Author Topic: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)  (Read 6437 times)

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

  • National program director of the chum group
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #90 on: February 06, 2020, 01:19:31 PM »
The posters who said this film felt like a video game hit the nail on the head. It was like the main objective was to deliver a message to the Devons, with extra achievement points available for contacting Blake's brother, delivering milk, and highest dive.

The whole thing felt like it was on rails, which was the major effect of the Birdman-style single-shot look rather than the ceaseless action a la Dunkirk I suspect they hoped for. Begin, receive mission, guest appearance from Colin Firth...
Is that any different to the structure of any other quest type of story?

Shoulders?-Stomach!

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Mr Moose is up! It's done done done!
    • http://jackanderton.jamendo.net/
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #91 on: February 06, 2020, 01:24:08 PM »
My thoughts on this film

- another modern film that raises the level of peril so high you actually stop caring about the outcome because it's not Indiana Jones, it wants to be taken seriously. You can't do both. You either enjoy the fun or you set a realistic level of danger that a single vulnerable character could believable navigate, even if only by a thread

- Dialogue absolutely fucking dogshit

- Looks nice. The burned out town section at night was a real work of art, majestic

Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #92 on: February 06, 2020, 01:41:59 PM »
Yeah got to say I was starting to lose interest a bit after about the fiftieth time he got shot at and they missed. Would prefer that they just didn't bother havong people shooting at him at all than a completely fake peril.

buzby

  • Member
  • **
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #93 on: February 06, 2020, 02:08:05 PM »
It can't be disappointing if loads of people die, if that happens it's done pretty much exactly what a war is supposed to do.
The 'bad' ending would be the exact opposite of Grandpa Mendes' true story the film was (very loosely) based on though.

Twit 2

  • No half measures.
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #94 on: February 06, 2020, 06:02:44 PM »
You either enjoy the fun or you set a realistic level of danger that a single vulnerable character could believable navigate, even if only by a thread

I thought it did this pretty well. Good level of peril. Not every single person who fought died, and presumably of the many who lived to tell the tale a lot of escapes would have been more miraculous or unbelievable than this.

Quote
Dialogue absolutely fucking dogshit

It vacillated between perfunctory and poor. Certain directors shouldn’t write their scripts (Friedkin: “A director who writes his own scripts is like a man who represents himself in court”). Mendes belongs in this group, but still better than the likes of Nolan.

Quote
Looks nice. The burned out town section at night was a real work of art, majestic

Looks nice is my main criterion for a film so I was certainly happy with this one. As I said, I thought it packed an emotional punch too, and for the most part got the level of sentiment and pathos right (Art Garfunkel twatting on in a copse aside). It was a nicely uncluttered and restrained film in all. 4 out of 5 cherry trees!

Mister Six

  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Ridiculously teacakes
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #95 on: February 06, 2020, 10:20:14 PM »
Doesn't mean films have to be, embrace the fun side of things. It's The Great War, not The Disappointing War

Aye, I don't know why everyone thinks this film had to be another Meaningful Bleak WWI Miseryfest. It's a Boy's Own adventure with a tinge of WWI melancholia. As it is, he isn't able to stop the first wave from going up, and Sherlock says it's probably all meaningless in the long run. That's about as far as it should go, I think. It doesn't have the dramatic heft to support a serious ending, in any case.

touchingcloth

  • Member
  • **
  • You wanna plack the rick, you ha.
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #96 on: February 06, 2020, 10:24:51 PM »
Flares, I thought.

EDIT: Yep, flares. Interview with Roger Deakin: https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2020-01-16/roger-deakins-sam-mendes-1917-key-scene

I phrased my question poorly. I assumed they were flares or something similar, but I’m mainly confused about why they would be going off so frequently above a burned out wreck of a complex which seemed to be housing about five Germans.

Is that any different to the structure of any other quest type of story?

Structurally and plot wise no, but I’ve rarely been left with the on rails feeling being so strong. There weren’t many points where the characters seemed to be choosing just one path of many potentials to follow.

touchingcloth

  • Member
  • **
  • You wanna plack the rick, you ha.
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #97 on: February 07, 2020, 09:14:44 PM »
One thing I realised when watching this film is that besides private and field marshal I’ve got fuck all clue about the relative ranks of soldiers. Corporals, lance corporals, sergeants, majors, sergeant majors, captains, officers, lieutenants, admirals - they’re just so much chum in the barrel of war crimes.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Mr Moose is up! It's done done done!
    • http://jackanderton.jamendo.net/
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #98 on: February 08, 2020, 05:11:11 AM »
Boys Own Adventure in that 'almost certainly has ptsd forever' way we all remember from the heroes in our early childhood.

touchingcloth

  • Member
  • **
  • You wanna plack the rick, you ha.
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #99 on: February 11, 2020, 01:11:26 AM »
1917 snub totally. WTF. #Oscars... Oh wow. 1917 just got the worst snub in the history of the Oscars... cannot believe the snub by @TheAcademy to Sam Mendes and his #1917 masterpiece. What was bad at #Oscars ; 1. No host made it boring. 2. Joaquin Phoenix's speech. Don't get me started. 3. Captain Marvel and wonder woman looked ugly af. 4. Sir Elton John's shoes. Yuck. 5. #1917 snub. SHOOK that 1917 didn't win best picture/director , need to see Parasite ASAP #Oscars. Anyone else kinda hoping 1917 would win best picture? Because I feel like I missed something here #Oscars. I was curious to see why Parasite got an Oscar for Best Picture over 1917, went to see the trailer and I'm still curious, couldn't take anything away from that trailer. I wish 1917 had released in 2018! It also deserved the best picture Oscar... The Oscars are a joke ! 1917 not the best picture ? Total farce.

Twit 2

  • No half measures.
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #100 on: February 11, 2020, 07:12:29 AM »
The deeks finally got his trinket, but that’s all the film deserved.

touchingcloth

  • Member
  • **
  • You wanna plack the rick, you ha.
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #101 on: February 11, 2020, 09:18:29 AM »
I haven't seen Parasite, but it's definitely appropriate that all of 1917's (Academy) gongs came in technical categories. The BAFTAs lads had lost their minds.

Bleeding Kansas

  • Member
  • **
  • Them as 'as nowt is nowt
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #102 on: February 11, 2020, 10:03:31 AM »
The deeks finally got his trinket, but that’s all the film deserved.

This is his second. He won one for Blade Runner 2049.

Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #103 on: February 11, 2020, 10:07:47 AM »
Forgot that _everyone_ cares deeply about awards shows, they're very exciting and full of fun*

Twit 2

  • No half measures.
Re: 1917 (2019 1917 war film)
« Reply #104 on: February 11, 2020, 12:39:05 PM »
This is his second. He won one for Blade Runner 2049.

Ooh, missed that. He can now attempt to rival Chivo’s hat trick.

Tags: