Sam Mendes’ one-shot war epic is an impressive technical feat that fails to be a great film.
Many moviegoers will marvel at the sheer spectacle that is 1917, as it is impossible not to ask the question of “How the hell did they do this?” time and again throughout the film. As Corporal Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Corporal Schofield (George McKay) journey across hellish trenches, no-man’s land, and crumbling country towns on their way to deliver a message calling off a British advance which is headed for a deadly trap, every camera movement and set piece is as beautiful as the next from the first to the last frame. You truly feel as if you are crawling through the disgusting concoction of blood and guts that these two young men perpetually find themselves in, perhaps you’re even able to smell the stench of rotting flesh all around them. However, while the Mendes’ one-shot trick works incredibly well when all of its elements connect, I’m left wondering if employing such a visual style was merely an interesting way to tell this story, rather than the best way.
The one-shot film has been seen more than a handful of times at this point, with the most notable in recent memory being Birdman, which took home the Academy Award for Best Picture at the 2015 ceremony. While the prospect of a single-take war film may appear to lend itself to more visual possibilities than a comedy set inside a Broadway theater, the nature of 1917 ’s plot results in a rather boring visual style for grudgingly long periods of time. Many will argue that the endless tracking shot works to bring us along on this epic journey in real time. However, the simple fact is that many of the transitional periods from one leg of the mission to the next both look and feel awfully similar, and the payoffs at the end don’t always justify the overly long progression to get there. Strip away the set pieces of utter destruction around them, and what you have is just two guys walking from one place to the next with no immediate sense of danger on more than a few occasions.
Regardless of its shortcomings, 1917 is still an awe-inspiring piece of filmmaking that accomplishes what it sets out to do more often than it fumbles. Much will be said about the superb action scenes of the film, but don’t let the quieter moments go unappreciated, like a soldier sitting idly amongst a group of unfamiliar friends enjoying each other’s company, while he can only think of the best friend he recently lost. All in all, 1917 is destined to be an endlessly rewatchable war film with long shots that will go down as some of the greatest in film history, but not a great film.
BY: Quinten Sansosti
Recent Comments