I wonder if some of the hype is because the new way of thinking of filming the movie rather than the actual content.
Most movies and TV shows don't live up to the hype. The media gets everyone worked up about how stunningly stupendous something is going to be and there is no way that the production can meet that expectation. Especially as most of the hype occurs after most of the production is already finished and there is little opportunity for the production to be improved.
The hype of the "single shot" effect for the whole movie is an example. Maybe it is the first time the technique has been used in a war movie, but it has already been done with other movies and some TV show episodes. Cinematographer for Birdman already won an Academy Award for it. Hitchcock did it in 1948.
FWIW, 1917 was edited to look like one shot. There have been films that were actually done in one continuous shot for the whole movie. Longest one was 140 minutes.
The whole one shot thing is old news, but it is being hyped as something new and wonderful.
Greetings,
I doubt I'll ever see this movie but can someone explain what the "one shot" production technique is please? Thanks
Children of men was the movie I think that started this technique if I’m correct. There were long scenes with one camera. Made you feel in the scene.
For me, it was interesting but not very believable. SPOILER ALERT: Would the captain in the truck really send 1 guy to undertake a risky task when some 1600 men were at risk? Why not send at least 1 or 2 men to help...
To me, too much extra stuff added to make the movie sensational, but not believable.
Been waiting for it to come out on general release. Will be going to see it Monday afternoon after everyone else has gone back to work.
Looks like a really good movie.
Review later!
For sheer blood and guts movie - They Shall Not Grow Old - is the "best" (worst?) movie I have seen. It too is about WW1 but there was no editing of the very real injuries you see on screen, all factual.
Trailer:
8 out of 10, tops
So B-