1917

The KWMdB.

Moderators: dANdeLION, sgt.null

Post Reply
User avatar
peter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 11555
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 10:08 am
Location: Another time. Another place.
Been thanked: 6 times

1917

Post by peter »

It would be hard not to recognise that Sam Mendes' Oscar nominated WWI story 1917 is a stunning bit of film making. Shot so as to appear as almost a continuous one take film, just thinking about the logistical operation required to pull this film off makes me break out in a sweat.

While at first I was pulled in by the effect, after a short period it began to wear on me - and then after an equally short period I forgot about it altogether. I've been thinking as to why the director chose this method and if it actually added anything to what I'm guessing would have been a powerful film even shot in a more traditional way. The reason, I'd guess that Mendes chose to do this was to give the viewer a sense of 'being there'. The trenches part of the film lent itself to the technique perfectly on this score, and then when the protagonists moved beyond them there was enough visual spectacle of different sorts in order to hold the attention anyways. I found myself looking at the mud and ground looking for tracks of film cameras on wheels (especially in shots that panned around a character by 360 degrees) - and amazed to see there were none.

But what of the film I hear you ask; was it any good, technical merits aside. Well, yes and no. It's a poignant story, full of bravery and the pointlessness of war, the screenplay is fantastic (what the film looks like if that's what screenplay is), it definitely hits the spot.........but I wasn't riveted to my seat by it. I wouldn't have missed it by any means, but I came away, like everyone else it seems, stunned by the technical wizardry to the point where the actual story seemed secondary - and given the import and tragedy of the story it told, this wasn't the way it should have been. Initially I found the acting slightly wooden, but I got over this (or the acting simply got better) and ultimately the guys did a fine job. The cameo roles by famous actors dotted in here and there were not really necessary and I think were a bit of a distraction - by virtue of their brevity you could not forget who you were looking at; better to have stuck to unknown actors altogether here I think.

All in all though a film I recommend. Give it a whirl and see if you agree with my assessment.

:)
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.

....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'

We are the Bloodguard
Post Reply

Return to “Flicks”