Here we go. One of my most anticipated films of the year, and it’s being released in the dumping ground of the middle of January. It almost seems too perfect. We have a film that looks like it’s going to generate some real buzz from UK audiences out in cinemas at a time where there is nothing to compete with it. Of course, as a cinema goer it’s annoying that there’s nothing else new coming out, but, if the hype is to be believed, this film is something special. And to explain why I’m looking forward to this film so much, I will need to discuss a war film that came out a few years ago.
In July 2017, Christopher Nolan brought us Dunkirk, a furiously raw and bleak take on one of the key turning points in World War II, and ended up being a film I admired rather than loved. It fell in a wired middle ground for me between being too colourless and bleak to be able to get properly invested in, but also the narrative required us to have some kind of feeling towards the characters for it to properly work, and when Tom Hardy spends pretty much his whole role struggling to emote from behind a constrictive mask, connecting with those characters can be difficult. The narrative is certainly satisfying and it’s glorious from a structural standpoint, but it didn’t quite work for me for reasons I struggled to articulate at the time.
1917 looks set to provide the counterpoint to Dunkirk that I’ve been looking for for the past two and a half years. And, make no mistake, the film looks amazing. I think we might have an early contender for film of the year. In other words, I was looking to see the film the day it finally gets that wide release and see whether it lives up to my sky-high expectations. So, is it as good as I’d hoped?
Yes. Not only did this film exceed my expectations, it might just go down as a genre defying classic. Every war movie made from this point is going to be compared to 1917 (and maybe even some that came before), and it is a masterpiece without comparison. I almost feel bad for even comparing this film to Dunkirk in my preamble, because the comparison hardly seems fair. Sure, Christopher Nolan might have had a solid grasp of the fundamentals that make up a solid war movie when he made Dunkirk, but director of 1917 Sam Mendes understands the key thing that Nolan was missing. The understanding that to make a great war movie you don’t need to compromise the human core. Dunkirk was a good film, but it felt stone cold. 1917 on the other hand, despite its murky tones and just as heavy themes, still grounds its narrative in real humanity, that being the relationship between two brothers, the younger of whom has been tasked, along with a colleague, to rescue sixteen hundred soldiers, including his older brother, who are walking into a trap after an orchestrated retreat by the Germans. Not only is it a well written narrative, but there are real relationships here that elevate them further.
But the characters and how clearly and effectively they are both sketched out accounts to almost nothing in the grand scheme of things, especially in comparison to the technical achievement that this film is. Whoever had the one take idea is a genius. I don’t know if Sam Mendes himself had the idea to tell the story in that way, but whoever did deserve all the credit in the world. And it links into the central idea of the film. Everything about it is engineered to create a bleak atmosphere, and the one-shot approach is only half the story there. I am in awe of the team that worked on the set design and lighting for the shots when Schofield arrives in Ecoust, and the acting is second to none, with George MacKay acting like his life depended on it. I believed every moment of MacKay’s performance. It had me in tears both times I saw it by the end. There is a belief and a commitment and an understanding of war that, once again, is not so cold hearted to neglect the human element that comes through in MacKay’s performance that is damn near transcendent. There is blood, metal, brutal gunfire and a whole lot of fire in this movie, and the diegetic sound that beautifully compliments the framing of every moment draws attention to every little detail of the brutality of war so expertly that it’s hard to believe that this film was constructed by people rather than just existing independently of everything.
It’s nothing short of extraordinary, and I haven't even got to talking about the drop-dead gorgeous cinematography. The wide low-level tracking shots as Schofield and Blake negotiate their way though no man's land are chill inducing, the wide shot of Schofield entering Ecoust is one of the greatest things I’ve ever seen on a screen, and the camera movement is consistently seamless, especially in the few instances the camera pans. One of the most inspired choices in the cinematography in this film is the use of handheld camera. Sure, there are plenty of still shots, especially as Schofield is in a state of mourning his colleague in the film’s opening act, but the camera is never planted and properly still. Just when you thought the film wasn’t technically ambitious enough. And this unsettled choice of camera technique only elevates the film further, highlighting the uncertainty of the characters about their future, made all the more tragic by the circumstances in which Blake has his life ended after the pair negotiated the German front line. After a German plane crashes in front of them, Blake attempts to help the injured pilot, even as Schofield suggests putting him out of his misery. Blake’s efforts were cut short when he was stabbed to death by the enemy pilot he was trying to rescue. Again, there is a real humanity to the characters that this film is not afraid to foreground. It makes the moment where Schofield breaks the news to his deceased friend’s brother in the film’s closing moments all the more heartbreakingly beautiful. Again, the ending had me in tears both times I have watched it.
1917 is a film so well realised, so exceptionally crafted and so unfathomably and tremblingly raw that it’s challenging to express. Amazingly good acting, technical ambition and a story that leaves nothing to be desired. Without a doubt this is the film to beat in 2020, and I’d be surprised if anything does.
10 / 10
