1917 (WWI movie)

[ajprice]

ukaskew said:

I loved that about the second viewing. I'm taking my Dad this week, and now I know that the longest single take is 3 and a half minutes I'm even more intrigued on a technical level!

I've watched it once and seen a few interviews with Mendez and the 2 main actors, it's been mentioned in those that there are a few 6 minute takes and one 9 minute take.

[Roofless Toothless]

This sort of production with long takes is nothing new. Read about Hitchcock's Rope (1948).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope_(film)

[Adam B]

thegreenhell said:

Munter said:

There's a reason films and programs have increased the number of cuts per minute over the years. Bucking the trend is going to get a poor reception from some people.

ADHD?

Maybe not the medical condition, but certainly short attention spans and general dumbing down of the general public.

Loved the cinematography of 1917 (which was a simple story, loosely based on a real life event, set in the trenches of WW1, not a documentary about the reality of trench warfare and water features of WW1)

[jonm01]

I saw it last night and thought it was astonishing.

[steveatesh]

Saw it today and thought it was one of the best films I’ve seen for ages.

[Brave Fart]

Just seen it - I didn't want to judge it as a flawless documentary; as a classy piece of film-making it was gripping, realistic and never dull. So much better than Dunkirk. The two hours flew past and I felt immersed into a hellish world - the knowledge that is was so real for so many really makes you stop and think. Excellent film.

[227bhp]

If they hadn't flogged the continuity thing to death beforehand I wonder how many would have noticed?

The biggest bloopers for me were:

They left scenes of devastation, mud and corpses everywhere to find the German side all clean, dry limestone and no dead!
He was shot at multiple times at short range and never hit.
Apart from the times when he was and seemed to recover quite quickly.
As mentioned before everything made of paper surviving a soaking.

That aside it was quite gritty, hard hitting and well worth a watch.

[ukaskew]

227bhp said:

If they hadn't flogged the continuity thing to death beforehand I wonder how many would have noticed?

"They" really didn't, the trailers make no mention of it.

[227bhp]

ukaskew said:

227bhp said:

If they hadn't flogged the continuity thing to death beforehand I wonder how many would have noticed?

"They" really didn't, the trailers make no mention of it.

All the trailers shown at the cinema did.

[anonymous-user]

227bhp said:

They left scenes of devastation, mud and corpses everywhere to find the German side all clean, dry limestone and no dead!

The British trenches were as clean and tidy (or not) as the German ones.
The devastation, mud and corpses you describe was no man’s land and didn’t really belong to either side. They had to pass through it to get from the British to the German sides.

227bhp said:

He was shot at multiple times at short range and never hit.

Ever tried shooting straight when you’re tired, cold, hungry, scared, pissed off, in the dark?

[phazed]

I believe the reality in the trenches of both sides has been well covered historically. Something not ever to be repeated. It must have been completely soul destroying. Months on end of wet feet, lack of any decent food, low morale, dead and wounded with generally poor back up to remove them and a complete lack of facilities. No wonder the casualties were so enormous.

That would be very hard to replicate accurately on a large scale as was depicted in the film.

[borcy]

I think the time most units spent in the most forward of trenches was about 3 days. They were rotated through quite quickly.

[AC43]

stuarthat said:

So not a good film ,people leaving the cinema ,haven’t met anyone who liked it, so not just me .

It didn't hook me. Endless "clever" cinema tricks fail to mask the lack of character development, the lack of dialogue, and the lack of any complexity in the plot.

I started looking at my watch every five minutes on the hour. At 90 minutes my son was trying to get hold of me about something so I left the auditorium to call him and couldn't be bothered to go back in. He'd seen it so he told me what happened and that was that.

I found it strangely unengaging and agree with all the others about the contrived bits stuffed in "because Hollywood".

[yellowjack]

Crossflow Kid said:

227bhp said:

They left scenes of devastation, mud and corpses everywhere to find the German side all clean, dry limestone and no dead!

The British trenches were as clean and tidy (or not) as the German ones.
The devastation, mud and corpses you describe was no man’s land and didn’t really belong to either side. They had to pass through it to get from the British to the German sides.

227bhp said:

He was shot at multiple times at short range and never hit.

Ever tried shooting straight when you’re tired, cold, hungry, scared, pissed off, in the dark?

I was shot at multiple times by large calibre machine guns, at short range, while driving an APC, and even it never got hit. Make of that what you will. But many service personnel struggle to pass their annual personal weapons test first time, and that only involves targets that aren't running around or shooting back, and there isn't the poor visibility and confusion of a two-way shooting war. I was a competitive shooter, and coached other soldiers when they struggled with their APWT, yet on occasion I too could struggle to hit a full size (figure 11) target at 100 metres, especially if I hadn't shot in a while. Added to the physiological difficulties in a recording a hit on any target, even an easy one, is the psychological issue of asking men to kill other men. In many studies it's been found that soldiers who are not "conditioned" to kill are reluctant to shoot even their enemy, so they either fire fewer rounds, or they aim off. Aiming off still results in a 'noisy' battle space, and can certainly be effective in winning a firefight, even if you don't record a single hit.

Have a look, also, at the casualty to rounds fired ratios of various conflicts. Sometimes it takes thousands, tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands (from a quick google) of rounds to kill just one enemy. Most of what is fired ends up as just noise.

[Legend83]

Very interesting YJ.

We went to see it last night in IMAX and as a spectacle it was utterly peerless film-making. Some of the tracking shots, particularly the rise up as they go over the top, were stunning.

However we didn't get any emotional pay-off - we didn't have long to get to know these guys and so the impact I thought it was going for was lessened. I wasn't overly moved by the ending when he turns the photo over and felt I should have been...I dunno, maybe my heart was on high alert because of all the bloody tension beforehand!

But Roger Deakins is a god.

[LittleBigPlanet]

Saw this last night, I thought it was a masterpiece (sorry to buck the trend here it seems). The cinematography, script and acting were superb, some of the labouring shots had me awestruck.

Bravo.

[Shakermaker]

227bhp said:

ukaskew said:

227bhp said:

If they hadn't flogged the continuity thing to death beforehand I wonder how many would have noticed?

"They" really didn't, the trailers make no mention of it.

All the trailers shown at the cinema did.

Not the trailers I saw, none of them mentioned that it was intended to be seen as one continuous shot with the editing, the trailers I saw showed various cuts to different scenes.

Still looking forward to seeing this film

[gregs656]

AC43 said:

It didn't hook me. Endless "clever" cinema tricks fail to mask the lack of character development, the lack of dialogue, and the lack of any complexity in the plot.

Funny as those are things I liked.

Given the way the film is meant to be viewed, all those things make sense and help to give it a sense of cohesion.

[Fundoreen]

No suprise to me. This was exactly what I expected. They telegraphed the premise endlessly in tv interviews and on the net.
Apparently the story was flimsly? So some guy risking all to stop 1000s being killed is not a big story.
Audiences are trapped in a cycle of big film means enless big confusing sequences. Lots of
stars running around doing impossible things and surviving.
This weeks big energy vortex that is closed and saves the world is a good spend at the boxoffice as something cosmic happened lol.
Thank you marvel comics films.

No wonder they said this:

~www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2019/10/21/francis-ford-coppola-agrees-scorsese-calling-marvel-movies-despicable/

[rdjohn]

A long way from my favourite film.

Best line - “Am I going to die” - “Yes”. That came as a bit of a surprise.