1917 (WWI movie)
Discussion
I have a similar box. It's got a tight fitting lid and pressed against your chest it could well be waterproof. Anyway, minor detail, plenty of bigger mistakes. Still, a fantastic film overall. Nobody moved when the credits rolled, a good 2 or 3 minutes of people collecting themselves before the first brave soul got up. Haven't seen an audience reaction like that since Saving Private Ryan.
I thought it was as much Tolkien as it was WW1 - an impossible quest across the Plains of Mordor by Frodo and Sam.
I was struck by the simplicity of the film. No plot to speak of, no side tracks - well, apart from the not very convincing episode with the baby.
It was spoilt for me, though, by the river stuff, as others have said above. Wasn't there a similar escape in The Hobbit?
I was struck by the simplicity of the film. No plot to speak of, no side tracks - well, apart from the not very convincing episode with the baby.
It was spoilt for me, though, by the river stuff, as others have said above. Wasn't there a similar escape in The Hobbit?
phazed said:
I think you guys are making too much of Dunkirk. It was an entertaining film and if you went into the cinema with that in mind it was brilliant. It may not be 100% accurate but as an entertainment film it certainly did it’s job.
I saw 1917 last night and although technically brilliant I guess, I thought it wasn’t as good a fil imo and the acting was a little ham. I still enjoyed it but can’t see what everyone is raving about.
I agree. I watched the film, and enjoyed it, but afterwards, it began to grate on me for a number of reasons. The alleged attention to detail (which mysteriously disappeared at key moments, so actors blowing ) and distracting cinematography (it was a gimmick, and added nothing) were just cover for a paper thin and unoriginal plot. Nothing in it seemed Oscar worthy.I saw 1917 last night and although technically brilliant I guess, I thought it wasn’t as good a fil imo and the acting was a little ham. I still enjoyed it but can’t see what everyone is raving about.
On the other hand, Dunkirk was criticized for its lack of 400,000 extras. I preferred its approach to building characters, and the sheer genius of making an historic event, where everyone knows the ending, as genuinely gripping, and excellent characterisation. The ensemble cast did a good job with their characters, and there were genuine surprise on the abilities of some of the younger cat members. Harry Styles can hold it together
Dunkirk is a film I can watch over. 1917; I couldn't care less if I never saw the film again.
Gadgetmac said:
stuarthat said:
So not a good film ,people leaving the cinema ,haven’t met anyone who liked it, so not just me .
I call BS 
te Met some fellas today they saw it asked them ,and agreed I have probably seen more shows and films than the average person, love a good film and that wasn’t one of them ,1971 was better Kajaki the killing fields band of brothers hacksaw ridge etc for me far superior as stated for me and so far not one person I have spoke in person to has liked the film .
Ps didn’t like once apron a time in Hollywood either just went on and on .
stuarthat said:
Gadgetmac said:
stuarthat said:
So not a good film ,people leaving the cinema ,haven’t met anyone who liked it, so not just me .
I call BS te Met some fellas today they saw it asked them ,and agreed I have probably seen more shows and films than the average person, love a good film and that wasn’t one of them ,1971 was better Kajaki the killing fields band of brothers hacksaw ridge etc for me far superior as stated for me and so far not one person I have spoke in person to has liked the film .
Ps didn’t like once apron a time in Hollywood either just went on and on .
Having felt guilty not inviting my father when I saw it last weekend I went again with him last night.
I enjoyed it again and the two hours seemed to go by much faster the second time round. Watching it again I could spend less attention on the story and more on the detail and cinematography, both of which are great.
I enjoyed it again and the two hours seemed to go by much faster the second time round. Watching it again I could spend less attention on the story and more on the detail and cinematography, both of which are great.
CaptainSlow said:
Having felt guilty not inviting my father when I saw it last weekend I went again with him last night.
I enjoyed it again and the two hours seemed to go by much faster the second time round. Watching it again I could spend less attention on the story and more on the detail and cinematography, both of which are great.
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 enjoyed it again and the two hours seemed to go by much faster the second time round. Watching it again I could spend less attention on the story and more on the detail and cinematography, both of which are great.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff