Discuter de 1917
Discuter → Films → 1917 → Générales
Not to many people are talking about this...
posté par OddRobSTAFFMOD le 10 janvier 2020 à 23h20
Seems like an interesting concept. Making it seem like its one take but actually hiding the cuts. Im glad their marketing team finally decided to NOT call it a one take/long take film, that pissed me off. But I would have been more impressed if they actually did film it in one take, of course that probably wouldnt even be possible on a film this large.
Réponse de MongoLloyd
le 13 janvier 2020 à 11h30
It has a terrible title. Why would anyone care about what happened in 1917?
Réponse de jorgito2001
le 13 janvier 2020 à 14h24
Wow, are you really that ignorant are faking the funk? WW1 was the not only the first ever world war but reshaped the global landscape..and even led to WWII
Réponse de znexyish
le 13 janvier 2020 à 15h23
Truth is most people couldn't tell you a thing about WWI, or 1917, or add up the numbers 1,9,1, and 7. Now if it was retitled 1916 they could play the Motorhead song 1916.
As for the one take style Sure they could have tried to do the entire thing in one actual take with the proper digital resources. Would have to do many takes till one has no errors. But what would be the point of that. It's the illusion that it is a single shot that matters.
Most film rarely if ever use single takes for individual shots no matter how long the shots are. It's a "single take" film. That's the gimmick. Plus since it's dealing with drama then each each section with a dramatic moment matters.
I haven't seen it yet but I expect I would be waiting for the hidden cuts and be distracted by the gimmick I am not sure is necessary. Same way I felt watching Dunkirk last year with it's timeline shifting.
1916 - Motorhead
Réponse de MongoLloyd
le 13 janvier 2020 à 15h54
Has nothing to do with what you or I think. The title is not compelling whatsoever, and it leads people to think that the subject matter is similarly not compelling. Box office is already down 32% from a week ago, so it seems I'm not wrong.