1917 | Christmas 2019 limited, Jan 10 2020 wide | Universal | 19th Most Profitable Movie of 2019

[JB33]

Yeah, I've read several different opinions about the "gimmick". Really anxious to see it for myself so I can see what everyone is talking about and decide what I think of it. In a nutshell it clearly really works for some and doesnt work for others.

[Plain Old Tele]

1 hour ago, The Panda said:

I don’t think the gimmick was a detriment to the story being told, I actually think it’s what makes the movie work.

 

Granted, I think the film (plot included) was built around the gimmick so had Mendes chosen a different route I think we get an entirely different movie.

I think in many spots editing would’ve/could’ve been more beneficial. We go through he journey essentially in real time with the protagonists, but once within a particular moment or sequence (especially the quieter ones) I think cutting would’ve been more effective, nor do I think the audience would’ve been taken out of the “real time” atmosphere.

As it is, you end up watching the blocking (both for the characters and the steadicam op).

[The Panda]

39 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

I think in many spots editing would’ve/could’ve been more beneficial. We go through he journey essentially in real time with the protagonists, but once within a particular moment or sequence (especially the quieter ones) I think cutting would’ve been more effective, nor do I think the audience would’ve been taken out of the “real time” atmosphere.

As it is, you end up watching the blocking (both for the characters and the steadicam op).

I’d agree somewhat here, some of the quieter traveling scenes are where it felt video gameish to me

[The Futurist]

Style is substance they said ...

[dudalb]

14 hours ago, Plain Old Tele said:

I think in many spots editing would’ve/could’ve been more beneficial. We go through he journey essentially in real time with the protagonists, but once within a particular moment or sequence (especially the quieter ones) I think cutting would’ve been more effective, nor do I think the audience would’ve been taken out of the “real time” atmosphere.

As it is, you end up watching the blocking (both for the characters and the steadicam op).

Of course I will be watching to see if they have the right model of Lee Enfield rifles.....

[AndyK]

On 1/7/2020 at 9:51 PM, Plain Old Tele said:

...what?

 

It’s very impressive technically. It’s kinda goofy watching the trailers and TV spots, since of course they’re edited a great deal. But the whole thing does (essentially) play out “in one shot” and that’s no small feat at all. 

You were right !

 

As it turns out, the only bit that seemed out of place was that bit in the trailer where the shells made no craters, the rest was very impressive.

 

Spoiler

Although technically, it was a two shot movie, not one shot. The bit in the house where he fell back and hit his head is where they lost a few hours and it was dark when he awoke.

 

[dudalb]

Spielberg seem to have a knack, both as producer and director, for being involved with  good War films.

"Saving Private Ryan" (I still think the Omaha Beach segment is the single best,most brutally realistic battle scene ever filmed...Spielberg pulled no punches whatsoever with that scene) "Warhorse" (another World War One film, come to think of it) and the great TV miniseries  he co produced with Tom Hanks..."Band of  Brothers" and "THe Pacific" and they finally got their series on the US Air campaign against Nazi Germany "Masters Of The Air" greenlit.

Mendes could not have found a better partner for this project, I think.

[JB33]

Someone I know at my theatre said walkups have been incredible for this today and will likely be even moreso tomorrow. I'm seeing it tomorrow afternoon.

[RichWS]

I enjoyed it quite a bit. Wish it had a little more heft but it's an effective thriller. 

 

Spoiler

The night window scene is undoubtedly the highlight. Found it breathtaking. Seals the Deakins Oscar; awesome Newman cue.

 

[filmlover]

Saw this in IMAX today and must say it's worth shelling out the extra dollars just to see that beautiful Deakins cinematography on as large of a screen as possible.

[SMmadrid90]

Awesome movie, the lead character is like Jesus in WWI and that scene near the end WOW. I see this movie winning a lot of Oscars

[AndyK]

 

[Julian1410]

I have a phobia of rats so the first half of the film was a nightmare

[lorddemaxus]

14 hours ago, RichWS said:

 

 

  Hide contents

The night window scene is undoubtedly the highlight. Found it breathtaking. Seals the Deakins Oscar; awesome Newman cue.

 

That scene and the last 10 minutes were probably my favourite scenes in the movie and imo the two scenes that actually make the movie worth watching. The rest is meh.

[The Futurist]

Do these directors and cinematographers and their obesssion for the longest shot ever try to confess something to us ?

Do they feel inadequate ?

Are they compensating for something ?

Trying to prove something ?

Or do they think we are gullible enough to make us think these long takes add meaning and subtext to their movies ?

Do female directors and cinemaptographers wake up at night in terror wondering if their shots/takes are long enough ?

Of course they do, ask Jan.

 

Mendes, Deakins, Innaritu, Chivo, De Palma all look like very troubled, terrified teenage boys.

Those poor kids.

Edited January 12, 2020 by The Futurist

[CoolioD1]

just got back. decent.

[Avatree]

6 hours ago, The Futurist said:

Do these directors and cinematographers and their obesssion for the longest shot ever try to confess something to us ?

Do they feel inadequate ?

Are they compensating for something ?

Trying to prove something ?

Or do they think we are gullible enough to make us think these long takes add meaning and subtext to their movies ?

Do female directors and cinemaptographers wake up at night in terror wondering if their shots/takes are long enough ?

Of course they do, ask Jan.

 

Mendes, Deakins, Innaritu, Chivo, De Palma all look like very troubled, terrified teenage boys.

Those poor kids.

don't really know why I'm replying to this, but in theory can it not make a film more engrossing / immersive, to have a real-time smooth experience with no cuts to remind you you're watching a film?

 

I didn't like the Revenant but the action scenes that had a single take were pretty incredible and I felt like I was right there.

 

also, what brian de palma movie has long shots?

 

Edited January 12, 2020 by Avatree

[Cmasterclay]

Liked it more than I expected, mostly because MacKay brought more emotional heft to the movie than I thought it would have. It feels a bit routine but I also can't find anything about it that wasn't really good, ya know?

[DeeCee]

 

[JB33]

Fantastic movie! The two hours really flew by for me. It could have easily been longer.

 

Also, I really wish I could have seen it in IMAX but c'est la vie. I don't really need to say why; the cinematography is incredible! I loved any of the scenes in trenches. It was just such an intimate and authentic look at war, especially when you add the single-shot element to it. The score was great, although Joker is still my #1 of the year there. Also I thought George MacKay's performance was a pleasant surprise. Not that I expected the acting to be terrible, but this seemed like a movie where the performances would take a back seat to the visuals and all the technical elements.