Film Review: 1917

Sexuality/Nudity No Objection
Violence Mature
Vulgarity Mature
Anti-Catholic Philosophy Acceptable


1917 is a thrilling movie that will have you on the edge of your seat and from start to finish.  On top of that, it is a technical marvel that had me flabbergasted as to how the film was shot.

The movie takes place in the third year of World War I.  Two British corporals are resting by a tree near the trenches:  Corporal Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman), a baby-faced earnest youth and his friend Corporal Schofield (George MacKay), a bit more haunted and cynical friend.   The two are interrupted in their rest as Blake is told to pick a man and report to General Erinmore (Colin Firth) deep in the trench.  Blake chooses Schofield and the two head to the secret meeting.  The general tells them that the Germans appear to have retreated.  Colonel Mackenzie, leader of the 2nd Battalion of the Devonshire Regiment is planning to pursue the Germans at dawn.  But Erinomore tells them that the retreat is a feint and the 2nd Battalion is heading into a trap.  Blake's brother is serving in the 2nd Battalion.  The Germans cut all lines of communication, so Blake and Schofield have to get to Colonel Mackenzie before the attack or 1,600 soldiers, including Blake's brother will die.

The movie has an incredibly economy of story.  With that set up, the entire film is about this mission.  The movie, like the main characters, are single-minded in their purpose.  That isn't to say that the film is simplistic.  Far from it.  But the stakes are so high and the mission so important that every detail pushes the story forward.  Sometimes this utter simplicity gives a movie a sharpness of focus that prevents it from being bogged down by too many plot points.

The film is completely locked into the perspective of our heroes.  Director Sam Mendes has done something truly incredible.  The movie is filmed to look like one singe continuous shot from start to finish.  There are no cut aways to the where the enemy is, there is no comforting cutting back and forth to different parts of the front.  The camera stays on our heroes and we almost never see more than what they can see.  I read one review that said the effect is that you feel like the third man on the mission.  That is absolutely the feeling you get.  You feel the claustrophobia of the trenches followed by the terror of No Man's Land.  Every inch of ground is an obstacle.  Behind every door could be lurking death.  The danger is all around, in front, behind, to the side, above, and below.

Normally, I would find the single-camera angle to be too gimmicky.  It would say to me that this was simply an exercise in showing off by a director who wants to dazzle us by his skills in using the camera.  I've talked to other who found this style distracting.  To be honest, the single-take structure often took me out of the movie.  But even though this usually is a detriment, it wasn't the case here.  When I did notice the camera work, it filled me with a sense of awe at the vision it took to put this movie together.  Sometimes this style prevents any real intimacy with the actors.  But Mendes is able to seamlessly move the camera into a quiet close up so that we can see the scared or haunted eyes of our heroes.  The camera passes by so much wreckage and destruction that you want to linger because you know that there are compelling stories behind the carnage.  But just like our heroes, we have to keep pressing forward or the mission will fail.

The performances are fantastic as well.  Chapman is easily likeable as the wide-eyed innocent who is driven by fraternal loyalty.  But this is MacKay's movie.  You watch him transform from complaining sidekick into full-blown exemplar of valor.  MacKay's desperation and exhaustion is palpable.  You want to be able to let him rest, but the mission keeps pushing him ever forward and faster into danger.  The movie is also filled with cameos of famous British actors.  The production values are outstanding as you feel completely transported by the sets, props, and costumes.  After the movie I wanted to spend more time learning about the larger conflict in which they were engaged.

The only detriment to this story is that it holds too much emotion in restraint.  This might be a cultural gap between Britain and America, but the stiff upper lip is a bit too stiff at times.  The story isn't just about utilitarian moral calculations of risking your life to save hundreds.  It's the story of that universal understanding of familial sacrifice and the lengths we would go to save a brother or sister.  This strikes a deep emotional chord,  but the characters are so restrained in showing their feelings that you never get the cathartic release that is building up for the entire movie.  This may be accurate of the time and of the culture, but it creates just enough emotional distance from the audience to be noticeable.

The movie makes clear that war is hell.  But in that crucible of fire, we see heroes forged.  I highly recommend this movie.  It is one of the most exciting and engaging war films I have seen.