who else only liked it mostly for the amazing cinematography... and found it full of errors?
Re: Movie: 1917
Posted: Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:09 pm
by jfko6
I liked 1917, but did have a discussion with a priest who had many issues with the film. The milk sequence was an issue for him with the baby. Is there a away around the edibility? Perhaps. And the fact that the soldier wasn’t wet in his uniform, after his swim, seemed to do it in for him.
I didn’t think it was a bad film. In fact, I wanted to see it again in the theater. Now with Covid-19, AMC theaters is teetering on the edge and could close for good. They just spent a mint on building new theaters in new locations. Bad timing.
It was a good film IMHO. It wasn’t Saving Private Ryan.
Re: Movie: 1917
Posted: Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:09 pm
by kman
I enjoyed the film...but apparently missed all the errors. I think I was more focused on the cinematography and trying to figure out where they managed all the cuts from the continuous scenes.
It was a good film IMHO. It wasn’t Saving Private Ryan.
totally agree, I liked it, but... SPR was way better, 1917 sure wasn't as good as movies that came prior but it was not intended as a documentary., so maybe I am being too critical... it wasn't Band of Brothers quality either, which is in my top 5 best series list
I enjoyed the film...but apparently missed all the errors. I think I was more focused on the cinematography and trying to figure out where they managed all the cuts from the continuous scenes.
check out this video, its a good watch
Re: Movie: 1917
Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2020 10:47 am
by M R Eedy
I thought it was decent u dont see to much from the first world war I would have liked to see them the into those ration though