Pros
+Looks Beautiful and Ugly at the same time (Ugly as in portraying the ugly circumstances of the war)
+The way it is shot is incredibly fluid, it's very much a long shot movie but there are maybe 5 actual like hard cuts in this and the hidden transitions are seamless. It really feels like you're walking alongside these messengers while still also giving the viewer an impression for how much time is passing in the story.
+Characters were all believable and likeable. There's some funny banter, there's some emotional release, a bit of fear, some kindness, and it's well acted so it gives the viewer a good impression of who these men are and it makes you want to care.
+Music and general sound design was nearly perfect
+ The story in general is solid. There are some things that I feel won't please everyone (which I'll mention) but I think overall it's a good story. The beauty is kind of in the simplicity. It's all about getting from point A to point B, but having it be that simple it makes room for the viewer to appreciate everything that happens in the journey.
+ You've probably guessed it from the things I've already said but the overall atmosphere is great without feeling like it's up it's own ass
+Very purposeful film. Lots of efficient scenes which seem disconnected at first but end up communicating an aspect of why the messengers are doing what they are and reflect the importance of this mission and/or increase the urgency of what is happening.

Neutral
*The movie is partially about will power and the main character's name is Will lmao

Cons
-I think [spoiler] Tommy's death happened too soon [/spoiler] I understand not wanting to waste too much time but I feel like just a few more scenes would have done a lot for that part of the movie. (FYI this is not a big criticism I kinda knew it was going to happen since the trailer [spoiler] had so many scenes where Will was alone [/spoiler] but it didn't quite mean as much as I would have liked)
-Predictable. This isn't honestly a criticism for people like me who don't really need any twists but I feel like some people would be bored with how straight forward and unapologetically predictable it is.
-[spoiler] in the German trench it says on one of the rafters "I <3 Elsa" a clear anachronism since Disney's Frozen (tm) had not come out in time for WWI soldiers to be fanboying Elsa smh btw I'm joking lol but I did see that in the trench[/spoiler]

Definitely worth a watch

It's not an action war movie, it's a drama/suspense war movie.

Visually stunning; the cinematography is on another level. The choice to hide cuts to make it look like one long, almost unending take is brilliant. The camera is constantly on the protagonists, giving a sense of poignancy to their journey. I honestly don't know how much of it was visual effect, but the scenarios were very well designed. That trek in no man's land might be one of my favorite sequences ever. So tense, so gruesome, so real. And that scene at night in the abandoned town: that alone justifies the Best Cinematography award "1917" won. Just brilliant.

The soundtrack was great: never over imposing, but present with subtle notes to increase the immersion. Also great sound design, from the squelching of the boots in the mud to the sound of the rifles. I wish I had seen the film in a nice movie theater instead of home.

The story could be a hit or miss. I can see how somebody could find "dull" for a lack of a better word, but to me it felt just right. Only two small things I didn't like. First, the completely lack of aim of the german soldiers (come on, talk about plot armour). Second, the theme of backstabbers germans: it didn't feel right to me, especially the pilot.

I liked the overarching theme of the movie: futility. [spoiler]The colonel receives the message and he stops the attack, but he knows nothing really has changed. The protagonist ends the story in the same way he started: against a tree.[/spoiler]

Definitely a must watch, even if just for the visual aspect of it. 8.5/10

Almost everything I want to say about this movie, I can't say at the risk of sounding overly cliché. But all those things people say about how immersive this movie is... It's true. People saying how good the cinematography is... Uh, yeah, it's Roger Deakins. Of course it's going to look gorgeous.

There are three things I was most impressed by, though:

- I pride myself in being able to figure out when a movie uses something to hide a cut in order to make a shot seem like it was done in one take. Starting out, I thought I'd make a game of pointing out all the hidden cuts I could find. I actually found very few of them, partially because they did an excellent job of hiding them, but mostly because I became so engaged with the movie that I stopped paying that any attention.

- The blocking is masterfully done! The way we constantly see the camera move from in front of actors to behind them matches perfectly with what the scene requires, and paces each scene very well. It makes me wonder just how this was shot to make it flow so smoothly together.

- It's difficult to think about just how much gets lost from cutting thousands of times in a movie until you see _1917_. I'm not saying every movie should be made like this one, but I don't think this movie would have worked nearly as well if it had been edited normally. Every frame is brimming with detail, and it manages to always have the camera at the right angle looking at the right thing. The cinematography is perfect, essentially.

I so, so, so wish I saw this movie in theaters instead of brushing it aside as an artsy gimmick in a genre film with which I'm not well acquainted. It doesn't matter if you like war movies or not, if you like movies at all, you'll be sure to enjoy _1917_.

I really wanted to give this film five stars, but there is a curious introspection that prevents me from calling it perfection. Nevertheless, ‘1917’ is a brilliant piece of art, and clearly a personal project for Sam Mendes. Blending groundbreaking technology with detailed production components, it's sure to entertain audiences and garner respect from critics for its execution. Just don’t say I didn’t warn you when the Oscar nominations come out.
- Charlie David Page

Read Charlie's full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-1917-sam-mendes-personal-war-story

"Director Sam Mendes employs distinctive but extraordinary shots in the first person during the two-hour footage, which makes the production work in many different ways. Although it sometimes results too shaky, it is thanks to George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman's performances that 1917 preserves both sombre but optimistic tones throughout the montage. In short, this is an exceptional approach to memorialise the hundredth anniversary of the end of the First World War".

We are somewhere in France during the Trench Warfare [1915 - 1917] with a depleted British Army; the atmosphere, alongside with the dialogues, can define by itself how was life at the front: scarce water and food, despair between soldiers to go home, endless weapons and corpses scattered on the floor, and so forth. Corporals Blake and Schofield are told to attain a severe/impossible mission despite not having any reinforcements. Before achieving this goal in sending General MacKenzie [Bennedict Cumberbatch] the infamous fallback letter, both privates must penetrate the frightful No Man's Land and experience horrendous life-and-death encounters in many places.

Regardless of the silent second half, the absence of preeminent performers and the woozy experience of watching the film in one sole perspective director Sam Mendes and executive producers deliver an eloquent portrayal about surprising facts of the four-year global conflict. For example, both soldiers are bewildered by the superiority of the German trenches in proportions and in quality considering that historically they were far better equipped than the Allied ones which allow the audience the opportunity of a lifetime to analyse the condition millions of innocent citizens were facing. The result improves with some accurate shots at landscapes, underground warfare channels, entire villages pulverised, etcetera. I must acknowledge the last fifteen minutes of the film; it has been a long time since I spotted such an imposing ending. Countless emotions appear regardless of having reached the climax. What a masterpiece ladies and gentlemen!

What amazes me the most is that despite being a World War film, 1917 does not give the impression in duplicating the ordinary details of previous same-genre releases such as Hacksaw Ridge [2017]. Once Mr Gibson introduced a brief biography of Desmond Doss [the main character] he began recording some ultraviolent scenes as though you were spotting the most savage state of humankind. As an alternative, 1917 delivers some innovative procedures in creating a war film without increasing the brutal strength of instant classics as Saving Private Ryan.

Congratulations!

[80/100]