In its final scene, the movie even gave rise to the proverbial lump in the throat. And, of course, “1917” had the technological wow factor that helped turn the film into a gotta-see-it phenomenon: the way it created the illusion of being filmed in a single, extended, how-did-they-do-that? roving video-game shot. It was popular with critics and audiences alike (though from my perspective, the critics who praised it unconditionally should have known better). It was a big, prestigious combat film that came bedecked with what we used to call an “anti-war” message. ![]() Yet let’s be honest: One of the key reasons that everyone in the known universe thought “1917” was a slam-dunk to win the Academy Award for best picture is that the film checked so many made-to-order boxes of Oscar comfort-zone classicism. ![]() That may sound unfair to Sam Mendes’ “ 1917,” which is no doubt a skillfully sincere war film, crafted by Mendes in homage to his grandfather, who fought in World War I. ![]() It was one of those years when a movie that was made to sweep the Oscars didn’t, and a movie that wasn’t made to sweep the Oscars did (or, at least, it came close enough to a sweep to feel like one).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |