Certainly the most interesting aspect of 1917 is the resulting effect of anchoring characters in environment, and providing a sense of the sheer, awesome scale of the war, as in early scenes that have our couriers skirting massive, muddy craters left by heavy ordnance. Technical brio, however, cannot redeem all that is callow and crass in Mendes’s movie: the dialogue is pure placeholder stuffing, the approach a clumsy collision of the Assassin’s Creed video games and Elem Klimov’s Come and See; the muck-daubed stars register as 21st-century theater kids who’ve been instructed to issue routine “Fucks” for purposes of establishing “raw” authenticity; and the lyric grace notes—a field of cherry trees chopped down in blossom, an abandoned baby being nurtured in a basement in a bombed-out cityscape—strain for a pathos that’s out of reach. A late-film cameo by Benedict Cumberbatch gives the game away: dig a millimeter beneath the surface of the ubiquitous art-directed grime of 1917 and you’ll catch the antiseptic smell of the Great Anglo-American Prestige Picture, never more emotionally tidy or stylistically turgid.
I'm not sure another century of ww1/ww2 gung ho propaganda is really worth an oscar tbh.
Haven't seen it but that's 100% accurate. If the poppy fondlers in the UK like it then I'm out.Exactly how I felt about 1917
I wish I wasn't so cynical, but maybe that's Mendes's fault too
"a clumsy collision of the Assassin’s Creed video games and Elem Klimov’s Come and See"
Yeah he looks to healthy to have been living on the arse end of the train but otherwise good movieGetting excited for Parasite, so watched Snowpiercer over the weekend. I loved it SO much, after a rocky first half hour or so. Not feeling the Chris Evans casting, tbh, but listen, he wasn't shite enough to ruin it for me. Tilda was DELIGHTFUL.
Upgrade your account now to disable all ads... If we had any... Which we don't right now.Upgrade now