Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

1917 [Sam Mendes]

Options
2456

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    i hope its not to sterile like the Dunkirk movie , it looked good watching it but can barely remember a thing about it now nor want to rewatch it

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #33
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Likewise. Dunkirk was impressive but all that reality meant a lack of something else to make it memorable.


  • Options
    #34
    Decuc500
    Registered Users Posts: 1,214 ✭✭✭Decuc500


    Well that was very impressive. The 'one shot' look was technically brilliant and totally immersive. The cinematography, particularly the night time scenes, was stunning. I'd be giving Roger Deakins his second Oscar.

    I don't know if it was historically accurate. I couldn't care. It was pure cinema.


  • Options
    #35
    branie2
    Registered Users Posts: 10,298 ✭✭✭✭branie2


    I saw it this evening, and I thought it was very good


  • Options
    #36
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    branie2 wrote: »
    I saw it this evening, and I thought it was very good

    for some reason I thought it was only out next week, cool!

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    ISOP
    Registered Users Posts: 417 ✭✭ISOP


    Thought it dragged a bit, a bit over hyped. Saw JoJO Rabbit last night and it was miles superior


  • Options
    #38
    santana75
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭santana75


    Definitely overhyped. Saw it tonight after reading universally glowing reviews. The critics are falling over themselves to hail this as a masterpiece. It's not though. Not even close. Its decent enough, but not the film it's being made out to be. If you're comparing it to another fairly recent war movie then I'd have to say it's not in the same league as Dunkirk. Nolan's movie was tighter, had more heart and just better executed.
    There was some clunky dialogue here, an effort to build character but it just didn't ring true. It'll be nominated for a load of Oscar's, for sure it that kind of movie. But I hope Tarantino wins best director over sam Mendes because once upon a time in Hollywood was the better directed film.


  • Options
    #39
    Banjaxed82
    Registered Users Posts: 1,946 ✭✭✭Banjaxed82


    Yeah. Overhyped. Didn't engage on emotional level and I didn't feel there was much tension more often than not. Was this cause they were hamstrung by the one shot technique?

    Some nice work by Deakins but thin on story and just a bit meh overall.


  • Options
    #40
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    santana75 wrote: »
    Definitely overhyped. Saw it tonight after reading universally glowing reviews. The critics are falling over themselves to hail this as a masterpiece. It's not though. Not even close. Its decent enough, but not the film it's being made out to be. If you're comparing it to another fairly recent war movie then I'd have to say it's not in the same league as Dunkirk. Nolan's movie was tighter, had more heart and just better executed.
    There was some clunky dialogue here, an effort to build character but it just didn't ring true. It'll be nominated for a load of Oscar's, for sure it that kind of movie.
    Thanks. I've been really looking forward to this, so it's good sometimes to get the mood and expectations adjusted before seeing a film. I listened to the Empire podcast and they said similar things; that it is more of 'an experience' film than anything else. With that in mind, still really looking forward to it.


  • Options
    #41
    Rothmans
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭Rothmans


    Banjaxed82 wrote: »
    Yeah. Overhyped. Didn't engage on emotional level and I didn't feel there was much tension more often than not. Was this cause they were hamstrung by the one shot technique?

    Some nice work by Deakins but thin on story and just a bit meh overall.


    Maybe it's because I have a particular interest in the First World War, but it really got to me on an emotional level. I found it to be really visceral. I found there was great tension in it. I found myself jumping back in my seat a few times.

    I have to say, it's the best film I've seen in a long long time. The cinematography was outstanding, as was the acting. I couldn't fault it, and would highly recommend it. I don't go to the cinema an awful lot, but this film was well worth it, and I think needs to be seen on the big screen. It's a ten out of ten from me.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    gmisk
    Registered Users Posts: 32,274 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    Just home from seeing it this morning
    Personally I loved it, the story is simple but it is so well done, honestly no idea how they got some of the shots. George MacKay is a fantastic actor. I found the cameos of the other bigger names a distraction. It's got to be seen on a big screen for me, wouldn't have half the effect at home. I also found it pretty blooming moving.
    My expectations were a tad dampened down as truth and movies gave it a very average review,so that might have helped a bit.
    8/10


  • Options
    #43
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    a very immersive movie , the average person should like it. they seemed to put a lot of effort into making the front lines seem true to life , trenches, bombed out town etc. some amazing night time use of flares
    overall plot hole? we were wondering after the movie why didn't they just send a plane to deliver the orders? even if there wanst an airfield it still would have been possible to land in a field or they could have dropped the orders from the plane?

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #44
    joe_99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 763 ✭✭✭joe_99


    Exactly. A plane would have done the job easily. Plus the British army was quite mobile beyond the abandoned German line so there must have been another way round


  • Options
    #45
    gmisk
    Registered Users Posts: 32,274 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    silverharp wrote: »
    a very immersive movie , the average person should like it. they seemed to put a lot of effort into making the front lines seem true to life , trenches, bombed out town etc. some amazing night time use of flares
    overall plot hole? we were wondering after the movie why didn't they just send a plane to deliver the orders? even if there wanst an airfield it still would have been possible to land in a field or they could have dropped the orders from the plane?
    I don't think the drop thing would have worked, it would need to be pretty precise to drop a letter so it went to the correct person from a plane? And not exactly a printing press to do a leaflet drop... Also the time thing was crucial, by the time they got in contact with airforce etc it would likely have been too late. I am not sure there was a place to land either, they were in woods before pushing forward


  • Options
    #46
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    gmisk wrote: »
    I don't think the drop thing would have worked, it would need to be pretty precise to drop a letter so it went to the correct person from a plane? And not exactly a printing press to do a leaflet drop... Also the time thing was crucial, by the time they got in contact with airforce etc it would likely have been too late. I am not sure there was a place to land either, they were in woods before pushing forward
    ok! them in the forest works for me cheers!

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #47
    Akabusi
    Registered Users Posts: 1,089 ✭✭✭Akabusi


    It's decent enough, couple of things i didn't like though
    Who milked the cow? I thought this was pointless, if you were going to do this then do it right
    Having the two lads go through no-mans land and the German trenches seemed a bit ridiculous when other parts of the British Army where able to drive around the country side with only a tree and some mud to hinder them
    The crossing of the bridge, where the German solider couldn't shoot straight, then our hero fires a few shots and is able to easily advance and enter the building where the German hasn't moved and still misses him from point blank range


  • Options
    #48
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Akabusi wrote: »
    It's decent enough, couple of things i didn't like though
    Who milked the cow? I thought this was pointless, if you were going to do this then do it right
    Having the two lads go through no-mans land and the German trenches seemed a bit ridiculous when other parts of the British Army where able to drive around the country side with only a tree and some mud to hinder them
    The crossing of the bridge, where the German solider couldn't shoot straight, then our hero fires a few shots and is able to easily advance and enter the building where the German hasn't moved and still misses him from point blank range
    I’d assume a German did and it was left when they retreated, but it was lucky eh? He got to save the baby, what are the chances?

    Meeting the other British , It seemed a little odd but fog of war and all that. You could argue that 2 soldiers slinking through the line would draw less attention than a convoy of trucks.

    The German soldier had been badly injured, he was slumped back against the wall so I guess would justify his aim being off. It did seem though that the Germans in general didn’t have good aim, the one chasing him down the street should have got him easy enough

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #49
    Lefty2Guns
    Registered Users Posts: 729 ✭✭✭Lefty2Guns


    Went to see it yesterday myself. Its definitely a cinema film and wouldn't be half as enjoyable/effective watching on the TV. The cinematography was excellent even though the story wasn't.


  • Options
    #50
    johnny_ultimate
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,202 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Comfortably the worst of this year's awards-contenders - and I really didn't like JoJo Rabbit much at all.

    Since pseudo 'one-take' films have been done before, filmmakers need a really good reason to utilise it now - to make it feel fresh and different. Here, it comes across as little more than Mendes showing off. Given the seams are so obvious, IMO the decision to fake one take emerges as a crippling creative limitation. Rather than proving a more immersive experience, the choreography and artificial nature of events only draw attention to themselves. Some weak digital effects don't help. Ultimately, for me it was like those opening sequences to games where you're led down a corridor or something as the credits play and you see stuff happening behind glass. That, but two hours long and a mediocre war film. At least with something like Victoria or Russia Ark you can marvel at the logistics of maintaining the choreography for an entire running time - this doesn't even have that, so frequent are the cuts.

    Deakins is a good enough cinematographer that there are a few moments of awe - well, specifically the pretty spectacular sequence where we track through a ruined village as flares ominously illuminate the sky and cast eerily beautiful shadows. In fact, that sequence works so well one wonders how well individual scenes could have been shot without the self-imposed limitation of mimicking a single shot (one long and overt cut to black aside).

    Sadly, though, that one sequence sticks out in what otherwise is a bland, unfulfilling war film that makes one big bad decision that has a knock-on effect on everything else (although jarringly Thomas Newman's score is one of the worst I've seen in any recent major release). Even as a tense, high-risk thriller it pales in comparison to Uncut Gems, which just happened to be released on the same day and is infinitely more suspenseful.


  • Options
    #51
    PTH2009
    Registered Users Posts: 37,983 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    Saw it today

    Decent film with a lot of jumpy moments. Great acting by all in it

    WW1 was brutal, I was always amazed how well most British treat the older folk over there and now I get why. The stuff they must of lived through during the world wars must of been tough. I doubt theres many WW1 veterans army/civilians around today


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Banjaxed82
    Registered Users Posts: 1,946 ✭✭✭Banjaxed82


    A masterclass in the editing process (or lack thereof), and the ramifications of restricting yourself by a technique that amounts to not much more than a gimmick.

    Creating tension, suspense and pacing is the whole point of the editing process in this regard. The words on the page change when the camera creates the images. And the images change when the fresh eyes of the editor throw yet another perspective on how the story should be told/structured.

    I can understand the idea of having a sequence told in 1 shot, but a whole film?...this type of film?... Seems like they shot themselves in the foot.


  • Options
    #53
    gmisk
    Registered Users Posts: 32,274 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    Banjaxed82 wrote: »
    A masterclass in the editing process (or lack thereof), and the ramifications of restricting yourself by a technique that amounts to not much more than a gimmick.

    Creating tension, suspense and pacing is the whole point of the editing process in this regard. The words on the page change when the camera creates the images. And the images change when the fresh eyes of the editor throw yet another perspective on how the story should be told/structured.

    I can understand the idea of having a sequence told in 1 shot, but a whole film?...this type of film?... Seems like they shot themselves in the foot.
    There is another example of a film shot (rather than one made to look like one shot) which is Victoria and it is imo excellent


  • Options
    #54
    joe_99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 763 ✭✭✭joe_99


    PTH2009 wrote: »
    I doubt theres many WW1 veterans army/civilians around today

    You are joking, right?


  • Options
    #55
    1o059k7ewrqj3n
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,779 ✭✭✭1o059k7ewrqj3n


    Brilliant film, my only disappointment was that it ended. The seamless take thing is done very well. I liked it a lot because of how it revealed the environment the men were in, reminded me a bit of Children of Men, some of the cinematography is just stunning.

    I might have dropped the soundtrack altogether and focused on the actual diegetic sound, and maybe one or two moments the pace accelerated too much, but overall a beautiful film. I'll probably go see it again and feel differently about the pacing but there you go.


  • Options
    #56
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭Effects


    joe_99 wrote: »
    You are joking, right?

    Poor old Franky Buckles.


  • Options
    #57
    PTH2009
    Registered Users Posts: 37,983 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    joe_99 wrote: »
    You are joking, right?

    Meant veterans still alive today

    Very doubtful


  • Options
    #58
    joe_99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 763 ✭✭✭joe_99


    PTH2009 wrote: »
    Meant veterans still alive today

    Very doubtful

    The war ended 102 years ago. Add about 14 years for the youngest veteran.


  • Options
    #59
    Cina
    Registered Users Posts: 2,387 ✭✭✭Cina


    I came out of it thinking that nitpickers will try and rip it apart and point out all the flaws and plot holes and inconsistencies, and to make sure I don't listen and let it dampen my view of the film, because overall it was two of the most stunning and gripping hours of cinema I've seen in a very long time, so personally I don't really care if
    a plane could've done the job better or if ze Germans have the aim of a stormtrooper :)


  • Options
    #60
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    joe_99 wrote: »
    The war ended 102 years ago. Add about 14 years for the youngest veteran.

    there is generally about 1 Japanese old lady who would fit that category :D

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Unearthly
    Registered Users Posts: 7,984 ✭✭✭Unearthly


    I thought it was great. Very gripping throughout.


Advertisement