Dos jóvenes soldados ingleses tienen una misión imposible durante la Primera Guerra Mundial: entregar un mensaje tras las líneas enemigas para evitar que sus compañeros caigan en una trampa.Dos jóvenes soldados ingleses tienen una misión imposible durante la Primera Guerra Mundial: entregar un mensaje tras las líneas enemigas para evitar que sus compañeros caigan en una trampa.Dos jóvenes soldados ingleses tienen una misión imposible durante la Primera Guerra Mundial: entregar un mensaje tras las líneas enemigas para evitar que sus compañeros caigan en una trampa.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
- Ganó 3 premios Óscar
- 135 premios y 200 nominaciones en total
Resumen
Reviewers say '1917' is acclaimed for its technical prowess, especially the one-shot cinematography and realistic portrayal of World War I. The film's intense emotional impact and strong performances are frequently highlighted. However, some critics feel it lacks originality and depth, drawing comparisons to other war films. Concerns about plot simplicity and underdeveloped characters are noted, although the visual and technical elements are universally praised.
Reseñas destacadas
I am not particularly a huge fan of war films. Much of it is because they too often glamorize war or present bullet-proof heroes who are anything but realistic. However, I am glad I watched "1917" because neither of these problems exist in the story plus it's a very good depiction of war and the awfulness of it...particularly WWI.
The story is very simple...two lance corporals are sent on a mad dash across enemy territory to alert troops on the other side of this no-man's land that they are walking into a trap. The film shows their journey and the thrilling finale.
The plot is among the simplest I've seen in a war film and the movie is really about action and the men's struggle to sneak across the battlefield and alert their troops....simple. Yet it was made so thoughtfully and realistically that it really worked well. A brilliantly made film...among the best I've seen about war. But it's also very graphic and unpleasant....so be forewarned.
The story is very simple...two lance corporals are sent on a mad dash across enemy territory to alert troops on the other side of this no-man's land that they are walking into a trap. The film shows their journey and the thrilling finale.
The plot is among the simplest I've seen in a war film and the movie is really about action and the men's struggle to sneak across the battlefield and alert their troops....simple. Yet it was made so thoughtfully and realistically that it really worked well. A brilliantly made film...among the best I've seen about war. But it's also very graphic and unpleasant....so be forewarned.
Last night COL Ferry and I (COL Coldwell, both USA) were able to watch the new WWI film, 1917, before it has national release. It is a cinematographic feast for the eyes, long expansive shots that follow the protagonists as they execute their mission. It does not hide the horrors that existed in trench warfare, it shows them for their brutality and abundance. (My great uncle died as a consequence of his service fighting in the trenches, mustard gas poisoning). In many ways it reminded me of Saving Private Ryan.
For those who have served in combat (I have deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan), I cannot tell you if the film will be too difficult to watch, it might well be, especially if incoming artillery is a trigger. For me, as the camera travels a few inches above the dirt advancing slowly up a berm, my response was visceral. I was taken back to the patrols we walked in Afghanistan, not knowing what was around the corner; not relaxing heightened vigilance, not knowing if there would be an IED, a child wearing a suicide vest, a sniper taking aim. For the protagonists in this film (as for all who served and are serving) surviving the climb up the berm, there is no sigh of relief, no respite from the fear of uncertainty. They (we) survive to move forward to face more uncertainty.
Watching allowed me to pay homage to my great uncle, and the approximate 800,000 other Brits who were killed or died as a consequence of their service. (Germany lost over 2 million soldiers in the war). Estimates put the total casualty numbers for both military and civilians at 40 million, half killed or died from wounds/infection.
I rate this film as 10/10, for many reasons. Directing, acting, set design, cinematography, musical score, the raw emotion it invokes. Some critics have said they never felt a connection with the characters, I suspect they never served in combat. While the brotherhood (including female War Fighters) is strong, there is also a common characteristic possessed by all War Fighters, the ability to focus on a mission and suppress emotion, even as those around the Fighter fall. This was the quality I recognized in the actors and why the viewer doesn't "bond" with the main protagonists; we, the viewer, were on the mission with them, we grieve as we can and move on.
Watch if you will, but know there is no pleasure in watching and the film will grab you and the beginning and not let you go. Even though we know the outcome of WWI, there is no joy, there is no peace. Watch because it will allow you a glimpse at the horror and brutality of war; reflect on their service and sacrifice. Note, as we (the viewer) are "walking" through the trenches, glancing shots of the young soldiers shows them with flat affect, isolation, almost apathy; this is the face of "shell shock," what we know call post-traumatic stress disorder.
For original WW1 footage, watch "They Shall Never Grow Old," an exceptional documentary.
For those who have served in combat (I have deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan), I cannot tell you if the film will be too difficult to watch, it might well be, especially if incoming artillery is a trigger. For me, as the camera travels a few inches above the dirt advancing slowly up a berm, my response was visceral. I was taken back to the patrols we walked in Afghanistan, not knowing what was around the corner; not relaxing heightened vigilance, not knowing if there would be an IED, a child wearing a suicide vest, a sniper taking aim. For the protagonists in this film (as for all who served and are serving) surviving the climb up the berm, there is no sigh of relief, no respite from the fear of uncertainty. They (we) survive to move forward to face more uncertainty.
Watching allowed me to pay homage to my great uncle, and the approximate 800,000 other Brits who were killed or died as a consequence of their service. (Germany lost over 2 million soldiers in the war). Estimates put the total casualty numbers for both military and civilians at 40 million, half killed or died from wounds/infection.
I rate this film as 10/10, for many reasons. Directing, acting, set design, cinematography, musical score, the raw emotion it invokes. Some critics have said they never felt a connection with the characters, I suspect they never served in combat. While the brotherhood (including female War Fighters) is strong, there is also a common characteristic possessed by all War Fighters, the ability to focus on a mission and suppress emotion, even as those around the Fighter fall. This was the quality I recognized in the actors and why the viewer doesn't "bond" with the main protagonists; we, the viewer, were on the mission with them, we grieve as we can and move on.
Watch if you will, but know there is no pleasure in watching and the film will grab you and the beginning and not let you go. Even though we know the outcome of WWI, there is no joy, there is no peace. Watch because it will allow you a glimpse at the horror and brutality of war; reflect on their service and sacrifice. Note, as we (the viewer) are "walking" through the trenches, glancing shots of the young soldiers shows them with flat affect, isolation, almost apathy; this is the face of "shell shock," what we know call post-traumatic stress disorder.
For original WW1 footage, watch "They Shall Never Grow Old," an exceptional documentary.
Watching 1917, the audience might discern its apparent single-shot presentation, a testament to director Sam Mendes' remarkable craftsmanship. Is it filmed in one shot? A minimum of 34 discreet edits were subtly introduced to create the illusion of a continuous shot. This prompts speculation about the extent of the set, given the limited number of cuts, particularly within a wartime backdrop.
Transitioning to the narrative and cast evaluation, the film embarks on a riveting journey. The ensemble, including delivers a commendable performance. The artistic nuances employed to bolster the script, characters, pivotal moments, and conflicts resonate as an exquisite touch.
The film doesn't merely captivate with its story but also portrays a natural splendor, subtly showcasing its essence. I couldn't recall watching any movie with only 2 female characters including a baby girl.
My experience was satisfying although it doesn't rely heavily on suspense or thrills. It is a delightful watch!
Transitioning to the narrative and cast evaluation, the film embarks on a riveting journey. The ensemble, including delivers a commendable performance. The artistic nuances employed to bolster the script, characters, pivotal moments, and conflicts resonate as an exquisite touch.
The film doesn't merely captivate with its story but also portrays a natural splendor, subtly showcasing its essence. I couldn't recall watching any movie with only 2 female characters including a baby girl.
My experience was satisfying although it doesn't rely heavily on suspense or thrills. It is a delightful watch!
Absolutely incredible - I've seen it 3 times in cinemas and each time I find myself even more in awe of, blown away by, and in love with this film. It's thrilling, tense, gentle, satisfying, and deeply beautiful. As a huge fan of the war genre, this is unlike any other film I've ever seen - it finds its true strength in its unexciting, human moments rather than in the mindless chaos of firefights, while still managing to have some of the most exhilarating and edge-of-your-seat segments I've ever seen. Schofield is a brilliant and unconventional choice for the lead character, and his empathy and softness have made him one of my favourite characters of all time and an exceptionally rare example of how quiet tenderness truly can carry a war film better than loud banter and hyper-masculine bluster so often does. Krysty Wilson-Cairns is a genius and George Mackay said so much more in Schofield's silence than most actors could hope to in the grandest monologue. A masterpiece.
Sam Mendes' war drama is set during World War I and very personal to him, as it tells a story his grandfather used to tell him when he was still a young lad. Dedicated to Mendes' hero, this drama cuts deep when we join two young soldiers on a mission to deliver a message that could possibly save thousands of fellow combatants.
Filmed and edited as if it was one long take, the camera never leaves our main protagonists, Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Schofield (George MacKay), out of its sight. Mendes (Skyfall) and co-writer Krysty Wilson-Cairns (Penny Dreadful) therefore corner themselves by relying on this kind of linear storytelling, to tell a very focused but at times a somewhat thin tale. Some of the scenes are so empty, it will for sure test audiences' patience. Technical, '1917' is a true feast for the eyes and ears.
Roger Deakins' (Blade Runner 2049) cinematography is once again breathtakingly superior to anything else you've seen this year, and for sure will be the one thing people unanimously praise. Sound editing/mixing, visual effects and production design are all outstanding. These are the things, people will remember. It is Thomas Newman's (Passengers) score that elevates every moment happening in front of you, intensifying the emotions brought by our main characters. And although MacKay (Captain Fantastic) and Chapman (Game of Thrones) do a pretty phenomenal job at capturing the true essence of their characters going through a literal hell, it's the side characters with little-to-no screen time who steal their spotlight. Andrew Scott (Fleabag), Mark Strong (Shazam!), Richard Madden (Rocketman) and Benedict Cumberbatch (Dr. Strange) are checkpoints along the way, but man, do they impress with the few lines they're given.
1917 is without a doubt a technical masterpiece, that will inspire many filmmakers, but I can't feel a bit let down. As an overall film, it wants to play a heavy tune on your heartstrings, but can't reach that level of sentiment, because the focus on technicalities pulled me out of the story. It for sure is one of the better films 2019 has brought to the big screen, yet a bit more focus on the script could've made this the cinematic masterpiece of the decade. Nonetheless, I recommend watching this on the biggest screen possible and enjoy another fine piece of cinema brought to you by Sam Mendes.
Filmed and edited as if it was one long take, the camera never leaves our main protagonists, Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Schofield (George MacKay), out of its sight. Mendes (Skyfall) and co-writer Krysty Wilson-Cairns (Penny Dreadful) therefore corner themselves by relying on this kind of linear storytelling, to tell a very focused but at times a somewhat thin tale. Some of the scenes are so empty, it will for sure test audiences' patience. Technical, '1917' is a true feast for the eyes and ears.
Roger Deakins' (Blade Runner 2049) cinematography is once again breathtakingly superior to anything else you've seen this year, and for sure will be the one thing people unanimously praise. Sound editing/mixing, visual effects and production design are all outstanding. These are the things, people will remember. It is Thomas Newman's (Passengers) score that elevates every moment happening in front of you, intensifying the emotions brought by our main characters. And although MacKay (Captain Fantastic) and Chapman (Game of Thrones) do a pretty phenomenal job at capturing the true essence of their characters going through a literal hell, it's the side characters with little-to-no screen time who steal their spotlight. Andrew Scott (Fleabag), Mark Strong (Shazam!), Richard Madden (Rocketman) and Benedict Cumberbatch (Dr. Strange) are checkpoints along the way, but man, do they impress with the few lines they're given.
1917 is without a doubt a technical masterpiece, that will inspire many filmmakers, but I can't feel a bit let down. As an overall film, it wants to play a heavy tune on your heartstrings, but can't reach that level of sentiment, because the focus on technicalities pulled me out of the story. It for sure is one of the better films 2019 has brought to the big screen, yet a bit more focus on the script could've made this the cinematic masterpiece of the decade. Nonetheless, I recommend watching this on the biggest screen possible and enjoy another fine piece of cinema brought to you by Sam Mendes.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesSir Sam Mendes (director) and Lee Smith (editor) stated that, despite the apparently continuous shot (broken only by one interval of unconsciousness), actually dozens of "invisible" edits were made, concealed by transitions through black, moves behind objects, and so on. According to Mendes, the shortest unbroken shot was 39 seconds long, while the longest single continuous shot was 8-1/2 minutes long.
- PifiasBritish trenches did not use long straight sections. Instead they used a traverse system of short fire trenches linked by traverses to minimize damage from a direct artillery hit in the trench system.
- Citas
General Erinmore: [quoting Rudyard Kipling] Down to Gehenna, or up to the Throne, He travels the fastest who travels alone.
- Créditos adicionalesThe opening logos are shortened and tinted blue.
- Versiones alternativasThe film's IMAX release presented the film open-matte, at an aspect ratio of 1.90:1, meaning there was more picture information visible in the top and bottom of the frame than in normal theaters and on home video.
- ConexionesFeatured in Jeremy Jahns: 1917 (2019)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- Títulos en diferentes países
- Thế Chiến 1917
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, Inglaterra, Reino Unido(trench scenes & farm)
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 95.000.000 US$ (estimación)
- Recaudación en Estados Unidos y Canadá
- 159.227.644 US$
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- 576.216 US$
- 29 dic 2019
- Recaudación en todo el mundo
- 446.064.352 US$
- Duración1 hora 59 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta