1917

[bear88]

Posted: 1/11/20 at 5:20am

The first two-thirds of Sam Mendes' World War I story of a message needing to be delivered across No Man's Land to another British battalion is compelling. The final third gets a little too contrived and showy but it ends on a graceful note. I've read some complaints that 1917 is just a technical exercise of directorial showmanship, but I don't share it. I cared a lot about what happened to these guys. And while it isn't really an anti-war film, it certainly makes you want to avoid being in one. The actors who play the leads both do a fine job, and Andrew Scott is a standout in a small supporting role. 

Updated On: 1/11/20 at 05:20 AM

[hork]

Posted: 1/11/20 at 12:35pm

I wouldn't call them unknowns. They're both former child actors who have been around a while and have had several prominent roles over the years. But I agree, this movie is more than a mere technical exercise. The performances really sell the piece. Andrew Scott created a vivid character in just a few minutes of screen time, and even Richard Madden's brief performance is deeply moving. I loved this movie.

[bear88]

Posted: 1/11/20 at 2:09pm

I updated my post to remove the ‘unknowns’ description. I had read that but hadn’t done any research myself. While the actors are certainly unknowns to American audiences, and to me in particular, each has appeared in a lot of films and TV shows in recent years, winning several awards.

[nmartin]

Posted: 1/11/20 at 2:36pm

SPOILERS BELOW     SPOILERS BELOW

I saw it today and very much liked; however, I am unsure about something. Whose family were in the pictures Schofield pulls out at the end? Schofield's or Blake's?

[MichelleCraig]

Posted: 1/11/20 at 3:58pm

Saw this last night and was absolutely blown away. I really want to write more, but I don't want to spoil anything for those who haven't seen it.

I will say it's one of the best examples of a film "that you really need to see on the big screen"...