Jump to content

1917. Sam Mendes makes a war movie with Benedict Cumberbatch in it.


Parliament

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, BornOrange said:

I'm surprised we haven't seen more WW1 movies the last few years since we have been having 100 year anniversaries since 1914.

With our country's 250th birthday coming up, I hope to see some Revolutionary War and Founding Fathers movies.

You’ll get more Fast and Furious Hobbs & Shaw movies whether you like it or not 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like a questionable premise for a WWI movie.  Most battles were massacres and 1,600 more dead was a drop in the bucket.  Also, there were telephones, motor cycles, airplanes and carrier pigeons.  But a dude running with the message was clearly the best option.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy Shit.   Holy Sheeit.

Some of you probably remember how Russian Ark was filmed in one single 96-minute take?  The entire movie, just one take.   I saw it at Dobie when it came out, so I know one of you types had to have as well.

And how the Michael Keaton film, Birdman, was edited to appear as one single take?

Apparently Mendes is actually trying to make it appear as one long single take.  The summary is "Two British soldiers experience one harrowing day while fighting in World War I"

Indiewire is reporting just one long shot, ala Russian Ark, but other sites are reporting more like Birdman.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BornOrange said:

I'm surprised we haven't seen more WW1 movies the last few years since we have been having 100 year anniversaries since 1914.

With our country's 250th birthday coming up, I hope to see some Revolutionary War and Founding Fathers movies.

Yeah, especially with the popularity of stuff like the Blueprint for Armageddon podcasts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cumberbatch is the best actor working today.  If they can make a bear-rape movie to finally get Leo his, they can simply use the brilliance of whatever this guy does to get his.  Until he wins that Oscar, it's all a sham.

I would watch Cumberbatch doing a crossword puzzle and pay $15 to do it.  To say I'm in can't even be measured as to its underwhelmingness.

Edit: joke's on me - I did watch him do a crossword puzzle (Imitation Game!) but didn't pay $15.  Anyway, yes, yes, yes, got damn yes I'm in.

Edited by phdhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, kevwun said:

Seems like a questionable premise for a WWI movie.  Most battles were massacres and 1,600 more dead was a drop in the bucket.  Also, there were telephones, motor cycles, airplanes and carrier pigeons.  But a dude running with the message was clearly the best option.

Do you even Gallipoli, bro?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Trench warfare was such a horrible idea.  But I suppose it was an improvement on standing in ranks and squares and blasting at each other across a field.

They Shall Not Grow Old and a documentary on Gallipoli (it actually got worse once they moved off the beachhead) served as graphic reminders of how hideous it was.  With all the bombardment, they couldn't keep telegraph/telephone lines intact; roads and paths were impassable to all vehicle traffic and damn near to human traffic; and everything was mashed up with corpses and parts-horses and humans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trench warfare was such a horrible idea.  But I suppose it was an improvement on standing in ranks and squares and blasting at each other across a field.
They Shall Not Grow Old and a documentary on Gallipoli (it actually got worse once they moved off the beachhead) served as graphic reminders of how hideous it was.  With all the bombardment, they couldn't keep telegraph/telephone lines intact; roads and paths were impassable to all vehicle traffic and damn near to human traffic; and everything was mashed up with corpses and parts-horses and humans.


I read those last few sentences in the voice of Dan Carlin
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2019 at 4:16 PM, phdhorn said:

Cumberbatch is the best actor working today. 

 

On 8/1/2019 at 5:21 PM, futureman said:

he is?

 

Probably.  He's great in Sherlock, he was great in Imitation Game, Khan in ST, a really good supporting role in Black Mass, and plenty of other movies.  And he's done a ton of Shakespeare, including Hamlet.  The guy's really impressive.  I'll see anything he's in.

Edited by TexArcher
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Trench warfare was such a horrible idea.  But I suppose it was an improvement on standing in ranks and squares and blasting at each other across a field.

They Shall Not Grow Old and a documentary on Gallipoli (it actually got worse once they moved off the beachhead) served as graphic reminders of how hideous it was.  With all the bombardment, they couldn't keep telegraph/telephone lines intact; roads and paths were impassable to all vehicle traffic and damn near to human traffic; and everything was mashed up with corpses and parts-horses and humans.

Link to Gallipoli doc?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2019 at 1:30 PM, kevwun said:

Seems like a questionable premise for a WWI movie.  Most battles were massacres and 1,600 more dead was a drop in the bucket.  Also, there were telephones, motor cycles, airplanes and carrier pigeons.  But a dude running with the message was clearly the best option.

Saw it as a preview to joker. In but your post was the first thing I thought of. Didn’t literally tens of thousands die in one day a couple times in ww1? That and all those other msging systems had to be easier but I’m hoping they address both aspects early on in the movie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
22 minutes ago, DougO said:

I just can't imagine Cumberbatch pulling off a line like, "I reckon this here rifle-gun shoots a might to the right."

Well, given that a British soldier in WWI probably wouldn't have said anything remotely resembling that, I don't guess you have to worry.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw it yesterday.  I'm a huge fan of Dan Carlin's podcast, so I was prepared to be disappointed.  I was not; they did a great job putting the viewer in some horrific circumstances.  

Visuals and cinematography are off the charts. Oscar is in the bag I think.

I'll spoiler my minor critiques:

Spoiler

It was obvious he would  climb out of the river exactly where the company were camped.  Cheap. Seemed like a forced Revenant type episode to give them the dramatic over the waterfall shot.

The final battle was bizarre.  Before the first wave even goes the Germans are shelling the shit out of the them.  Then they go and he runs to the Colonel, gives him the order, and the shelling stops and the wounded start returning immediately.  WTF?  Wouldn't the Germans even shell harder once they realized their plan was realized?  And how did the first wave get the notice to pull back, they were already in full attack mode.  They didn't.  The director used dramatic license to accelerate realistic timelines to fit the story, which is diametrically opposite to how they handled the first 3/4 of the movie.

Great movies end well.  This one didn't.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...