1917 (2019) (1 Viewer)

[Walter Kittel]

Wait a minute. A dent in 1917’s noms? Or noms in general?

Sorry, my reading comprehension was taking a break when I replied. I thought you were predicting wins in those categories for 1917, not nominations. My point being that I think that 1917, OUATIH, and perhaps Joker will likely split a lot of the awards, in terms of wins.

- Walter.

 

[TravisR]

Sorry, my reading comprehension was taking a break when I replied. I thought you were predicting wins in those categories for 1917, not nominations. My point being that I think that 1917, OUATIH, and perhaps Joker will likely split a lot of the awards, in terms of wins.

- Walter.

Outside of Joaquin Phoenix, is Joker even a remote contender for any Oscar nominations?

 

[Walter Kittel]

Outside of Joaquin Phoenix, is Joker even a remote contender for any Oscar nominations?

Just my opinion of course, but besides best actor for Joaquin Phoenix; I thought the film's editing, cinematography, score, screenplay, costuming, and direction might garner nominations. We'll find out in less than 12 hours.

Personally, I am quite comfortable mentioning Joker in the same sentence as 1917, OUATIH, The Irishman, and Parasite (which I mention based on critical opinion - I have not seen it yet). I think it is that good, certainly in terms of execution.

- Walter.

 

[Malcolm R]

Outside of Joaquin Phoenix, is Joker even a remote contender for any Oscar nominations?

We'll find out about Oscars shortly, but the Critics' Choice Awards had it up for several, including Picture, Actor, Screenplay, Cinematography, Make-Up, Score, and Production Design.

It won for Score and Actor.

 

[Tino]

Sorry, my reading comprehension was taking a break when I replied. I thought you were predicting wins in those categories for 1917, not nominations. My point being that I think that 1917, OUATIH, and perhaps Joker will likely split a lot of the awards, in terms of wins.

- Walter.

I agree. I think OUATIH will be nominated in most of the same categories. Irishman will get a bunch too. And I agree on Joker as well.

 

[TravisR]

EDIT: no need to go off topic

 

[Tino]

My 1917 Oscar Nomination Predictions

Best Picture
Best Director
Best Original Screenplay
Best Cinematography
Best Editing
Best Original Score
Best Production Design
Best Sound
Best Sound Editing
Best Costumes

So I was wrong on Editing and Costumes but it got Visual Effects and Makeup instead.

10 total. Pretty good.

 

[Malcolm R]

A movie that's "one continuous shot" has no editing.

 

[Hollywoodaholic]

A movie that's "one continuous shot" has no editing.

The longest actual shot in the film is about 9 minutes, and the film was shot in several locations far apart, so the editing to make it appear seamless and in one location was critical. I don't think it wins Best Editing for the exact point you make, though.

 

[Chris Will]

9 minute shot, do we know what scene that is?

 

[MartinP.]

FYI: Best Film winner Birdman did not receive an editing nomination either.

 

[Hollywoodaholic]

9 minute shot, do we know what scene that is?

I think I read it was the one leading up to and getting on the truck transport, including some of that footage traveling (where the camera was actually handed over and controlled by soldier 'extras.') If I see it again I'll post a link.

 

[Tino]

So I just got back from my second viewing of 1917 after seeing it almost 4 months ago.

And it was even more tremendously powerful than I remember. A technical and emotional masterpiece and one of the absolute best war films ever made.

I was able to spot a lot of the invisible edits this time but they are so seamlessly integrated into the film that the illusion of it being one take is even that more astounding.

And @Jake Lipson I saw it tonight with a friend who also has a severe startle reflex and he was able to handle it well he said. He only jumped two or three times due to an explosion and some gunshots. I think you can handle it based on what you’ve stated. Ymmv. Good luck.

 

[Robert Crawford]

So I just got back from my second viewing of 1917 after seeing it almost 4 months ago.

And it was even more tremendously powerful than I remember. A technical and emotional masterpiece and one of the absolute best war films ever made.

I was able to spot a lot of the invisible edits this time but they are so seamlessly integrated into the film that the illusion of it being one take is even that more astounding.

And @Jake Lipson I saw it tonight with a friend who also has a severe startle reflex and he was able to handle it well he said. He only jumped two or three times due to an explosion and some gunshots. I think you can handle it based on what you’ve stated. Ymmv. Good luck.

I’m a big time “War” film genre fan so I will be highly analytical when it comes to evaluating this movie in this particular film genre.

With that said, my Dolby Cinema showtime is about to start so I will post my thoughts about this movie later today.

 

[AshJW]

Finally it starts in two days here. But I will see it not before next weeks Wednesday. Puh.

 

[Tino]

I’m a big time “War” film genre fan so I will be highly analytical when it comes to evaluating this movie in this particular film genre.

With that said, my Dolby Cinema showtime is about to start so I will post my thoughts about this movie later today.

Really looking forward to your comments Crawdaddy.

 

[GlennF]

I saw it in IMAX. Liked the movie a lot...didn't "blow" me away. A few too many coincidences and clichés for my liking. The lead actor was very good. Don't wont to say much else to spoil it for others.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Really looking forward to your comments Crawdaddy.

I'm with Glenn. I really liked the movie, but I wasn't blown away by it as others in this thread. I'm going to try to see it again before the Awards at one of my local theaters to see if my initial opinion changes at all. There are two WWI films that haunt me, "Paths of Glory" and "The Lost Battalion". At this time, this film doesn't have the same effect on me.

 

[Walter Kittel]

I'm with Glenn. I really liked the movie, but I wasn't blown away by it as others in this thread. I'm going to try to see it again before the Awards at one of my local theaters to see if my initial opinion changes at all. There are two WWI films that haunt me, "Paths of Glory" and "The Lost Battalion". At this time, this film doesn't have the same effect on me.

To those two fine films I would add All Quiet on the Western Front.

There is a pretty interesting critique of 1917 that deals with the subject of nationalism (and is way too political for me to post a link here). I mention that because both Paths of Glory and All Quiet on the Western Front deal with that issue in ways that 1917 does not. Should it deal with that fundamental aspect of WWI? I don't know. I think filmmakers should have the freedom to approach topics as they see fit; but I think when we are dealing with historical events it becomes a bit less clear.

- Walteer,

 

[bujaki]

Last year I watched Wooden Crosses and last night Westfront 1918. Both were made in the early days of sound pictures, as was the case with All Quiet on the Western Front. The most gut-wrenching of these films is the French entry, Wooden Crosses. 1917 is a stunt movie, brilliantly staged, but not the least bit realistic. Would you send just 2 men on such an important mission? No spoilers.
Parasite and Pain and Glory are far more resonant films.