- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Watched 1917 last night, I was a little dissapointed
Posted on 6/10/20 at 8:42 am
Posted on 6/10/20 at 8:42 am
Spoilers
Obviously it was beautifully shot, the set pieces were incredible, the costumes, gear, vehicles, trenches etc.... were all so perfectly done it was almost like a documentary from that aspect of the movie.
The story and characters though, it just didn't feel that exciting or important considering the subject matter. Even when Blake died, it was sad, but not that sad, it didn't feel that intense to me. I think the movie was trying to show how quickly things change and how fast you have to move on in war, from Blake dying, to teaming up with the truck, to getting shot, to caring for a baby, and then never really getting to find out what happened to anyone you met on the way. It just didn't really grip me.
This movie should have been perfect for me, I majored in history, I love history, I teach history, the movie felt like 1/2 a movie and 1/2 a documentary and fell flat to me because of that.
Maybe I would have enjoyed it more in theaters
Obviously it was beautifully shot, the set pieces were incredible, the costumes, gear, vehicles, trenches etc.... were all so perfectly done it was almost like a documentary from that aspect of the movie.
The story and characters though, it just didn't feel that exciting or important considering the subject matter. Even when Blake died, it was sad, but not that sad, it didn't feel that intense to me. I think the movie was trying to show how quickly things change and how fast you have to move on in war, from Blake dying, to teaming up with the truck, to getting shot, to caring for a baby, and then never really getting to find out what happened to anyone you met on the way. It just didn't really grip me.
This movie should have been perfect for me, I majored in history, I love history, I teach history, the movie felt like 1/2 a movie and 1/2 a documentary and fell flat to me because of that.
Maybe I would have enjoyed it more in theaters
15
Posted on 6/10/20 at 8:53 am to Tiger1242
quote:I could see that. I kind of feel the same way. I’ve only seen it in theaters and I feel it might lose something in my living room.
Maybe I would have enjoyed it more in theaters
I’ve seen all the best picture movies sans little women and felt that it should’ve won best director just for the incredible techniques and the way it was shot. It was a stunning movie to look at. And I was very captivated during the movie.
This post was edited on 6/10/20 at 8:57 am
Posted on 6/10/20 at 8:59 am to Tiger1242
I enjoyed it. But there were parts it felt like were specifically added simply to score points with the academy and get awards/nominations.
Not necessarily bad scenes, just felt forced or out of place/sequence at times. All in all it was a fun theater experience.
Not necessarily bad scenes, just felt forced or out of place/sequence at times. All in all it was a fun theater experience.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 9:01 am to Tiger1242
I agree. But like you said
I just couldnt stop seeing Tommen being that same clueless, spinless little boy.
quote:i think this is what it captured. Friend volunteers friend to help with a mission because he wants to save his brother. And he dies, yet the firend has to follow through with it because it is war.
I think the movie was trying to show how quickly things change and how fast you have to move on in war
I just couldnt stop seeing Tommen being that same clueless, spinless little boy.
This post was edited on 6/10/20 at 9:03 am
Posted on 6/10/20 at 9:09 am to kciDAtaE
quote:
But there were parts it felt like were specifically added simply to score points with the academy and get awards/nominations.
Not necessarily bad scenes, just felt forced or out of place/sequence at times.
Yea I think it was a movie made for people who love the technical aspects of making a movie. Incredible camera work, incredible sets, incredible organization to get all of that in just a handful of long shots, incredible editing to make it look like one seamless shot. For someone like me who watches movies to learn, get wrapped up in a story, and feel for characters, that wasn't there, the plot and story development was secondary in this movie to the logistics and scenery
Posted on 6/10/20 at 9:10 am to Tiger1242
quote:
The story and characters though, it just didn't feel that exciting or important considering the subject matter.
it's not really that type of movie
this is a technical/spectacle film. it's not a movie centered around plot or character development. at best either are pawns for commentary for ideas/criticisms that are not directly shown on screen
Posted on 6/10/20 at 9:13 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
this is a technical/spectacle film. it's not a movie centered around plot or character development. at best either are pawns for commentary for ideas/criticisms that are not directly shown on screen
Agreed, and for someone who appreciates that stuff and how it improves or even makes movies great, but doesn’t watch movies for the camera and those aspects, the movie was beautiful but just okay
Posted on 6/10/20 at 9:13 am to Tiger1242
It was a good, beautiful, enjoyable movie.
Not great.
That's all I can really say about it.
Not great.
That's all I can really say about it.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 10:35 am to SG_Geaux
Agree with everything said here. Visually captivating and original. Capturing the "scorched earth" aspect of war was well done with the rats, craters, bodies, and burned out landscape. However, the story and characters were nothing special.
Well worth the watch though.
Well worth the watch though.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 10:39 am to Tiger1242
i watched it on a plane ride recently on my laptop and i was obviously getting a reduced experience compared to what it was supposed to be in theaters.
i enjoyed it. i know it was trickery, but i thought the single camera shot of the whole movie was done very well from a cinematography standpoint.
i do agree about the characters falling flat, but that's a bit of the problem dunkirk has and i don't hold against it.
i always think that when you're filming an "event" type movie, you have the decision to build characters vs. show the event. Mendes obviously tried to frame the war through two characters eyes without making you invest in them and did a good job if that was his intent.
when tommen died i didn't have an ounce of emotion about it.
i enjoyed it. i know it was trickery, but i thought the single camera shot of the whole movie was done very well from a cinematography standpoint.
i do agree about the characters falling flat, but that's a bit of the problem dunkirk has and i don't hold against it.
i always think that when you're filming an "event" type movie, you have the decision to build characters vs. show the event. Mendes obviously tried to frame the war through two characters eyes without making you invest in them and did a good job if that was his intent.
when tommen died i didn't have an ounce of emotion about it.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 11:40 am to Tiger1242
it's fine. technically very impressive. but not at all one of the great war films.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 12:48 pm to Tiger1242
I watched in a theater and thought added a lot to it. I felt like the overall sense of adrenaline being a constant but also spiking at times was done well. It seemed to give a good feel for what it was like to fight in a war during those times.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 12:51 pm to Tiger1242
Best war movie of the 2010s.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 4:47 pm to Tiger1242
It was well shot and I believe it's a period which needs to be remembered. I think the movie did a good job with the overall subject.
But it wasn't spectacular, imo.
As I said before, Tolkien was better. Showed a more human side of things.
Also , Peter Jackson's colorized documentary of WW1 film is stunning.
Chariots of Fire, while after the war, also captures the period of time quite well.
But it wasn't spectacular, imo.
As I said before, Tolkien was better. Showed a more human side of things.
Also , Peter Jackson's colorized documentary of WW1 film is stunning.
Chariots of Fire, while after the war, also captures the period of time quite well.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 5:20 pm to Tiger1242
I liked it but it seemed like the story was made for some Disney/mass-market appeal rather than a meaningful portrayal of the war.
I'll take what I can get when it comes to big WWI movies (same for all other historical movies in an age of Marvel) but there were obviously compromises.
I'll take what I can get when it comes to big WWI movies (same for all other historical movies in an age of Marvel) but there were obviously compromises.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 5:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
it's not really that type of movie
this is a technical/spectacle film. it's not a movie centered around plot or character development. at best either are pawns for commentary for ideas/criticisms that are not directly shown on screen
Exactly. OP wanted them to stop the action and sit around the campfire and shoot the shite like that horrible scene in Saving Private Ryan where Matt Damon talks about him and his brothers fricking the ugly girl. Its not that kind of movie and is better for keeping the action going. And it was awesome in the theater and you should have known that would be the case. Its a great one mission war movie.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 6:03 pm to rebelrouser
quote:
Exactly. OP wanted them to stop the action and sit around the campfire and shoot the shite like that horrible scene in Saving Private Ryan where Matt Damon talks about him and his brothers fricking the ugly girl.
????? Why are you being a dick?
Posted on 6/10/20 at 7:41 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
Maybe I would have enjoyed it more in theaters
You would.
I absolutely loved it and don't really have any complaints about it, but you makes some good points.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 7:49 pm to Tiger1242
Sorry. Shouldn't have used you in that example. Let's say people in general. I think it was a great film.
Posted on 6/10/20 at 10:06 pm to Tiger1242
Filmmaking has always struggled bringing ww1 to the big screen
Trench warfare
It was an ugly war and a lot of directors struggled capturing it
Thou shalt grow old was neat to see that old footage
Trench warfare
It was an ugly war and a lot of directors struggled capturing it
Thou shalt grow old was neat to see that old footage
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News