1917 (2019)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Post Reply
Ruth
Posts: 8437
Joined: August 2012
Artemis wrote: ↑
January 17th, 2020, 2:41 pm
Yeah that scene when he gets a second wind is really beautifully done. The tranquil look he had on his face when he was with the other soldiers hearing the dude sing really hit me emotionally. He looked so at peace.
I liked his character development too. Like at first he was like
"man, why the fuck did you pick me?"
but then he was like
"damn, i gotta do this for my bro. i need to do this for my bro's bro."
It has beautiful themes of friendship during tumultuous times.
It’s honestly really heartbreaking to think how guilty he must have felt over this. He has his life saved by Blake, but unfortunately can’t return that favor. I really liked how that anguish wasn’t hit over the audience’s heads in the most obnoxious war kino camaraderie kind of way, but it was visible in Schofield’s development. He seems like the kind of dude who internalizes everything and plans stuff ahead to get by, but you can clearly sense not just his physical exhaustion, but deteriorating mental state, as he gets more reckless and dazed with mission going forward. Idk what my point is but I liked that lol.
Demoph
Posts: 1230
Joined: January 2019
Very good film, 9/10. Now to dive in:
It reminds me mostly of The Thin red line, in the sense that I think that one of the main theme is the struggle between humanity and nature. It all starts when
Schofield talks about when he went home, and how nothing was the same. He at first only tries to survive in the first half of the film, and doesn't really care about the mission, he only does it because he has to. This is survival instinct, the animal side of men. Then there's the scene with the women and the child, and in that scene he regains his humanity (alos in the death scene before) and after that, he tries not to kill the germans xho sees him, but eventually has to fight against one like animals, on the floor, strangling one another, then he avoids killing the next german, and just hits him.
And in the end, when he reads the word of his wife "come back to us", he knows he can, not physically because the war is far from over, but spiritually: he is still human despite all he has gone through, yet near the tree, and amongst the blooming flowers, he is in the middle of the beauty of nature. He has finally been able to get the best of his humanity and his natural instincts, and is reconciled with nature and his family.
User avatar
Artemis
Posts: 9212
Joined: August 2009
Ruth wrote: ↑
January 17th, 2020, 3:46 pm
Artemis wrote: ↑
January 17th, 2020, 2:41 pm
Yeah that scene when he gets a second wind is really beautifully done. The tranquil look he had on his face when he was with the other soldiers hearing the dude sing really hit me emotionally. He looked so at peace.
I liked his character development too. Like at first he was like
"man, why the fuck did you pick me?"
but then he was like
"damn, i gotta do this for my bro. i need to do this for my bro's bro."
It has beautiful themes of friendship during tumultuous times.
It’s honestly really heartbreaking to think how guilty he must have felt over this. He has his life saved by Blake, but unfortunately can’t return that favor. I really liked how that anguish wasn’t hit over the audience’s heads in the most obnoxious war kino camaraderie kind of way, but it was visible in Schofield’s development. He seems like the kind of dude who internalizes everything and plans stuff ahead to get by, but you can clearly sense not just his physical exhaustion, but deteriorating mental state, as he gets more reckless and dazed with mission going forward. Idk what my point is but I liked that lol.
I think I know what you mean
he gets this newfound sense of purpose and he has this really heavy obligation put on him. The actor is so good. You can really feel the stress he is under and the lack of time. He is so emotive.

He initially didn't want to do this but he has to honor his friend and on a grander scale his country.
I feel like I can gush about this movie forever. I also loved the Indian soldier!
when he offers to do the voices for the story they're telling, one dude goes "you can't tell it you don't have a grasp of the language." Then the other retorts with "he has a better grasp of it than you." Absolute dab.
User avatar
LelekPL
Posts: 3346
Joined: January 2015
Location: Poland
Contact:
Contact LelekPL
This was great. I'm not much for war movies myself but this has all the hallmarks of a cinematic classic. It's a beautiful film. Sad yet so engaging and visceral. And the one shot really works, making this movie as immersive as a video game almost.

Where with Dunkirk I felt an emotional emptiness and detachment, this delivers that with ease by making us follow just two soldiers all the way through on a mission. The stakes are clear, the engagement is immediately there and I was glued to the screen. The moment when they first get out of the trenches is incredibly tense and it continues for the rest of the movie. You might say it's a standard fair in terms of storytelling in these movies but the way how effectively it is made really makes it stand out. The way it's shot (Deakins outdid himself this time), the score, the staging, blocking. One or two uses of CGI are pretty glaring but other than that this feels both gritty and sweeping at the same time.

The acting is pretty good, nothing awarding winning but MacKay is the clear stand out. Chapman actually reminded me a lot of a young DiCaprio. Not in terms of acting but looks. It was almost eerie.

I'm thinking 8/10 but I'm deliberating a 9. Easily in my top 10 of the year and also reaches my top of the decade.
User avatar
Tenetdrome
Posts: 54
Joined: December 2019
Location: Colorado
I thought it was quite heartfelt. The quality of the filmmaking obviously speaks for itself, but I wasn’t expecting to be as emotionally attached to the characters as I was. Excited to see what George and Dean do in the future, they both gave excellent performances.
User avatar
bootsy
Posts: 2547
Joined: June 2011
I liked this but man did it so not leave an impression on me when it was over. I loved Deakins obviously and McKay was very good.
The night scenes, the journey to the German bunker, and the bombs going off trying to get to Mackenzie were standouts for me.
Batfan175
Posts: 4794
Joined: January 2012
bootsy wrote: ↑
January 19th, 2020, 3:15 am
 I liked this but man did it so not leave an impression on me when it was over. I loved Deakins obviously and McKay was very good.
The night scenes, the journey to the German bunker, and the bombs going off trying to get to Mackenzie were standouts for me.
So would your verdict be something like 'good looking but forgettable'?
User avatar
Bacon
Posts: 26414
Joined: June 2011
https://twitter.com/rianjohnson/status/ ... 5439783936
Rian Johnson
@rianjohnson
Last night at the PGA awards Mendes told me 1917 was ACTUALLY shot in one continuous take, if an actor flubbed a line they’d go all the way back and start again from the beginning. They paid Cumberbatch to show up every day and wait in that room at the end. He was there 6 months

@bootsy: Yeah just about everyone I know who's seen this has said it was very entertaining, but left them with very little of a lasting impression.
User avatar
bootsy
Posts: 2547
Joined: June 2011
Batfan175 wrote: ↑
January 19th, 2020, 11:22 am
bootsy wrote: ↑
January 19th, 2020, 3:15 am
 I liked this but man did it so not leave an impression on me when it was over. I loved Deakins obviously and McKay was very good.
The night scenes, the journey to the German bunker, and the bombs going off trying to get to Mackenzie were standouts for me.
So would your verdict be something like 'good looking but forgettable'?
Not quite forgettable but I didn't have an emotional attachment to it once I left. It's still a great technical achievement and McKay is good but I didn't really care that much about the characters. I know that is the stigma attached to Dunkirk but I didn't need to feel that with Dunkirk. That movie was more about everyone trying to get home.
Bacon wrote: ↑
January 19th, 2020, 5:15 pm
 https://twitter.com/rianjohnson/status/ ... 5439783936
Rian Johnson
@rianjohnson
Last night at the PGA awards Mendes told me 1917 was ACTUALLY shot in one continuous take, if an actor flubbed a line they’d go all the way back and start again from the beginning. They paid Cumberbatch to show up every day and wait in that room at the end. He was there 6 months

@bootsy: Yeah just about everyone I know who's seen this has said it was very entertaining, but left them with very little of a lasting impression.
After the movie was over I felt like 'this is the movie everyone is touting as this must see, great film' and after I felt like 'it was good' but left feeling a little empty. Some things were very predictable. This might have been one of those movies where I wish I didn't see the trailer.

I go see movies with my wife and after a movie we usually talk about it a little bit but we just didn't with this one. We were like 'yeah it was good' and that was it. :lol:
i seriously cant get over how amazing this movie would be if it didn't have a score. it adds such a blatant, sloppy level of artifice to a film that is otherwise doing everything in it's power to take that away. not just in technique but the story is also refreshingly reserved and matter of fact. i was legiterally sitting in the theater thinking if the demolished town scene didnt have music i probably would have cried during it. if the content is good enough it can be enough nahmean


also get rid of the subtitles. the whole emotional heft of that scene came from him connecting with that girl despite not speaking the same language... again the film is killing itself to be subjective but then translates a language that the main character wouldn't understand like are u on crack samuel
Post Reply

Return to “Movies & TV”