Indoor, Outdoor & Kids' Trampolines

1917 Movie REVIEW


one of the big questions this awards
season along with is Joker a responsible movie is once upon a time in Hollywood
offensive well one of the other big questions that’s emerged late in the
game so it’s not getting quite the same amount of attention and well if it wins
though and I think it might but is 1917 a great movie an oscar-winning worth my
worthy movie or all the other awards it’s picked up so far without the one
continuous shot gimmick and I don’t think it would be I don’t think it is a
great movie without that but it is filmed as one continuous shot that’s I
think the whole reason for it’s the raison d’être for the film right and the
one continuous shot is so well executed so well choreographed and heightened
artistically with lighting choices set design etc that it rises above being a
gimmick I’ve been using gimmick and some of you are like it’s not a gimmick grace
but I think that what it was first conceived it’s like how can we Plus this
movie how can this movie stand out from the other films how can this film be
Oscar worthy Awards worthy and it’s as one continuous shot but it seen again
it’s so well done that it becomes not a gimmick even
though that’s probably how it was initially conceived but it instead
becomes a masterpiece in fact I would say it’s the greatest one-shot movie of
all time Rome gets points for being first also
from a UK director Alfred Hitchcock but this is the best I believe I think
there’s actually no argument there some of you might try to make the argument
but you’re wrong which makes 1917 truly truly noteworthy
in the history of cinema that’s an impressive thing to pull off it’s also
interesting though that you know it’s borrowing on this continuous one shot
that of course was introduced by rope a long time ago the setting is world war
one but because we’re constantly following
our lead characters from behind moving forward that’s actually a choice the
movie makes I’ve put down below a link in the video description to a behind the
scenes short on how this movie was made craftsmanship that went into it and you
don’t your minds already blown I’m sure if you’ve seen this movie but this will
blow your mind even further but it’s one of the things that details is that the
movie makes the choice to always have the camera moving forward because never
backwards because they’re on an important journey they’re racing against
the clock they’re on a mission and that mission has goals both large and small
they go to many different locales which are like levels so the following the
character from behind in those other elements mission elements I think make
1917 also feel quite a bit like playing a video game and I’m not sure if that’s
intentional or not we’ll discuss it more at the acting but it’s very interesting
I would have even more respect for Sam Mendes if he intentionally work that in
there so far it’s not playing so well with younger audiences you know usually
Hollywood divides the demographics twenty five under it up but maybe
hopefully they’ll discover this film it’s like a video game
you know maybe they should they should maybe they should have played that up
more and the advertising they should have had video game publications
highlight that but maybe they were like it’s not worth it potentially
undercutting our awards chances maybe they should play that up after awards
season but anyway if our maybe if I were the universals publicity office I’d have
all those articles ready to go after the day after it probably wins the Oscar
because I would say 1917 is a shining a shining example of cinematic
craftsmanship with too glaring exceptions screenwriting and film acting
so let’s discuss that right screenwriting with the whole brother
angle you know they’re trying to save one of their brothers so who’s on the
who’s with the put the the battalion that’s in danger the movie comes off a
bit like a watered down Saving Private Ryan as I’ve said in other coverage Sam
Mendes is copying the best here Christopher Nolan and Steven Spielberg
Steven Spielberg though is the executive well his companies aren’t produced
producing this movie so I’m sure Spielberg is okay with it
but anyway well it’s also very touching that Sam Mendes he co-wrote the film
based it off of the mapless the stories that his grandfather told him about his
grandfather’s real-life experiences during World War one the story itself
here it’s pretty basic any when you hear that you think back to the story about
like the rat and the rat you know I don’t want to give anything away if you
haven’t seen it but you’re like oh yeah that’s why he worked little anecdotes
like that because his grandfather told that to him and you know it makes sense
because the movie is so strong visually that the script is so bare-bones that
it’s really just an excuse for those visuals now it doesn’t have to be but
here that’s what it is and I mean that make sense I mean if the
movie had better writing and acting I would feel it was a slam-dunk for Best
Picture but as it is it feels to me like a legit choice but a safe choice when
compared to other nominees like Joker and parasite like it would be a little
sad if the Academy was willing to really step out on a limb there and recognize
those films for Best Picture but 1917 is as I said a legit choice so
what’s the problem with the acting well George McKay has a great screen presence
visually with big wide eyes and a lanky frame but I don’t think he says
charismatic as other actors he’s not electric right which again this is my
thoughts on you know we’re acting comes in with the video games that adds to the
video game feel because his characters more avatar and fully developed
character like a real character and you know well that was initially a criticism
I have of the head of the film when I was writing my notes here I thought
maybe that was again a choice that Sam Mendes made maybe again the video game
aspects of the movie are intentional and McKay will be just fine I’m sure a big
franchise Marvel DC or whatever will scoop him up because he’s British after
all and Hollywood has never been able to resist a British actor however there are
two very charismatic cameos in the movie Andrew Scott who is always a delight and
he’s a hundred and ten percent electric whenever he’s on screen he has some of
the funniest lines in the movie he’s just you’re like don’t leave the movie
but he’s it fortunately he’s only on there for a few minutes and then also
Mark Strong who could act with just the lower half of his body when he first
came on screen and you could only steal him from the waist down I was like who’s
that he’s just amazing and I don’t even I can’t even see the top half of his
body the walls bit of stunt cast well I didn’t like I didn’t like him I mean
outside of those two cameos I was a fan in the stunt casting I thought
that it would take you out of the movie be like oh wow Colin Firth this must be
an important movie but again it’s like you have to weigh the loss the pros
versus the con so the con is it slightly takes you out of the movie but the pro
is is it makes it seem like it’s an awards worthy film and that’s obviously
working quite well for this movie but in a Cumberbatch I thought was the one just
didn’t work out of all the cameos especially because he is so not a boss
level character but any means when he shows up at a vital moment in the third
act maybe again that’s also intentional that you know you have this big thing
built up in your head and then it’s just like this regular dude man you know
again I’m still processing it you know I think that this will certainly be a film
that is studied and you know by cinephiles and film students like
because it’s that good so let’s talk about the genius because the story is a
bit weak even while watching the movie you find yourself marveling at its
technical prowess and that adds that’s like that’s almost I think the primary
enjoyment of the film and so maybe that’s why we’ve screenwriting the
acting aren’t great because there that’s not the reason for the film again to
exist like you’re watching it and you’re like they really build all that right do
they build that many trenches and look how different the UK trenches look from
the German trenches that was such a cool thing also how do they do that with the
flares with the shadows and how do they choreograph that how did they go through
that window and again I hope you’ll check out that behind the scenes short
that I have linked down below which has a lot of the answers to those questions
you know even if you haven’t seen the movie I think that that behind the
scenes short might convince you to go because you’re like I can’t believe they
did that again much of the enjoyment of the film
it’s not the story or the characters but seeing the movie pull off this one
continuous shot topping itself from scene to scene in cleverness technical
ability and artistry and that makes Sam Mendes as a director not so much a
writer but again he he put this whole thing together and I think that there
are things that are intentionally underwhelming to play up other aspects
it’s crazy it’s interesting it’s almost it’s like it’s it’s really it is very
nolan e in that regard Nolan’s like damn it so Sam Mendes is
the director Roger Deakins is a cinematographer but then also production
designer Dennis Gastner those are the real stars of the
movie and Gastner by the way has a stunning resume he is a seven-time Oscar
nominee including for this movie I think he’s gonna win here but he already won
back in 1992 when he was a double nominee in the same category double
nomination for Barton Fink and Bugsy what a Sophie’s Choice but the Academy
went with Bugsy so for its cinematic craftsmanship 1917
1917 instantly becomes one of the greatest war movies and just plain
movies ever made even if the script and acting are weak that’s how amazing it’s
one continuous shot is and I wonder if in the near future
anyone will try to top it the challenge to me seems immense but also immensely
appealing because Mendes and his team really throw down the gauntlet here it’s
like wow could I do that and I think you’ll at least see like um you’ve seen
a couple like cool hallway like daredevil for instance had a really good
long shot and it’s final sadly final season but I think so I think you might
see more people using long shots as a continuous takes as a result of this
movie at least four chunks of their film I would just be too tempted to try my
hand at it because it’s so cool but no one can do it in a war movie it’s done
this is the definitive one-shot war movie so that’s my review of 1917 I’m
very curious to hear your own thoughts down below if you haven’t seen it yet
what’s still keeping you because it’s now of course playing why but I think I
think people will be discovering this movie all the way through until the
Oscars air and probably well after that it’s again it’s part of cinematic
history you owe it to yourself to see it even if you’re a casual movie goer so
share your thoughts down below subscribe today and of course as always you can
check out some more videos right now

Reader Comments

  1. I think you Roger Deakins could have gotten more than a name drop. It wouldn't have been possible in the same level without his skill.

  2. I don't get the "he looks bland", "he looks like a regular dude"….If the movie is trying to portrait the reality of war, who fights a war are the normal people, not superhero-like captain america and Thors

  3. It’s interesting that you saw that. As I did as well. I remembered thinking this reminds me of what Nolan would do.

  4. A charismatic lead would chew up the screen, he used the cameos to provide points of interest. I thought it was perfect

  5. I'm starting to question Grace's tastes. Actually I've been questioning it lol. Still love the channel partly bc we disagree so much but sometimes I have NO clue what she's seeing. This is great and the 5th episode of The Mandalorian is by far the worst

  6. I’ve never seen your videos before… but I just got back from seeing the film and was looking for 1917 videos… and I will say EVERY point you made is 100% accurate and exactly how I felt after leaving the theatre.

  7. This is easily your worst review ever……. I pretty much disagree with all your critiques. Stick to Marvel reviews.

  8. George McKay played it perfect. he was a reluctant participant, grief stricken, and then determined to succeed, and a calm relief when it was ending. After the film was over I felt it was a haunting masterpiece. My wife thought it was a good war movie.
    I really liked Joker. That movie stayed with me a couple of days. 1917 should prevail with the over 60% male academy. My clear favorite is Once Upon a Time, it's a comedy/fantasy. I couldn't give a fig about dirty feet, snoring or Bruce Lee's depiction. That falls under winy criticism.

  9. And for goodness sake make sure you see this picture in a cinema with the biggest bright screen with the best sound, do not watch it on a rubbish TV screen even the biggest best rubbish TV screen, this film is what cinema was made for and it is truly breathtaking on that magnificent huge CinemaScope screen or IMAX.

  10. I have to disagree about the acting. I thought the movies was amazing and the actors were great. The scene in the farm between the two was so emotional.

  11. A movie can't be great with a medicocre screenplay and acting. It may be a technical masterpiece, but it's not best picture material. Moreover, iit's NOT even a true continuous one-shot movie! The best true one-take movie would be "Victoria," followed by "Russian Ark"….

  12. Just seen it. Tho mesmerizing in production design and cinematography, it doesn't get past Once upon a time in Hollywood, Parasite and Joker in my Top list of 2019. I also think that Birdman was a better "one shoot" movie btw.

  13. Hi Grace!! Been watching you for years and always appreciate your point of view/ going to see this next week-I’m prepared for the intensity! Thanx !!🤗

  14. Not sure how the acting can be in question. Its a story of a soldier doing his job in an extraordinary situation. Hes surrounded by death and destruction. How charismatic could he be? He’s walking in an ongoing nightmare. Having been a soldier, they nailed his reaction, and interaction with the other characters. He was a reluctant participant from the start, only continuing due to his honor and duty.

  15. For once, I totally agree with all the points she’s made in a movie review. The cinematography and craftsmanship were superb, the acting not the best and Cumberbatch did not fit here! There’s a British TV mini-series, I forget its name now, where Cumberbatch plays a similar role in a World War 1 trench in one or two of the episodes, the whole show in fact, is about the life of this character. But it’s so-so much better than this! A real fleshed our character, not a stand-in with cliched lines coming out of his mouth like in this movie.

  16. It's not a one shot film. And even if you were to see it as a one shot film, it's not the best ever. That honor goes to Russian Ark without any doubt.
    And over the last two years I would even prefer the Norwegian film Utoya July 22 over 1917 on an emotional level. On a technical level Deakins would win between those two films.

  17. Agents of Shield did some 1 shot scenes, that's the only reason I know what that is.

    I'm not going to see it. I don't care for military movies. Too real life for me and I want to go to movies for an escape, not to be reminded of real life.

  18. Great movie! The main character was invincible! LOL Fun fact that some of the scenes were filmed and edited to look like it was a continuous shot.

  19. Grace,

    Thank you as always for a nuanced and entertaining review… And by the way… Your hair is exceptional… Continue to be well… 😉😎

  20. I'm just tired of movies without women, there's enough movies today where I don't have to see a movie with no women, so unless I feel like I have to see it, I don't bother. Even this past year it felt like one movie after another about two guys.

  21. Good film, I liked the one continuous shot method, immersed into the whole journey of the hero characters. Ups and downs it was like watching a playing video game a third person shooter explorer, something like uncharted games. Main actor is brilliant and portrays a solid character person.

  22. Thank you for acknowledging both Rope and Birdman, two incredible films! Just got back from seeing 1917 and I really enjoyed it. Loved the tension, loved the storytelling, and the lead character. I was rooting for him/them the whole time. This year’s voting will be tough, but my vote still goes to Parasite for Best Picture.

  23. Joker had too many plotholes and weird/unrealistic situations to be considered a great movie… But he definitely deserves best actor

  24. The dialogue in much of 'Saving Private Ryan' was rather clumsy. Plus, other than the opening sequence, that's just an all-around overrated film.

  25. I think that despite some minor flaws, which could be easily fixed, this film was amazing and took a huge step forward in terms of delivering a great cinematic experience.

  26. Man those scenes in that war torn town, light, darkness and sound.. its a painting on the dark canvas of WW1.. just blew me away.

  27. I feel like a fast and furious type of movie would benefit from a really good continuous shot… (for a long action scene, not the whole movie)

  28. I’ve just watched 1917 today in the UK. I wasn’t that bothered beforehand and didn’t really know much about the story. I absolutely loved it. What superb storytelling and acting. It was incredibly moving and I was surprised many times. The lead actor was fantastic in my opinion. Highly recommended. People clapped at the end and we don’t really do that over here. Saw it in IMAX. Worth every penny.

  29. Not into war movies. But I’m interested to understand the cinematographic feat everyone keeps talking about in this motion picture.

  30. I actually think George MacKay was great & deserved to be nominated for best actor. The amount of rehearsal and precision this role took was insane. Also, he made each thing he was doing look so real. & Of course he’s an actor, but so many times you see an actor simply running and it looks so bad… MacKay seems to have filmed pretty much everything himself and was so believable while doing it and came across as a real person.

  31. Great cinematography & camera work but the story was too simple. I wish joker will win best picture but i know 1917 will take that award.

  32. I expected more of you. It seems so superficial to look for "electric" in this movie – it was meant to be more subtle and the story of a soldier, an everyday man. But I guess this is what a person's taste turns into when he or she watches too much superhero movies.

  33. You forgot to mention Russian Ark which I think is still the ultimate one shot movie, the whole thing was fully choreographed with no hidden edits

  34. I thought both of the leads acting were impressive and subtle that deserved nominations. One of my favorite war movies in recent years.

  35. ER TV show was shot in long shoots between scenes.
    I've personally haven't seen saving private Ryan but from other reviews they say this is better.

  36. I have to say the action is what plays very well. It help me feel like I was here with this guys the acting was so good. When they lost their breath, so did I.

  37. Agree on everything but MacKay. He looked to me exactly as the type of soldier he potraits. The who "has seen it all","done it all" and just "goes on" until his time runs out. If you've seen people like that you'd know.

  38. I took it as a war story. The script had to be as basic as it is because that's how war is. That movie made me cry because I know this could have happened to me if a war had broken out in my country. It wouldn't have been the same if the story was over the top. That's why superhero movies never make me cry, even Infinity War's ending, despite my love of the MCU.

    1917 is a movie that reminded me how powerful a movie could be. Everything else seems bland by comparison, starting with Disney Star Wars.

    Realistic stakes, writers, that's the gold standard.

  39. I always hate extended long shots cos they are super gimmicky, but it's actually to the film's benefit, as opposed to its detroment.

  40. I'm totally with you, except I like the story and acting too. Not that It is super great but it is total solid and feels very real. I think war is not so complicated IRL too (for the soldiers, not BTS), you go from A to B, shoot all enemies, and when you arive at B alive we will win… more or less.

    But I thought the same about the Technic as you: "It's unimportant how the story is. Because of that camera work the Movie is great!". And that One-Shot is indeed the best I have ever seen. Birdman, Irreversible, The Raid… there are some great movie in that regard but this is "The One"!

  41. George McKay is amazing. He was given a cocky, tough guy survivor of a great battle… that is against type. "War does not make one great." He's just a guy.

  42. I had no complaints about this movie & I love how it makes me feel like I was in the war, not just watching .Fantastic work
    Also what character going through that situation in a war is charismatic …

  43. "is Joker a responsible movie?" lmao. I know that all of the Hollywood morons are asking themselves that, but what a stupid fucking question.

  44. I saw 1917 yesterday on MLK Day and enjoyed it. Don't think my fav, Once Upon A Time In Hollywood, will win Best Picture. Joker won't win either. Neither one are responsible at what they're showing or even have a moral.

  45. Sometimes I wonder if Grace had seen the movie. The camera was not always behind them. There was quite a few scenes where the camera is going backwards while focusing on the characters.
    As far as the story was weak, how, how, how! Because it wasn't over complicated. Consider how a simple objective could have many obstacles, which sums up life in a nutshell. Acting, weak, what were you looking for. Were you looking for a Henry V with Kenneth Branagh moment. Sometimes a persons appearence don't match the persona of their personality.

  46. I found that the acting was great and suiting for the story. I was honestly surprised how well the "established actors" blended in. Also, I immensly related to the main characters, so I guess the acting worked on me 🙂 Overall, I loved this movie. I really don't have a problem with the simplicity of the story, because it is so realistic. I think it's not supposed to be a popcorn movie, but to make the audience feel like they're actually in the trench. For me, it worked perfectly 🙂

  47. Combat veterans: The story and acting was very authentic to the reality of war
    Grace: Nyah Nyah the script and acting wasn’t great I know better nyah

  48. schofield wasn't meant to be ''electric'' or charismatic, he's meant to be a cautious and reluctant fellow who's to him self while blake is the outgoing confident optimist, it's almost like you wanted his character to have a completely different personality and approach which in turn changes his character arc throughout the whole movie. and i was curious when you talked about a weak story, but when you got to it, you meant that the fact the story is simple means it's weak…..a simple story does not = weak story. a weak story is one filled with poorly executed characters, a plot that makes no sense and brakes pre established rules….what you pointed out in your ''weak screenplay'' segment has nothing of the sort.

  49. The story was certainly weak, and on shot thing to me was not only a gimmick but distracting….although beautifully shot, I was more interested in how they pulled off the shots rather than what was going on in the film and trying to figure where the cuts would have been made.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *