Richard Madden (pictured above) plays Lt. Joseph Blake in 1917. He is the brother of Lance Cpl. Tom Blake who has gone on a mission to save his brother’s regiment from a trap (courtesy of Wikimedia Commons).
“The War to End All Wars,” “The War of the Nations” and “The Great War.” This is the kind of language used to describe one of the deadliest global conflicts in history—unprecedented in its brutality and death count.
This war is not World War II, but the first World War—which occurred during the 1910s and is often less talked about than its second beastly incarnation. Many stories and films have been made about the more popular and famous second World War, which remains a frequent topic of historical interest and discussion.
1917, directed by Sam Mendes, is a recent epic that has invited comparisons to 2017’s Dunkirk. Unlike the earlier war thriller, however, this newer release shines a spotlight on the first World War and the experiences of the people who suffered during this period. Partly based on an account told to the director by his paternal grandfather, this visceral depiction of the conflict won a Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture–Drama and is now an Oscar frontrunner.
During some time in 1917, two British soldiers, Lance Corporals Tom Blake—portrayed by Dean-Charles Chapman—and Will Schofield—portrayed by George MacKay—are tasked with an incredibly dangerous mission. Within a very limited amount of time, they must cross over into enemy territory to deliver a message that may save 1,600 of their fellow comrades—including Blake’s brother—from walking into a trap. German troops are waiting to ambush the unsuspecting soldiers; if the message fails to be sent in time, the regiment will be massacred.
Most notably, 1917 is a technical marvel. It uses long, single-take shots in order to have the entire movie seemingly lack the cuts and framing that defines contemporary cinema. This makes it unique among its kind in the genre. The story therefore moves in real-time, making the viewers walk along with the characters through every nasty surprise and heart-stopping moment.
The two young corporals make their way through treacherous lands in a race against time. The combined might of the director and the cinematographer—the legendary Roger Deakins—ensure that we are always on edge during every intense set-piece and treks filled with slow-burn tension.
1917 is not a typical war movie. Rather than focus on traditional narrative, the film is meant to offer an experience that places the audience in the moment with the protagonists. Getting a taste of what it was like to be in the thick of it all is perhaps the movie’s main objective, and it adds to the urgency. This means that not very much is revealed about the characters, and the plot is decidedly unsentimental and straightforward in its depiction of a journey that leaves little room for exposition. Some may be turned off by this approach and deem the story somewhat dull.
The circumstances are appropriately non-glamorous and almost nihilistic, a portrayal not found in many war movies that prefer a cliché hero’s tale. This is not to say that 1917 is without emotional heft. Through various steps of the journey, the two soldiers strive hard to maintain a semblance of humanity and compassion along the way, which is challenged by the grim realities of this dark era.
A calmer scene involving a baby is both tender and every bit awws engaging as the more frantic and desperate action sequences, and an unspoken line near the end of the film is as moving as anything else in cinema. First-rate acting from the cast is perfectly conjoined with technical mastery, solidifying 1917’s impact.