1917

[kammo man]

Got to see 1917 last week.
Worth watching 100%.

[Ron P]

Saw the previews and it looks good.

[Lutfen]

Good to hear - thanks for the update.

Michael

Got to see 1917 last week.
Worth watching 100%.

[Brian R]

Yeah, I never go to the movies but would for this one. Looking forward to it!!

[ValhallaMilitaria]

I will see it of course but those uniforms look very clean for the trenches...

[book lover]

Just won the golden globe for best picture.

[stonemint]

Just watched it last night.

Positives:

The set designer should win the Oscar--no clean, neat landscapes like in Dunkirk.
Although filmed in Scotland, it looked like war-torn (and I mean torn) France.

Plot is fictional, and had elements of Saving Private Ryan and Apocalypse Now.
Cinematography incredible.
The "one-take" shooting was pulled off magnificently.

There were elements of surrealism, and the scenes in the burning French town even had a hint of German expressionism.

Negatives:

Germans were rarely scene up close, and when they were, they were the stereotypical cold "Hun" of WW1 US/Brit propaganda.
The German pilot pulling out a bayonet after being badly burned (and rescued) by the Brits defied logic (plus he would have carried a pistol).
The random, scattered lone German soldiers did not make sense in terms of an occupying army.

The protagonist surviving a major explosion (and being buried alive); being shot in the head; & going down a waterfall yet still being able to run defied reason and common sense.

Lastly, why not just drop the Order to cancel the attack using airplanes (which were regularly seen flying over the battlefied), or use carrier pigeons (but then, of course, there would be no plot and no movie).

In any event, despite the above negatives, I would recommend seeing it--it is about time the Great War got it's due (even if 5 years after the 100th anniversary).

[Remy Spezzano]

Overall the film is a cinematic masterpiece and most definitely worth seeing in a theater on the bog screen.

As Stonemint has pointed out there were definitely some plot holes in the film. But as he stated there would be no basis for a film if you filled all the holes in. Please don't let this discourage anyone from seeing the film. The fact that a first class, big budget, Hollywood production on World War I was even produced in the first place and released in 2020 is something to appreciate.

[Jody]

1917

My son and I both liked the movie. We thought about the film Gallipoli while watching it.

Jody

[Martin Simon]

Just saw it on the big screen. Quite enjoyed it, definitely worth watching..
Martin

[Jeff V]

I enjoyed it. Not perfect but well worth seeing IMO. As the others have pointed out the cinematography is beautiful.

[kammo man]

I could rip a thousand holes in this film , but whats the point.
Like I said before its a fun sit down to watch.

[Peter_Suciu]

I'm going to be the contrarian in this case. Visually thefilm looks fantastic and the film even did an excellent job with immersing theaudience into the frontlines. The trenches are spectacular, especially theGerman trenches.

However, as a story the film is a complete disaster thatmakes almost no sense if you think about it at all. There are countless plotholes, and the story plays out like a video game – complete with neat chapterbreaks. (Spoilers follow) When the two characters exit the German trenches itfeels like they've suddenly reached a new "level" as one would in avideo game, the same is true with the meeting up of the British unit at thefarm – suddenly a hundred guys are there that weren't there a minute earlierand they seem pretty comfortable and busy.

The sequence with the trucks advances the character withoutadvancing the plot, and suddenly the main character is now at a bridge and leftalone. He starts to cross and is shot at? Where did the rest of the Britishunit with the trucks go? Again, this is something you'd expect in a video game.The sequence in the town with the Germans is another example of feeling like avideo game but without any of the fun!

How does a soldier without rifle, helmet, gear, etc. not gotstopped and questioned for being a suspected deserter? While he is a LanceCorporal he never is seriously questioned by anyone at any point!

I could on, but every point is more of the same. There israrely any intensity or suspense. You know the character is going to make it orelse the film ends.

As for the attempt to make it look like a single sequencewithout cuts it is simply a tired gimmick that has been done far better inother films. If you're looking to find the cuts they're surprisingly easy tofind; and if you're looking to find the cuts it means the director did a badjob of making it convincing and the story isn't moving along. Again, it is gimmickand a silly one at that.

Finally, the film is diminished by the British FilmIndustry's misguided attempts to be inclusive and diverse and for all films(regardless of the period) to have the feel of today's UK. This is seen in theinclusion of an Indian soldier and several black soldiers! While a minornitpick it is enough to further remind me I'm watching a movie made in 2019rather than taking me back to 1917.

As for the Golden Globe and Oscar nomination this I suspectis the result of Peter Jackson's They Shall Not Grow Old being released lastyear and reminding viewers that World War I happened. The 100th anniversary ofthe war came and went and only now are people beginning to realize it was infact a big deal. However, I really think that the voters (the Hollywood foreignpress in the case of the Golden Globes and the Hollywood elite for the Oscars) alsojust bought into the gimmick of a single take. The film's anti-war stance alsoplays well to both crowds too.


All in all, this film is an example of how NOT to make aWorld War I story.

[TWS]

Saw it last Thursday on pre-opening night and enjoyed it. Yes, I saw some nitpicks as others have noted. My wife being a "normal" person and not a hardcore military history buff like denizens of this forum, was blissfully unaware of these details that we notice and enjoyed the film immensely - even more than me.

On balance, I'd recommend it.

[WalterB]

Saw it last Thursday on pre-opening night and enjoyed it. Yes, I saw some nitpicks as others have noted. My wife being a "normal" person and not a hardcore military history buff like denizens of this forum, was blissfully unaware of these details that we notice and enjoyed the film immensely - even more than me.

On balance, I'd recommend it.

Agreed! Though with faults, it had redeeming value. The run along no-man's land while the second wave stormed across was impressive to me.