1917

Discussion in 'Moopy Odeon' started by HeLikedTurner, Jan 11, 2020.

?

Dunkirk-sized hit or a Dad's Army dud?

  1. 10

    2 vote(s)
    25.0%
  2. 9

    1 vote(s)
    12.5%
  3. 8

    3 vote(s)
    37.5%
  4. 7

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. 6

    2 vote(s)
    25.0%
  6. 5

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. 4

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  8. 3

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  9. 2

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  10. 1

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  11. 0

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. HeLikedTurner

    HeLikedTurner User

    Joined:
    May 12, 2019
    Messages:
    1,401
    Location:
    Ireland
    I saw this earlier tonight. Aside from the “one take” gimmick, it’s nothing that we haven’t seen dozens of times before, and they don’t even fully follow through with the gimmick. The dialogue is standard, cliched stuff. The acting and accent by Dean-Charles Chapman was less than convincing. More importantly though, it all felt rather empty. Like a video game, where the characters have to jump through hoops and do challenges to win. I thought Dunkirk did a vaguely similar thing, but in a far less cliched way and much more striking. George MacKay was excellent as usual, and it had a couple of touching moments, but nah. I'm mystified as to why it's being so praised and awarded.

    Jojo Rabbit did a far better job of showing the horrors of war, but in a wildly different and more entertaining way.
     
  2. vespertine

    vespertine In the name of love

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2007
    Messages:
    617
    Location:
    Drowned World
    Sorry but the continuous shot thing is a gimmick. Let's leave it Orson Welles shall we. [​IMG]

    This came out last year and was fabulous. After that, I'm all WWI'd out.

     
    HeLikedTurner likes this.
  3. Phoenix

    Phoenix L to the OG

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    25,265
    It looked good but it was nothing of a story. Just the same old shit. I’m so over these war movies about twinks getting shot and they all hate war blah blah blah

    Even They Shall Not Grow Old was boring, it was all over the place and was more about the restoration than the actual content.
     
  4. Phoenix

    Phoenix L to the OG

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    25,265
    I think I would be less annoyed had it not won as many awards
     
    HeLikedTurner likes this.
  5. VoR

    VoR #Justice4JLo

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    113,141
    Location:
    The Cinema
    Well I thought it was excellent, but I did watch it in an IMAX, which really added to it. (I did the same with Dunkirk).

    Yes, it’s a story that’s been told 1,000 times before but that doesn’t take away how beautifully shot most of it was (forget the one-take illusion, it just looked amazing and so detailed) and I flinched at every bullet.

    I also appreciated the relative lack of violence. A great example of telling without showing.
     
  6. ameraal

    ameraal huzzah!

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Messages:
    44,738
    a 10 from me. despite having a few tiny flaws, i thought it was fantastic - very simple, yet powerful, exposing the horror of war subtly and compassionately. i didn't care for the "one shot" thing i'd heard a bit about beforehand (i hate reading about movies i plan to see prior) but the sequences really were quite awesome.
     
  7. Sheena

    Sheena MAKE IT QUICK, LUCILLE!

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    120,945
    I thought it was fantastic and I cannot believe the lead actor hasn't received any awards buzz- he was not only incredible, the physical demands of the role must have been ridiculous, let alone having to remember the set pieces which went with those "one take" scenes (and yes, I know they weren't LITERALLY one take...)
     
    Ellie likes this.

Share This Page