In1998, legendary director Steven Spielberg made what many still consider to be the God of War films, Saving Private Ryan. It is regarded as one of the greatest and most sincere dramas about brotherhood, human fragility, and the Hell of War. It went on to receive a few Oscars but lost Best Picture to (of all films) Shakespeare in Love. I myself can remember seeing it in theaters and I can still feel the trembling in my chest and the tears in my eyes. Since that film's release, many other War movies have tried to match or even one-up Saving Private Ryan with varying degrees of success, but none of them ever really reached the same level of sincerity or impact. Now, over twenty years later, I think we may have finally received a genuine contender for the spiritual successor to the God of War films in the fantastically crafted World War One epic, 1917.
Set in the tail end of the First Great War, the story follows two young soldiers: Lance Corporal Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Lance Corporal Schofield (George MacKay). Blake has an older brother in another regiment closer to the front lines that are on the verge of a heavy attack against the Germans. However, what they don't know is that the Germans have been anticipating their attack in preparation of a trap allowing the Germans to annihilate over sixteen-hundred British troops, including Blake's older brother. Unable to send a radio message to the front lines, Blake and Schofield are sent on a mission to hand-carry a message to the other regiment across a vast No-Mans-Land calling off the attack. So begins the race against time to save their fellow soldiers and Blake's brother.
The main attraction of the film is that it plays out in real-time. That is, it is another feature-length film to be shot (seemingly) in one continuous take. Utilizing classic editing techniques, the whole film plays out in one go save for one brief time jump in the middle. This isn't the first movie to pull off the one long take trick. Alfred Hitchcock's Rope and Alejandro G. Iñárritu's Birdman are a few that come to mind. The attraction of the long take, at least to me, is allowing the scene to feel more visceral. Because there are no cuts (apparently) we as an audience are with the characters every step of the way, thus we feel the most as though we are part of the proceedings. In the case of 1917, it's so much more than that. The film boasts a new level of awe-inspiring presentation with camera acrobatics the likes of which I cannot remember seeing anywhere else. Every time the moment transitioned to another point in the story, I found myself utterly amazed at how often I genuinely forgot I was watching a film. That is when I wasn't geeking out wondering how the hell they moved the camera along multiple bodies of water so fluidly. It is an achievement in cinematography that deserves any and all praise it gets.
Speaking of the cinematography, it is, needless to say, absolutely gorgeous. Cinematographer Roger Deakins, one of my all-time favorites, and who previously collaborated with director Sam Mendes before (more on him in a moment), once again demonstrates his uncanny talent for creating striking images with minimal lighting. Most of the lighting in the film is natural with a few darks scenes lit by flashlights or fire sources. All of which looks as gorgeous as only Mr. Deakins can deliver.
The set and production design is arguably the real main character of the film. Everything seen on the screen was hand-built and designed. Every trench and bombed-out town was painstakingly crafted with incredible detail and uncanny realism. Resulting in visual storytelling that is as visceral and beautiful as it is horrific in its subject matter. Much like Saving Private Ryan, the film is not afraid to showcase the true tragedy of war.
Director Sam Mendes, who previously made the incredible classic American Beauty and one of the better James Bond films Skyfall, got the inspiration for this film from his Grandfather, Alfred Hubert Mendes, who was a messenger on the front lines in World War One. As a filmmaker, Mendes is generally a good talent to behold. Despite his films often carrying a dark and seemingly sad tone, they never feel utterly depressing. In a strange way, he has a talent for presenting grim stories with an undertone of optimism. Not so much through levity, although his films do still feature some of that, but rather in small reminders of the better parts of human nature. This very feeling makes its way all throughout the film.
However, the MVP award must go to the music. Composed by Thomas Newman, the film's soundtrack practically carries the movie. It never stops and yet is never overbearing. Playing the right notes at just the right time, going somber when needed, rising up again to enhance the visuals even further, and adding subtle tension to the atmosphere at all times, it almost becomes a character itself. It may very well be the best film score I have heard all year.
1917 is a film I had been looking forward to all year, and I am glad to see that my excitement has paid off. This is an achievement in visual storytelling the likes of which is rarely pulled off so beautifully. While I do caution some viewers for graphic violence and images, it is appropriate given the subject matter and is all in service to the story. This is one film that deserves a high place in cinema history.
Sam Mendes, all I have left to say to you now is this: You are forgiven for Specter.
Is this movie worth seeing?
Yes.
Is it worth seeing in Theaters?
Yes.
Why?
It's a technological and narrative achievement that must be experienced on the big screen to be fully appreciated. Don't be ashamed to cry if you are so inclined...I wasn't.
Ladies & Gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment