1917 (Sam Mendes Film - Christmas 2019)

Yeah, but as the film goes on you forget all about that.

 

Really looking forward to this. Sam Mendes and Roger Deakins teaming up again?! Always grounds for something intriguing (yes, I liked Skyfall too). Uniforms are looking on point too, going by what I saw in They Shall Not Grow Old. Truly fascinating. Maybe I will watch that after 1917. Same thing I did with Darkest Hour followed by Dunkirk. Just need Ridley Scott's Battle of Britain film to complete the trifecta.

Next Thursday/Friday. Can't wait!!

 

Saw a preview of "1917" today. A masterpiece in every way. I have never seen the trench warfare and no man's land of WWI depicted with such gripping realism in a feature film. My paternal grandfather fought on the German side in the trenches in the area in Northern France where the film takes place and I wish he could see this movie.

 

That's not actually true. But the film happens (mostly) in real time, except for a period when one of the heroes is knocked unconscious. There are places where they cut and put in something to cover the cut, like a soldier walking between the main characters and the camera. But it is an absolute lock on the Best Cinematography Oscar - some of the shots are mind-boggling.

 

So, my 16-year old son and I are going to see this tomorrow I believe. Another thing we noticed is that from the trailers these two guys are walking around with fixed bayonets all of the time. You wouldn't do that. Not only does it make the weapon unwieldy, but the extra weight on the end of your rifle can throw off your aim. Bayonets really were used in close-quarter combat only, and in a charge, like you see when attacking an enemy trench. So, walking on a sunken road with visibility to all sides, or in a field, it's pretty unimaginable that these guys would have bayonets fixed, especially when discharging your weapon would be from a distance.

But I guess only the hardcore Great War buffs would notice something like that. I hope I don't ruin the film for myself, but it's kind of difficult not to see a glaring issue like that.

 

If anyone wants to watch a very good series on WWI:

The Great War and the Shaping of the 20th Century - Wikipedia

Amazing how quickly things can spin out of control, and then you get two world wars and 100 mil people killed.

 

I hope you like it. In the film, neither of the soldiers are tremendously experienced - it's one man's dumb luck to have a brother in one of the battalions under threat and the other to be his friend. The story isn't about two hardcore badasses, but two young men who do what has to be done.

I just read an excellent review in, of all places Ars Technica:

1917 film review: War has never been captured so incredibly

 

Looking forwards to seeing it this weekend.

 

From the ARs Technica review I posted:

The resulting film is one of the most sobering works about war that has ever reached the silver screen. If I merely described the film's plot, I would struggle to recommend 1917; it's a hard watch, and its optimism is only lightly sprinkled amongst WWI's chaos. But as a filmmaking achievement, 1917 is an unmissable document of the human condition amidst the realities of war.

 

Just saw it this morning. No spoilers but......





Technically amazing. Certainly award-worthy for cinematography. As a movie, not so much. I wouldn't go as far as one review I saw essentially calling it a great bad movie, (it is better than Dunkirk which was horrible), but it's hard to get past the gimmick element of the one-shot presentation. That takes away from the story. An interesting, but ultimately uneven flawed film.

 

It worked for us. I was admiring the cinematography for maybe the first 10 to 15 minutes, but after that I got totally caught up in the story.

 

That's cool. My expectations for the film were admittedly high, and I didn't feel it achieved that. I didn't dislike it; just didn't feel it was a great movie.

 

There been so few World War I films that there is obviously still space for a truly astounding one. The World War I museum is here in Kansas City, but it concentrates mostly on the American experience of the war, which was only the last part of it. There were too many awful things about that war that have barely been touched on, like gas warfare.

 

I plan on seeing this next week. Recently I watched They Shall Not Grow Old and that movie packed a wallop.

 

Highly recommended. We saw it as part of a Fathom Events presentation.

 

You know, for years now a remake of All Quite on the Western Front has been in the works, with Daniel Radcliffe to play Paul Baumer, the lead. But that was back in 2010! He is no longer associated with the film. I'm not holding my breath that it will ever get made.

As of right now I'm floating a book idea to my publisher,under the working title 1921. The basic premise is an early take on psychoanalysis where an Army psychiatrist from the School of Military Psychology, in Georgia, takes a trip up to Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia, with the theory that there may be a link between violent and/or criminal behavior stemming from wartime experience. All of the prisoners he interviews are Great War combat veterans, who didn't have a rap sheet before the war.

Anyway, there are tons of combat flashbacks, between the different prisoners, as they get to know each other and get to know themselves and begin to understand why they feel the way they do. There are also quite a few surprises. Blah, blah, blah.

 

Just got back and really liked it. Cinematography was great, as was the direction. Should definitely win a few Oscars. Many felt it was an upset that it won Best Drama and Directing Golden Globes, though. Don't know if it will win the Oscars in those categories but will be one of the contenders. I think Cinematography Oscar is a given.

One of the persons I saw it with did mention one thing afterwards that I didn't think of. Lance Corporal Schofield's "immortality" during some of the scenes seemed unbelievable. During the movie, I didn't really notice as I was wrapped up in the action and drama. Hard to believe how he survived all that as it was portrayed in the movie. Surely at least one of the Germans taking a shot at him would have hit him and killed him, especially when running away with his back to them. Of course the movie depicted some of Germans chasing him while shooting. You'd think that one of the Germans would've just stopped, paused, took aim and hit him in the back or head while he was running away. (He did get nicked in the neck, though, once.)

 

Nothing else I've seen can match it. Not only the camera movement, but the astounding lighting - like those phosphorous flares moving through the sky with their harsh, sharp bars of light.

This sort of war story is told by those who didn't get killed. The ones did did never had the chance to tell their story to anyone. For instance, Audie Murphy and Alvin York's stories are nearly impossible to believe only because nearly anyone else trying the things they did were killed.

Until fairly recently, most Medal of Honor recipients received the award posthumously.

 

Can we watch it with spoilers for the first couple of weeks?

 

I'm trying to not mention anything that wasn't in the trailer.

 

It was the “immortality” post I was referring to.

 

I'll keep my post spoiler free. I've been waiting several months to see this film and it did not disappoint. I found it to be well acted, well directed,
well written and visually stunning. As a nice bonus, I got to see previews of two films I didn't even know had been made, that I also want to see.

 

I have interest in this! It will be part of my home video library...

 

I saw this today with my wife; it was sterling … the only thing missing was the smell. Cinematography was off the charts; performances as well. Great film imo.

 

Please nobody spoil who wins the war for me!