Is this worth a watch?
Is this worth a watch?
Juan Morgan
Other urls found in this thread:
Lucas Jones
absolutely
Ryan King
yes
Christopher Baker
I hate the british and even I thought it was worth a watch
Aiden Powell
Yes, it's excellent.
Michael Stewart
Yes even though it was far too allied centric.
It's a great technical feat
Jeremiah Sanders
Definitely, the restoration they did on the film is stunning, it really brings the war to life. As far as the "plot" goes, gives a fulfilling (albeit generalized) story of the frontlines using various oral histories
James Murphy
>far too allied centric
how dense are you
Jaxson Powell
It wasn't meant to be a broad exploration of the war, it was just supposed to show what life was like for the average British soldier on the western front, and it did it very well.
Michael Long
Why do you hate excellence?
Matthew Nelson
accent isn't excellent
food isn't excellent
women are the opposite of excellent
Luis Torres
Maybe... maybe... but our culture, etiquette and social graces are the defining marks of a civilised society.
Hudson Martinez
This shits on 1917 1000%
Jose Brooks
and now the world has no use for you. shoo
Ian Martinez
Fucking definitely.
Zachary Long
>spliced in a full CGI scene of black and brown soldiers
fuck off hackson
Austin Mitchell
Why are you comparing a documentary to a normal hollywood movie?
Xavier Morales
I beg to differ, the moment the British empire declined, so have standards and traditions that have been built upon for centuries that has paved way for degeneracy.
Jordan Myers
Why are you mad?
Ian Long
It's pretty overrated honestly.
All the audio is taken from a BBC radio documentary.
The restored footage totals like 5 minutes, the rest of the movie is black and white pictures and drawings.
It covers basically training, life in the trenches, one battle, and then the armistice, in boring little chunks.
Obviously from the British side only since it was a British production.
Ryder Williams
>I said shoo!
>*smack*
Christopher Miller
I mean it's an amazing film that even the zoomers in the audience at my screening enjoyed. The ending where it transitions back to stock footage was shocking because the fixed footage felt so natural that it felt as if it always existed.
If anything watch it to see a movie that was created with pure unbridled autism
>Jackson started it as a museum piece
>Ended up making a full movie
>Had to hire people to read lips to try and figure out the dialogue, ended up finding the actual speech for some parts
>Had to color correct many scenes without samples, some he had to dig through his private WWI collection to find the correct samples
>Because cameras of this era were handcranked the film was erratically exposed causing it to have huge changes in FPS. Jackson sat there and corrected the FPS for the entire movie by hand until everything ran as close to 24FPS as possible
Thomas Garcia
Its amazing and really sticks with you for a long while afterwards
Benjamin Howard
No rebuttal.
We also invented how to have a proper debate but I guess you haven't quite achieved that yet.
Christopher Bennett
It's 10/10.
Nathan Murphy
I'm not. Comparing them both is still stupid. Its like expecting Inglorious Basterds to show what WW2 was like.
Nathan Adams
1917 just had nothing to do with ww1, the writer just had no concept of it and history in general. It's a pity, they deserve better
Daniel Gray
wat
Aaron Collins
The scene of the soldiers sitting in a sunken lane right before they are going over the top will haunt me forever
They know most of them will be dead in a half hour and you can see how scared they are
People can trash Hackson all they want, but this will live long after his other works are forgotten
Jaxson Ortiz
This isn’t a debate class champ
Nolan Perry
The restored footage with the added audio alone justifies the watch. Everything else is icing.