I should not watch trailers, as I am old, and cynical, which is partially fuelled by often thinking (having experienced, seen, viewed, read many things on route to dotage) that "this seems familiar". Watched the trailer, immediately thought "ah, Gallipoli (the Peter weir film with a young Mel Gibson amongst its cast) transposed to the western front". Hope it's not the case, and that it's a worthy watch on release.
Plot sounds decidedly odd- after all by 1917 the BEF had a very comprehensive network of trench telephone lines, wireless sets and aircraft capable of dropping messages not to mention motorcycle couriers and cyclists who could take messages down the communications trenches. Runners would only be used for relatively short distances not six hour trips.
I saw the trailer for it earlier. I would humbly submit it's a fil that uses the Great War as a backdrop, rather than a film about the Great War. The cynic in me wonders if it will be referred to in a few years time as evidence that, after three years in France, the awful British still hadn't worked out a decent communication system for the field... Gary
Thank you for rapid merging Owen, very much appreciated! Kind regards and best wishes for the season, always, Jim.
Had the opportunity to see this film today. First day of release in Canada. Underwhelmed to say the least. Some odd good bits and it does have a Saving Private Ryan feel to it. In fact, some parts seem borrowed from it and The Revenant. It suffers from an implausible premise, political correctness set in 1917, inexplicable scenes and plot twists along with a disappointing ending.
Mates at work asked if I was going going to see it . They were surprised at my reply. "No . It looks shit."
I will watch the film but, if it’s as bad as Saving Ryan’s Privates and Dunkirk (2017 version) it will be the one and only time.
Still torn between not wanting to spend two hours yelling at the screen and showing support for Commonwealth-themed war films. Funny that there's no outcry over the lack of French representation this time...
After seeing the trailer and an interview with Sam Mendes last week on the Marr Show, I will give it a miss until further notice.
I recently went to watch Midway ... and decided not to watch any War Movies again ... rather go and see a good 'Western'.
Noted. I don’t believe I will enjoy it! And we can watch Westerns with a real WWII hero in them - Audie Murphy Westerns!
I confess, this made it look rather good: Scene from the movie, 1917. : PraiseTheCameraMan I'm giving it a chance.
Ok so why are none of the explosions causing casualties and why is an unarmed soldier running away from an advance not being picked up by an officer or NCO ?
Facile answer: because it's not real Genuine answer: couldn't say without knowing the context--although there are a few people falling over. Mind you, I didn't say it necessarily looked realistic. I'm happy to distinguish between a film and a re-enactment; they have different aims and different ways of achieving them. For the most part, historians are not film-makers, and although modern film-makers often consult historians, historical accuracy is only one of their concerns: it's often sublimated to varying degrees in the name of telling a good story. An awful lot of the 'classic war films' that I grew up loving weren't very realistic, but that didn't stop me enjoying them, now as then, and it doesn't mean that these films can't carry truths through the manipulation of the art-form. In general, audiences will tell them when they've gone too far and neglected the accuracy too much--by rubbishing the film. It's a fine line, and for me a film like say, Dunkirk managed the balance well. We'll see whether 1917 does likewise. The Odyssey wasn't 'realistic' and may not have even been based on verifiable historic events (there's a debate), but it certainly tells us a huge amount about the way that Greeks saw themselves and their place in the world. The only problem I see here are the viewers--probably a majority--who won't look under the bonnet to find out what's real and what's artifice. But I don't think we should carefully tailor the world to ignorant and incurious people like that.