1917


On 6 April 1917, the midst of the First world war, the Western front in Northern France. British General instructs the corporal Blake and his colleague mortally dangerous mission. They have to cross enemy territory, seemingly abandoned by German troops, and deliver the order to abolish the offensive in the 2nd battalion Devonshire regiment, otherwise 1600 soldiers will fall into the trap of the enemy, including the brother of Blake.

Director:
  • Sam Mendes

Stars:
Release Date: 2020-01-10
IMDb icon 8.4/10
  • Country: GB, US
  • Language: English | French | German
  • Budget: $100,000,000
  • Revenue: Cumulative Worldwide $66,672,784
reviews
Carmina Cotter
17 February 2020 | 08:54

The first Association that occurs in the connection film "1917", it remark. But not a writer himself by itself and that chain of images and associations, which is the name drawn for themselves. And here is not only "lost generation" and the First World war, but the images are less global and no less strong: frontline hospitals, trenches, according to the belt is filled with water, vast and bleak a neutral zone and steel overcast sky. It is like I covered all four years of that meaningless merciless war.

"1917" Sam Mendes has become very important as strange as it sounds in the year 2020, a timely statement. Because in our era, "is fraught with tragedy," it is again important to pay close attention to the inhumanity of war, its original unreasonableness and unnaturalness not only human, but and all living things. This last idea is expressed very literally in the way cut down the cherry orchard. But and Remarque used such frontal metaphors, speaking, for example, in the story "On the Western front change" about horses war. Obviously, humanism, understood originally as a love for the person should be understood as love life in all forms — to the animals, the trees, the grass, the ground, mercilessly pitted shells. It love respect life itself — obvious the mysterious fact of our existence.

The angle of view of the Director is set up so that he snatches the man alone with war, showing not only its vulnerability, but and the power to resist death. Corporal Schofield goes a long way — both physical and spiritual. It runs, stumbles, looks around, crawls, floats, and with this is angry, desperate, afraid, filled with determination, hope and tired. And in all this he really alone, even when next to him partner. Idealized front-line friendship, maybe that is why feel acute that it is too fleeting and uncertain. So a friend, partner, companion war — it's always shadow, too variable in overlapping the light of the sun, fire and flares.

Cyclical composition of the film (compare the first and last frame) is not gives optimistic forecast. And wasn't just that Sam Mendez knows that after the First World was and the Second. And that people as if it does not teach its own suffering, and at once it again believes that the next war will be the last.

Many debates have arisen around the effect of a single frame used by the Director and operator Roger Dikins. Not speaking about whether this acceptance is justified, you always want to remember the beginning of the movie, when we see the characters first in a then gradually leaving all create the ground: trenches around them grow a huge number of bags, stones and barriers until two corporal not be finally in the dugout. This, of course, is also a metaphor that speaks about how people deeply in your mind and emotions goes under the thick of the war, ceasing it to understand.

The outcome of this war, will return such as the Schofield or Blake home and will not understand that they do now will be to look around distractedly in the short pause that will take the story of the truce. But some of this generation will gather at the parts of the fragments of their shattered shells and poisoned gas attack lives to tell about a terrible war, the repetition of which is not would never happen...

Catina Wende
16 February 2020 | 12:41

Waltz is not for everyone. Waltzing look smooth, unhurried, and the rhythm of the dance devoid of passion. Instead, the grace of a calm measured movements. But for any are dance rehearsals, work and severe training in order then the quiet rhythm of the waltz the ease of movement seemed natural.

Look in "1917," a bright story, action or scale blockbuster that still after reading "the Little Prince" to say that the product is empty. The film is not about it. He personal, it is quiet, but not insensitive. It as "Hedgehog in the fog" — path goal as step unknown.

The road takes the hero of the husk, revealing the man under the layers of the soldier. He loses his helmet and weapon, he is losing part of herself, sees the beauty of life among the ruined garden. Because life and death waltzing in and are so closely if it tango. Fleeting frames enough to realize that behind the sacred" not war". And the whole point of "1917" is in live brutal moments and full immersion in the way of a soldier through war.

8 from 10

Heddie Carlota
15 February 2020 | 05:09

About the First World war (in the USSR it was called "First world" that actually corresponds to its true essence, since then, fought Nations for deep pockets of their rulers!) shot not so many films as she deserves it. My grandfather then fought on the Balkan front in the Russian expeditionary corps. But here Europe, 1917-th year... Near, close! Because sympathetically!

The plot of the film is simple, as boxers, and really something refers to "Saving private Ryan" Spielberg. Only in our case the soldiers should "go there, do not know where the fact, not know" (or rather, the most important military order!). Said — made (which it should see films). It completely truthful, not sins of the scenario "science fiction" as some modern Russian "military" series. Yes, it was not "our" war, not on the Western front, and therefore I wonder like entered place the "allies" Russian soldiers? Alas, not always compare in favor of the former, especially in the moment "was two, one." But better - judge for yourself!

And that I especially like in this picture, so is that it get exactly 80 shot on one or two mobile cameras, "is a scientist", for  steadycam system. In other words, in the film cinematographer no focuses on the traditional "static" but "nevuchim" in yourself on their assistants aforesaid (and expensive!) "Steadicam", runs for the actors at least for advanced, at least for her... Here so I write: "the film was shot long passages, according to 8 and more minutes...", with minimal "glue" in order to create the impression of a single action. Only here is not shown as one of the soldiers, excuse me, poops, and other insures with a rifle at the ready... And would cost!!! Yeah and I gave (if could!) "1917" "Oscar", at least one at least In the "best cinematography"! Which, incidentally, happened! Not only minds think alike!

faq
How much has 1917 made?
Commercial tv-show fees worldwide today are Cumulative Worldwide $66,672,784.
How much did it cost to make 1917?
According to various sources, the cost of producing the tv-show was at least $100,000,000.
Who is the director of the movie 1917?
This tv-show was directed by Sam Mendes.
What is the genre of 1917?
The tv-show belongs to the genres of Action, Adventure, Fantasy, Anticipated, Best movies 2019.
Who starred in 1917?
Many famous actors starred in this tv-show, here are the names of the most famous: Teresa Mahoney, Benedict Cumberbatch, Richard Madden, Andrew Scott, Mark Strong.
What is 1917 IMDB Ranking?
At the moment, the rating is 8.4.
When was 1917 released?
The start date for this tv-show on USA TV is 2020-01-10.