Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

1917 Movie Review

Discussion in 'WWII Films & TV' started by KodiakBeer, Nov 25, 2019.

  1. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,199
    Likes Received:
    1,621
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    Half Track likes this.
  2. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,913
    Likes Received:
    1,768
    Was that an Albatross? Or am I on drugs? Either way...
     
  3. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,199
    Likes Received:
    1,621
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    Don't be ridiculous! An albatross is a large feathered seabird, often sold in British film theaters. The flying object pictured was an aircraft powered with an internal combustion engine, though they aren't usually seen on fire like that one.

    albatross.gif
     
    Half Track likes this.
  4. Half Track

    Half Track Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2017
    Messages:
    546
    Likes Received:
    185
    Location:
    Chambersburg Pennsylvania
    Thanks, I will go.
     
  5. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,913
    Likes Received:
    1,768
    I miss the Hollywood Bowl.
     
  6. Half Track

    Half Track Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2017
    Messages:
    546
    Likes Received:
    185
    Location:
    Chambersburg Pennsylvania
    I have not gone yet but now after reading some people’s comments after seeing the movie, I am not so sure I will go as I said above. There are other movies that my wife and I wanted to see at this time and I was just wondering if anyone else here has seen the movie and your thoughts on it. It is playing locally along with three other movies that look really good. Knives Out, Just Mercy and Little Women are all highly rated. When it says in the reviews that 1917 is like “one continuous take”, I don’t understand that. Of course I realize that it is a war movie, unlike the others so it may be individual preference.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2020
  7. Owen

    Owen O

    Joined:
    May 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,527
    Likes Received:
    599
    This gives a similar feel of one long take with no cutting away from a scene.

     
    Poppy and Half Track like this.
  8. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,913
    Likes Received:
    1,768
    That was INSANE!!!!
     
  9. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper Patron  

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,163
    Likes Received:
    640
    time has revealed who the hottest spice girl is.
    it aint beckhams gf, skeletor.
     
  10. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,913
    Likes Received:
    1,768
    Derp.
     
  11. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,913
    Likes Received:
    1,768
    I was watching for that having read this the other day. It's almost like a drone is continuous following them at eye level. I really don't know how they did that but it's amazingly effective, "you are there" level videography. Oscar for cinematography in the cards.
     
  12. Half Track

    Half Track Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2017
    Messages:
    546
    Likes Received:
    185
    Location:
    Chambersburg Pennsylvania
    I saw it today. I’m glad I did. First I must say that the Regal Cinema in Hagerstown, Maryland is undergoing renovations. Perhaps other Regal cinemas are also. They are making the experience so much nicer with overstuffed seats that recline back. Very comfortable to say the least. We went to the 3:30 show. Senior price was $8.00. We had a balance on a gift card, so it cost us nothing.
    Anyone, as I read some very negative comments elsewhere, who did not like it, has no appreciation of great movie making. With attention to detail and cinematography that is out of this world it was a great movie for me. The rifles, uniforms, artillery, vehicles, bombed out buildings and the trench warfare taught me some lesson as to the way it was in April of 1917. The continuous take in the trenches put you right into the trenches with the two English soldiers. The two did a fantastic acting job. The dead soldiers, horses, dogs and cattle were very convincing. Barb wire was horrible. I must admit, to me anyway, the first half hour moved a bit slow. But the bloody detail (forgive) made it a worthwhile two hours for me and my wife. And the theater which held about 150 had few empty seats.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2020
    KJ Jr likes this.
  13. KJ Jr

    KJ Jr Well-Known Member Patron  

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    3,137
    Likes Received:
    352
    Location:
    New England
    Saw it yesterday and I echo Half Track. Stunning cinematography and the set details, from the trenches, ruins, No Man's Land, the landscape in general was brilliant IMO. No use of ineffectual and overused CGI that is so common these days in war films. The story and movie were so simplistic and raw you were hooked for the entire film. The mood was eerie and felt like a horror film, which captures the feeling of trench warfare and its hopelessness. It's one of those films that you walk away from and can't stop thinking about. Furthermore the acting was excellent.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2020
    Half Track likes this.
  14. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,913
    Likes Received:
    1,768
    You didn't notice that the airplane crash was CGI?
     
  15. Owen

    Owen O

    Joined:
    May 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,527
    Likes Received:
    599
  16. Half Track

    Half Track Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2017
    Messages:
    546
    Likes Received:
    185
    Location:
    Chambersburg Pennsylvania
  17. KJ Jr

    KJ Jr Well-Known Member Patron  

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    3,137
    Likes Received:
    352
    Location:
    New England
    Yes...I did notice but it had its intended effect and was realistic enough. The CGI I am referring to is the overused CGI that makes war films, especially these days, look ridiculous. I realize its necessary, but what I enjoyed so much with this film was how simplistic it was.
     
  18. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,913
    Likes Received:
    1,768
    If one wishes to complain about CGI, that's their right. But first it's helpful to view "Steamboat Willie", a great little movie with very little CGI.
     
  19. KJ Jr

    KJ Jr Well-Known Member Patron  

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    3,137
    Likes Received:
    352
    Location:
    New England
    CGI is a fact of cinema. I get it. However it can be used in many ways. As a historian yourself, wouldn't you rather see an authentic shot of an aircraft than a computer generated one. It's a necessity at times, of course. More than ever as it becomes so "realistic and cost efficient." For example, in Band of Brothers one scene sticks out in my mind, the airborne drop before the landings. That's an impossible event to capture without CGI. The scene itself is well done, but its extremely noticable that it is computer animated. It's a part of movie making. To me, 1917 was a well crafted movie due to its simplistic nature.
    I don't recall a recent war film, widely released from a major film studio that is, where more emphasis was put on 1st person view. Thought it was remarkably well crafted.
     
  20. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,546
    Likes Received:
    231
    Well, I finally got to see it. Glad I did but my reaction to it is somewhat mixed. I thought the scenes of the two protagonists crawling, jumping, sliding and wallowing through no-man's land was excellent. The soldier's equipment and weapons seemed authentic-except for the fact I didn't see even one Vickers machine gun in evidence. I also didn't see any British artillery. As far as I can tell, the scenes in the British trenches also seemed authentic. The plot itself seemed to be a British version of "Saving Private Ryan" combined with "The Lost Battalion". I too thought that the term "battalion" was misused. 1600 men is damned near the size of a regiment. The weirdest thing for me was after this soldier goes through all sorts of hell, getting covered with mud, blood, guts, dirt and almost drowned, he staggers into this isolated regiment and he's clean, shaved, his hair is combed and his uniform is clean! Really? I also had a problem with the German pilot stabbing one of the soldiers who saved him from being roasted alive. I don't think that would have happened. If I were grading this film I would have given it a good solid "B". I was sad because with a little more effort it could have been even better.
     
    Half Track likes this.

Share This Page