User reviews

Watching 1917, the audience might discern its apparent single-shot presentation, a testament to director Sam Mendes' remarkable craftsmanship. Is it filmed in one shot? A minimum of 34 discreet edits were subtly introduced to create the illusion of a continuous shot. This prompts speculation about the extent of the set, given the limited number of cuts, particularly within a wartime backdrop.

Transitioning to the narrative and cast evaluation, the film embarks on a riveting journey. The ensemble, including delivers a commendable performance. The artistic nuances employed to bolster the script, characters, pivotal moments, and conflicts resonate as an exquisite touch.

The film doesn't merely captivate with its story but also portrays a natural splendor, subtly showcasing its essence. I couldn't recall watching any movie with only 2 female characters including a baby girl.

My experience was satisfying although it doesn't rely heavily on suspense or thrills. It is a delightful watch!

It's a stunning watch from start to finish. The amount of work that went into this film alone deserves your attendance, and even then, the story never stalls, and has a fair balance between war and humanity, and has some of the most incredible camera work I've seen in a while. It's hands down my favorite film of 2019.

I am not particularly a huge fan of war films. Much of it is because they too often glamorize war or present bullet-proof heroes who are anything but realistic. However, I am glad I watched "1917" because neither of these problems exist in the story plus it's a very good depiction of war and the awfulness of it...particularly WWI.

The story is very simple...two lance corporals are sent on a mad dash across enemy territory to alert troops on the other side of this no-man's land that they are walking into a trap. The film shows their journey and the thrilling finale.

The plot is among the simplest I've seen in a war film and the movie is really about action and the men's struggle to sneak across the battlefield and alert their troops....simple. Yet it was made so thoughtfully and realistically that it really worked well. A brilliantly made film...among the best I've seen about war. But it's also very graphic and unpleasant....so be forewarned.

Last night COL Ferry and I (COL Coldwell, both USA) were able to watch the new WWI film, 1917, before it has national release. It is a cinematographic feast for the eyes, long expansive shots that follow the protagonists as they execute their mission. It does not hide the horrors that existed in trench warfare, it shows them for their brutality and abundance. (My great uncle died as a consequence of his service fighting in the trenches, mustard gas poisoning). In many ways it reminded me of Saving Private Ryan.

For those who have served in combat (I have deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan), I cannot tell you if the film will be too difficult to watch, it might well be, especially if incoming artillery is a trigger. For me, as the camera travels a few inches above the dirt advancing slowly up a berm, my response was visceral. I was taken back to the patrols we walked in Afghanistan, not knowing what was around the corner; not relaxing heightened vigilance, not knowing if there would be an IED, a child wearing a suicide vest, a sniper taking aim. For the protagonists in this film (as for all who served and are serving) surviving the climb up the berm, there is no sigh of relief, no respite from the fear of uncertainty. They (we) survive to move forward to face more uncertainty.

Watching allowed me to pay homage to my great uncle, and the approximate 800,000 other Brits who were killed or died as a consequence of their service. (Germany lost over 2 million soldiers in the war). Estimates put the total casualty numbers for both military and civilians at 40 million, half killed or died from wounds/infection.

I rate this film as 10/10, for many reasons. Directing, acting, set design, cinematography, musical score, the raw emotion it invokes. Some critics have said they never felt a connection with the characters, I suspect they never served in combat. While the brotherhood (including female War Fighters) is strong, there is also a common characteristic possessed by all War Fighters, the ability to focus on a mission and suppress emotion, even as those around the Fighter fall. This was the quality I recognized in the actors and why the viewer doesn't "bond" with the main protagonists; we, the viewer, were on the mission with them, we grieve as we can and move on.

Watch if you will, but know there is no pleasure in watching and the film will grab you and the beginning and not let you go. Even though we know the outcome of WWI, there is no joy, there is no peace. Watch because it will allow you a glimpse at the horror and brutality of war; reflect on their service and sacrifice. Note, as we (the viewer) are "walking" through the trenches, glancing shots of the young soldiers shows them with flat affect, isolation, almost apathy; this is the face of "shell shock," what we know call post-traumatic stress disorder.

For original WW1 footage, watch "They Shall Never Grow Old," an exceptional documentary.

I sat in a packed yet silent theater this morning and watched, what I believe to be, the next Academy Award winner for the Best Picture. I'm not at all a fan of war movies but I am a fan of great movies....and 1917 is a great movie. I have never been so mesmerized by set design and direction, the mass human emotion of this film is astonishingly captured and embedded magically in the audience. It keeps running through my mind...the poetry and beauty intertwined with the raw misery of war. Treat yourself....see this movie!

There are some great WW1 films out there, the granddaddy of them all in my view being 1930's 'All Quiet on the Western Front'. Also appreciate many of the actors here, though they are in cameo roles, and Sam Mendes as a director (of the films of his seen, almost all, 'Spectre' is the only one to not do much for me). Roger Deakins and Thomas Newman are masters in their field, Deakins is one of the best cinematographers in the business and Newman's score for 'Road to Perdition' is a favourite.

'1917' was seen for all those reasons. As well as because of the critical acclaim, with it being considered as one of 2019's year's best films. After seeing it, my thoughts are that the acclaim for '1917' is richly deserved in one of the best and most powerful films that year. It did connect a lot with me, due to watching it not long after reading the harrowing war diaries of my great-grandfather (who fought in the war and was mustard gassed and blinded).

First and foremost, '1917' is a visual and technical achievement. It is beautifully and evocatively designed and Deakins' cinematography, with awe-inspiring and never gimmicky use of the long unbroken one take technique, is nothing short of masterful. Mendes ensures that the tension, even in the slower moments, never slips, keeping the intensity (at its best almost nerve-shredding) going.

Newman provides another hauntingly beautiful score, that does stir the emotions in the latter parts of the film when things become more urgent. The sound is thrilling in its authenticity, so much so it was like being there. The film is intelligently scripted and to me the two lead characters, especially Scofield, were easy to get behind, interesting and their bond came over as realistic. The story is engrossing throughout, it briefly loses a little momentum just before the climax perhaps, but the first half is emotionally powerful and the climax is unpredictably intense.

Such a good job is done too with showing the full horrors of war from a visual standpoint, a psychological one and in the unflinching action. Without going too far, the point of view not being hammered home. '1917' benefits hugely from the splendid lead performance of George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman is strong too despite his role not being quite as meaty. The cameos from Benedict Cumberbatch, Colin Firth, Richard Madden and Andrew Scott manage to make big impressions in short screen time.

Overall, brilliant and powerful film. One of the best films personally watched in 2020. 10/10.

This film is overwhelming. I have nothing further to add, other than the compelling need for eternal remembrance to those who sacrificed their lives in any way, we can not fathom. We, citizens of any country, today, should feel ourselves lucky and blessed to exist. A Happy New Year to all. George from Hellas. NB: do not give it a second thought; watch it; even if this genre is not your cup of tea. After all, it is much more than a feature film. It's a massive dedication to unselfishness. Do yourself a favour and watch it. And then watch it once more.

1917 is a poem. Is the most deep, impressive and realistic way of seeing what kinds of things happened in WWI. This movie made me leave the movies with tears in my eyes as if I have had a time travel experience to the World War I, and then waking up and realizing how wonderful are the times we are living in. 1917 is a must see movie for everyone.

Guaranteed Oscar. A technical and visual triumph. Bravo Roger Deakins!

Great cinematography. Best part for me was the first 15 minutes. The film loses a bit of steam in the final act but the journey to get there is enjoyable and technically brilliant.

Don't listen to the critics saying this movie is boring. This movie is one of the most tense and exciting movies I've seen in years. Amazing cinematography and overall amazing experience of a movie.

Sam Mendes' war drama is set during World War I and very personal to him, as it tells a story his grandfather used to tell him when he was still a young lad. Dedicated to Mendes' hero, this drama cuts deep when we join two young soldiers on a mission to deliver a message that could possibly save thousands of fellow combatants.

Filmed and edited as if it was one long take, the camera never leaves our main protagonists, Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Schofield (George MacKay), out of its sight. Mendes (Skyfall) and co-writer Krysty Wilson-Cairns (Penny Dreadful) therefore corner themselves by relying on this kind of linear storytelling, to tell a very focused but at times a somewhat thin tale. Some of the scenes are so empty, it will for sure test audiences' patience. Technical, '1917' is a true feast for the eyes and ears.

Roger Deakins' (Blade Runner 2049) cinematography is once again breathtakingly superior to anything else you've seen this year, and for sure will be the one thing people unanimously praise. Sound editing/mixing, visual effects and production design are all outstanding. These are the things, people will remember. It is Thomas Newman's (Passengers) score that elevates every moment happening in front of you, intensifying the emotions brought by our main characters. And although MacKay (Captain Fantastic) and Chapman (Game of Thrones) do a pretty phenomenal job at capturing the true essence of their characters going through a literal hell, it's the side characters with little-to-no screen time who steal their spotlight. Andrew Scott (Fleabag), Mark Strong (Shazam!), Richard Madden (Rocketman) and Benedict Cumberbatch (Dr. Strange) are checkpoints along the way, but man, do they impress with the few lines they're given.

1917 is without a doubt a technical masterpiece, that will inspire many filmmakers, but I can't feel a bit let down. As an overall film, it wants to play a heavy tune on your heartstrings, but can't reach that level of sentiment, because the focus on technicalities pulled me out of the story. It for sure is one of the better films 2019 has brought to the big screen, yet a bit more focus on the script could've made this the cinematic masterpiece of the decade. Nonetheless, I recommend watching this on the biggest screen possible and enjoy another fine piece of cinema brought to you by Sam Mendes.

This is hands down one of the greatest war movies to ever hit the silver screen along with being very unique. The hell of the WWI battlefield is a subject that hasn't been covered in a long time and Mr. Mendes executes this perfectly. A movie like this couldn't have been made 50 years ago but with today's advances in film making along with a large studio budget Mr. Mendes takes us through an adventure every bit as harrowing as Saving Private Ryan and Thin Red Line.

The use of the single shot was brilliant as it brings the viewer along in the trenches and further adds to the realism to the film. I was surprised to hear that this was gimmicky effect from some critics, I feel Mr. Mendes nailed it brilliantly with the help of some fantastic cinematography. The set pieces were so realistic and detailed, a lesser director would've focused more on them but for this ride the camera never stops moving and it's a benefit to the film.

There was no slow part in the movie and the audience is enthralled with the journey from the first minute of the film. The dialogue was great and certainly was a key component of making the single shot method work here. There is no pointless exposition in the movie.

This isn't a piece to glorify war but rather demonstrate how one can be brave all the while showing their vulnerabilities and fear that any normal person would feel in that type of situation. There are no gratuitous bits in the film to exemplify heroism, just a simple story that allows the characters to shine and define bravery on their own terms.

From the acting, to the score, to the cinematography, editing and overall direction of the film Mr. Mendes absolutely knocked it out of the park. This isn't just one of the best war movies of all time, I believe it's truly one of the best pieces of film to ever grace the big screen. 1917 will leave you breathless and for many like myself, in tears when the journey comes to and end.

Bravo!!

The entire movie made to look like it's shot at one single take, this is possible because of extraordinary talented 14 times Academy Award nominee cinematographer Roger Deakins. This man is a genius, the movie is shot beautifully. it is mesmerizing to a watch world war 1 movie like it is happening right in front of you. The pacing is phenomenal. The only real flaw in the movie is that there are no great character building movements like other war movies but that is also intentional because, the main intention or motive is to save lives and not focus on characters in the movie and that works.

I saw a preview screening about two hours ago and I am still in shock. This is the best war movie I have seen in a decade. The shots Mendes uses and what he demands of his actors is nothing short of incredible. If you get a chance this will probably be the last must see movie of 2019. I will be seeing this again on release.

It's an experience, certainly, and I do recommend seeing it in a good cinema.

Deakins was fantastic, absolutely, some stunning cinematography.

But I found the movie incredibly disappointing overall. Feels like a missed opportunity, a very interesting experiment that just does not quite work.

Most of the movie felt like a series of Call Of Duty cut scenes, a video game you had no control over, a really odd feeling, and some of the scenes were like a video game in content with reality stretched to almost breaking point.

To me it was an adventure movie rather than a 'war movie', much more like Indiana Jones than Saving Private Ryan... To relate it to another movie I felt it reminded me very much of The Revenant in story and style, but like that movie it felt rather empty to me.

Absolutely incredible - I've seen it 3 times in cinemas and each time I find myself even more in awe of, blown away by, and in love with this film. It's thrilling, tense, gentle, satisfying, and deeply beautiful. As a huge fan of the war genre, this is unlike any other film I've ever seen - it finds its true strength in its unexciting, human moments rather than in the mindless chaos of firefights, while still managing to have some of the most exhilarating and edge-of-your-seat segments I've ever seen. Schofield is a brilliant and unconventional choice for the lead character, and his empathy and softness have made him one of my favourite characters of all time and an exceptionally rare example of how quiet tenderness truly can carry a war film better than loud banter and hyper-masculine bluster so often does. Krysty Wilson-Cairns is a genius and George Mackay said so much more in Schofield's silence than most actors could hope to in the grandest monologue. A masterpiece.

You're on a mission to deliver key instructions, that will halt significant, headcount reductions, but to get to where you need, you'll have to weave, bereave, believe, avoiding terminal pitfalls, lethal obstructions.

Leaving you under no illusion of the hell suffered by those during The Great War, telling an amazing tale of bravery, determination, conviction and courage, through spectacular cinematography, editing, set design and dialogue, all layered through huge performances by the cast, none more so than that from George MacKay, who carries you, as well as a great burden, through the torment and the trenches of man's inhumanity to man.