By Ryan Zeid
1917 (9 out of 10)
It’s certainly not an earth-shattering revelation, but when you think about it, everyone’s life is done in one take. Until time travel is invented, there’s no chance for us to go back in time and correct past mistakes, make different choices, etc. Of course, many people are fortunate enough to get “second chances” to try to make amends for past wrongdoings, or to change destructive behaviors and get sober and clean. But the reality is that we don’t get multiple takes to get each choice right, we just have to live with the consequences and hope that they build our character in a positive way.
With film, however, that’s not the case. While some directors prefer to do only a couple of takes and move on (i.e. Clint Eastwood), while others prefer dozens if not hundreds (i.e. Stanley Kubrick), actors and filmmakers are generally given as many tries as they want to get each scene just right. There are examples, however, of directors trying to get whole scenes and sequences in film done in one take, with some early examples coming from filmmaking legends like Alfred Hitchcock and Orson Welles. It’s not a perfect example, as the directors may still reshoot those scenes if something is off, and can also use camera tricks to hide cuts, but it’s still quite a technical achievement to do a sequence in one whole take. I can’t think of any film, however, where the filmmakers did the entire movie in one long take, at least not until seeing “1917,” a phenomenal and near impeccably made war film from director Sam Mendes (Revolutionary Road, Skyfall, Spectre).
Besides the seemingly one-take achievement (although I’m sure camera tricks and cgi were used to cover up edits), it’s a technical marvel, with immersive sound design, top notch direction from Mendes, and stunning cinematography courtesy of Roger Deakins. But it’s really the characters, the strong performances, and the incredibly tense and engrossing story that really sets this film in the masterpiece stratosphere. Dean-Charles Chapman and especially George MacKay are the real standouts as the main leads of the film, taking the audience on their characters’ harrowing but inspiring journey to save the lives of 1600 British soldiers during World War I. Even the secondary characters and the fun cameos are performed with aplomb and contribute to the overall enjoyment of the film.
If you enjoy films, particularly war films, that pull you right into the story nearly from the outset and don’t let go until the credits role, then I highly recommend you go see 1917. It’s really no surprise to me that it’s getting a lot of awards consideration this year; it’s extremely well deserved. This is one take you won’t want to miss. I give 1917 a 9 out of 10.