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

[JB33]

4 hours ago, tonytr87 said:

I'm always confused when folks say a movie is showing off and they don't like it. If you can do something that's difficult to do, do it. Should a filmmaker try less? GTFO. 

Yeah it's odd. For me it was a super cool experience and that's really what it's all about (besides the filmmakers' own sense of achievement and all that stuff).

[lorddemaxus]

9 hours ago, tonytr87 said:

I'm always confused when folks say a movie is showing off and they don't like it. If you can do something that's difficult to do, do it. Should a filmmaker try less? GTFO. 

If it makes a better film, yeah the filmmaker should try less. I don't see any impact a few more cuts would have had other than the film getting less awards and Mendes missing out on his Best Director award (which is why I think this movie was made in the first place). 

[The Futurist]

Notice that when you show them the reality of the trenches, they don't want parity there.

No think pieces.

No hot takes.

They are as silent as a dead soldier.

 

 

[ThePhasmid]

The scene where Schofield is running through the ruins as Thomas Newman's "Englander" is playing in the background was absolutely top shelf filmmaking. Many goosebumps were felt in that scene. The whole film is pretty damn stellar despite a somewhat rote plot, but that scene in particular will stick with me as one of the best of this year (or last).

[Lordmandeep]

Was a really good film...

 

The filming style was interesting and cool but i think as a result sort of robbed us seeing the epic action of the war on a grand scale as well at times. 

[MikeQ]

This film is technically and visually great (one remarkable scene is seared in my brain), but what really makes it work for me is that it resonates emotionally. Still thinking about it, but for now, it does feel to me that the choice of making it seem like one long take is in service of the story in at least a couple different ways. I have to unpack it, and I may post my larger thoughts on the film later.

 

Peace,

Mike

Edited January 18, 2020 by MikeQ

[Viktor Vilotijevic]

I am very interested to see how this one plays in other markets than US and UK. I think 150 million $ domestically is a given, but I'm going to keep my predictions conservative for overseas, anywhere from 150-180 million $.

[Cap]

Just won PGA Award for Best Drama

[dxmatrixdt]

.

Edited June 26, 2020 by abusive brainwashed Christ

[titanic2187]

Look like the film is going to win BP with just best director,best cinematography, both sounds categories win. 

Edited January 19, 2020 by titanic2187

[lorddemaxus]

Although I think the race is over because it won at the PGA. It could do what Saving Private Ryan, Brokeback Mountain, and La La Land (PGA+DGA winners) did and not win BP because of no SAG ensemble win. But a Harvey Weinstein film isn't competing and there seems to be no racial or "this movie is so overrated" backlash so I doubt it.

Edited January 19, 2020 by lorddemaxus

[MikeQ]

14 hours ago, lorddemaxus said:

Although I think the race is over because it won at the PGA. It could do what Saving Private Ryan, Brokeback Mountain, and La La Land (PGA+DGA winners) did and not win BP because of no SAG ensemble win. But a Harvey Weinstein film isn't competing and there seems to be no racial or "this movie is so overrated" backlash so I doubt it.

I agree that the PGA win now puts 1917 in a good spot for the Oscar win. But, from what I recall, DGA is actually a stronger predictor of the Best Picture Oscar. We haven't heard from DGA yet, so if Mendes does not win at the DGA, the race could still be open. 1917 is also not even nominated for SAG Ensemble, so if another film wins DGA and SAG Ensemble, that film will, in essence, have the support of the directors and actors. Or if the three guilds split entirely, we could have an open race that depends on how the preferential ballot plays out for the Best Picture Oscar.

 

Peace,

Mike

[RealLyre]

44 minutes ago, MikeQ said:

I agree that the PGA win now puts 1917 in a good spot for the Oscar win. But, from what I recall, DGA is actually a stronger predictor of the Best Picture Oscar. We haven't heard from DGA yet, so if Mendes does not win at the DGA, the race could still be open. 1917 is also not even nominated for SAG Ensemble, so if another film wins DGA and SAG Ensemble, that film will, in essence, have the support of the directors and actors. Or if the three guilds split entirely, we could have an open race that depends on how the preferential ballot plays out for the Best Picture Oscar.

 

Peace,

Mike

DGA should be an easy win for Mendes me thinks, 1917 is a technical achievement and directors love to award films that push boundaries (yes I know directing =/= cinematography but they love these gimmicks).

 

recent DGA winners like Gravity, Birdman, The Revenant and Roma had similar feats. (and while I loved 3 of 4 of those films I hope that doesn't become the trend where if you want to win for directing, you just shoot in really long takes).  

[filmlover]

This would make for a decent Best Picture winner in my books (certainly a big step up from the movie they crowned last year) but I'm laughing at the thought of a whole bunch of directors looking at Best Picture wins for Birdman and this within the last five years and beginning to plot their own "one shot" attempts at Oscar glory.

[The Futurist]

Do you know how you say gimmick in french/français ?

 

Spoiler

gimmick

 

Don't thank me for knowledge.

[CoolioD1]

57 minutes ago, filmlover said:

This would make for a decent Best Picture winner in my books (certainly a big step up from the movie they crowned last year) but I'm laughing at the thought of a whole bunch of directors looking at Best Picture wins for Birdman and this within the last five years and beginning to plot their own "one shot" attempts at Oscar glory.

tom hooper kicking himself for not filming cats like this

[DAJK]

21 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

tom hooper kicking himself for not filming cats like this

lmao that would have been a sight to behold

 

They shoulda also filmed Dolittle like this.

[JB33]

Haven't seen Jojo Rabbit, Parasite or Little Women yet, but my personal Best Picture is between this and Joker. Haven't decided yet. Next up on the watch list is Parasite.

[DeeCee]

Tiny spoiler alert. 

 

 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

11 hours ago, filmlover said:

This would make for a decent Best Picture winner in my books (certainly a big step up from the movie they crowned last year) but I'm laughing at the thought of a whole bunch of directors looking at Best Picture wins for Birdman and this within the last five years and beginning to plot their own "one shot" attempts at Oscar glory.

Interesting, when it got announced I felt it was Mendes getting inspired by Dunkirk and wanting to do a version of that. I was joking but after seeing 1917, it does kind of feel a little like the criticisms of Dunkirk were noted and "fixed"...

 

Nolan: World War II, but not the part that's been done to death on film. That Atonement scene was only 10 minutes. There hasn't been a proper Dunkirk movie in years and yea-- Darkest Hour,  Their Finest? Never heard of 'em! 

Mendes: World War I, which hasn't been done to death on film.

 

Dunkirk: People can't tell apart the young brown-haired guys on the beach.

1917: Here's a short guy and a tall guy, who also aren't too similar, facially.

 

 

Dunkirk: Oscar voters confused/annoyed by the nonlinear storytelling.

1917: It all happens in real time!

 

Spoiler

Dunkirk: Oscar voters say they're not sure where the movie was happening and feel they learned more about Dunkirk (the event) from Darkest Hour.

1917:  The leads have a single mission that's clearly stated. Several script references to a town in France and there's an encounter with a local woman who clearly speaks French.

 

Dunkirk: There was that George kid, the main one was Tommy, I think, and the other guys were named???

1917: Off you go, Blake and Schofield! Did someone ask what my name is? Why yes, it is Lance Corporal Will Schofield!

 

Dunkirk: Complaints the split narrative makes it harder to engage emotionally.

1917: It's two guys, one trying to save his brother, but he dies very dramatically before he can. The lone lead soldiers on, dodges peril, meets a French woman with a baby, and notifies the brother of his younger sibling's death. So. Much. Emotion! Feel, dammit, FEEL!

 

That is not to say which one is better, but just that after seeing both, I'm not surprised 1917 shows signs it's seriously contending for a Best Picture win, while Dunkirk was only ever an also-ran.