
But 1917 is a very different proposition. Whereas Paths of Glory was a political film, and indictment of the whole military system, 1917 is very much on the personal level, staying close to two ordinary soldiers, Blake and Schofield (Dean-Charles Chapman and George MacKay).

1917 takes its cue from Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk, immersing the audience in a nightmare reality and tightening the screws. Thomas Newman's impressive music has a similar impact to Hans Zimmer's in Dunkirk and Lee Smith who edited 1917 also edited Dunkirk.
And while 1917 is doing its continuous-tracking, real-time thing it is absolutely gripping and looks like it's shaping up to be a masterpiece.

All the earlier momentum is squandered and the intense emotional engagement of the audience needs to be built up again. And it never really is...

1917 is a good film, but it could have been a great film. It the story could have been designed so that it was all set in real time, and all shot like a continuous take, I believe it would have been an unforgettable masterpiece.
Even as it stands, though, I found it to be more human and moving than Dunkirk, with more engaging and memorable characters – Andrew Scott (the Priest from Fleabag) is particularly brilliant in the role of Lieutenant Leslie. The script is by the director Sam Mendes in collaboration with Krysty Wilson-Cairns, who worked on the TV show Penny Dreadful. It was inspired by the experiences of Mendes's grandfather.
(Image credits: a mere four posters available at the stalwart Imp Awards.)
No comments:
Post a Comment