterpiece of a movie .I did not expect this !! A brilliant absolutely astonishing film for an antiwar movie

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

TASOSJan 11, 2020

A breath-taking Masterpiece. You walk out the cinema and you ask your shelf what was that you saw. Cinephiles have to see this film twice, just to understand how was it shot. The movie of the decade!

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

10

MiloGrayJan 11, 2020

A cinematic masterpiece! Absolutely incredible acting with an incredible cast!! I’m definitely gonna see it again - if u read this - see 1917 now or I’ll cut ur throats

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

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

9

GeorgemortinJan 11, 2020

Esta película es una obra de arte, y solo con la forma de ser dirigida con esos largos planos secuencia merece ser vista en el cine.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

10

Swaggerdude11Jan 11, 2020

Phenomenal movie, gritty, dark, and most of all historically accurate to the brutalities of warfare.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

10

DerekMedeirosJan 10, 2020

The best film I’ve seen all year, and that includes 2019. Beautifully shot and executed. Truly a mastery of cinematography. Can not recommend this movie more.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

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

6

GreatMartinJan 10, 2020

Right now "1917" having already winning the Best Picture Golden Globe is the front runner for Best Picture Oscar. After seeing the picture it is obvious that the visual technique of director's Sam Mendes's collaboration with cinematographerRight now "1917" having already winning the Best Picture Golden Globe is the front runner for Best Picture Oscar. After seeing the picture it is obvious that the visual technique of director's Sam Mendes's collaboration with cinematographer Roger Deakins is what makes this movie rate so high. It looks like the picture has been made in one continuous take with 2-3 exceptions which are carefully explained in the script by Sam Mendes, with the help of Krysty-Wilson Cairns and based on stories told by his uncle Alfred Mendes.

The story is a basic one of two young British soldiers who have to deliver a message to stop a raid which would be a deathtrap for 1600 men, one being a brother of one of the soldiers. One of the illogical parts of the script is that the two men are are too inexperienced to take on a task but 1) going to the movies in most cases you have to park your logic out in the lobby and 2) this takes place at the beginning of the movie when you are caught up in the film's technique so by the time you get involved with the story itself they have picked up much needed experience along with many coincidences that might not ring true.

The two leads, Dean-Charles Chapman and George MacKay, are more than adequate, with one carrying a heavier load than the other, while there are many cameos from such actors as Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch, Richard Madden, Daniel Mays and Claire Duburcq.

"1917" is interesting for the way it appears to have been filmed but there have been much better war movies in the past and certainly better movies in 2019.… Expand

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

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

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

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

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

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

9

d0vla11Jan 10, 2020

What a great war movie. Cinematography and acting were phenomenal, also the score blown me away.

Definitely in top 5 war movies ever.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

9

BatMiteJan 9, 2020

An intense and perilous journey seen through the eyes of two young soldiers that are tossed into this mission: stopping their fellow British troops from advancing and falling into a ambush. The film follows what seems to be two young andAn intense and perilous journey seen through the eyes of two young soldiers that are tossed into this mission: stopping their fellow British troops from advancing and falling into a ambush. The film follows what seems to be two young and fairly inexperienced troops as they fight the elements and their own fears through foreign land to save their fellow soldiers from a trap from the opposing forces. The story has its moments of intense, stressful situations weaved with some time to let the audience breathe a sigh of relief, if only for a second or two. The visuals are what keep the performances and the writing tied together. 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 war itself, some things never seem to change.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

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

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

8

claire1205Jan 8, 2020

good,amazing,...............nice.........interesting movie..... love it...................................................

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

RTMJan 5, 2020

The movie was tense, and gorgeously shot, but with so many limitations. I see where Mendes was going with this, in the way of wanting the viewer to see art, and the tension accomplished with the one long take. The problem is the long singleThe movie was tense, and gorgeously shot, but with so many limitations. I see where Mendes was going with this, in the way of wanting the viewer to see art, and the tension accomplished with the one long take. The problem is the long single shot approach here, can be exhausting, and not particularly enjoyable with this narrative. Great performances by the two young boys. But again, the development of the characters was minimal. I found myself just wanting it to be over, and not caring about them much. Lastly, for a war time movie, it was actually boring. Not enough to keep the viewer engaged. I witnessed many in the theater squirming and getting restless. Not exactly the reaction I'd expect. Overall a good movie that I wanted to be great. In the end I found myself looking for a "Saving Private Ryan" or "The Thin Red Line" type of movie.… Expand

3 of 12 users found this helpful39

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

2

GeoaveneJan 1, 2020

O filme tem uma paisagem linda, elenco incrível. Mas a narrativa não me chamou atenção, o filme é confuso.

0 of 18 users found this helpful018

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

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

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

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

4

ibbsteDec 26, 2019

Typically, if you're going to employ an ostentatious filmmaking device it should be to serve a story. Unfortunately, in 1917, the story is completely perfunctory in the service of a gimmick that got old after Hitchcock already perfected it inTypically, if you're going to employ an ostentatious filmmaking device it should be to serve a story. Unfortunately, in 1917, the story is completely perfunctory in the service of a gimmick that got old after Hitchcock already perfected it in Rope. Deakins' consistency in tracking is impressive, I suppose, and there are some interesting images, but it is far from being one of the more interesting photographic achievements in film this year, and it really did feel like watching friends playing a video game right down to adjusting angles/perspectives and the occasionally random side characters say throwaway lines and breaks where you hear some random superior officer give expository dialogue directing the player on where they should be headed next.

As a history buff, I do think there's a valuable opportunity to present a proper World War I film to audiences who otherwise know very little about the context that led to the second World War, of which the marketplace is saturated with by comparison. There were some details that give context to the event, but it does little to nothing to offer audiences a substantive idea of the true horrors of the war other than the occasionally panning to a decomposing body part or blunt exposition in a speaking manner that no soldier of the time would speak like. The characters were supposed to show camaraderie but acted like any display of affection or sympathy for one another would have come with a fear of a contemporary "no homo" from their fellow soldiers (by comparison, see 1927's "Wings" where the men practically make out with each other in the end). Your friend is dying and not even a hug or kiss on the forehead before leaving him? You meet someone coming to terms with profound loss and a simple handshake suffices? Men in that time were not that self-conscious.

The climax of the film is the only sequence of the film I felt was truly gripping and felt any real stakes, until it goes right back into Saving Private Richard Madden at the end. Is the story *at all* interesting? No. Is it well made? Not particularly, unless a "well made" film is divorced from any sense of purpose or meaning to filming something logistically challenging! Sadly I thought this film was rather silly and a profoundly missed opportunity.… Expand

4 of 14 users found this helpful410

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

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