Friday's words: When evaluating the movie "1917", we can't make generalizations and judge it's good or bad based on its advantages and disadvantages in a certain aspect. In other words: we can't call it a bad movie just because of its clichéd adventure routine, nor can it be considered a masterpiece because of its gorgeous "one shot to the end." "Friday Literature" previously said in the "2020 Oscar General Review and Award Prediction" article: Oscar is a product of compromise. From this point of view, it is not surprising that "1917" can win many international awards. In it, the balance and balance of technology, business and art are vividly reflected. This article focuses on the above three aspects to make a comprehensive review of "1917".
1. The professionalism reflected in the shooting of "1917"
The professionalism mentioned here is not only reflected in a certain technology, but also not only in a certain person. It is the professionalism shown by all the directors, cameramen, artists, lighting, actors, etc. of the crew to make a good film.
This kind of professionalism is even reflected in certain trade-offs and sacrifices. For example, when the director and cameraman decided to use a "long lens" to shoot the entire movie, the lighting team found that artificial lighting could not be used for such ultra-long motion shooting, so the crew The decision was made to ditch the lighting for all location shoots and use natural light instead.
Another example is the director choosing non-star actors in order to find the protagonist that best fits the character's temperament, which is also rare for a Hollywood blockbuster shot by a Hollywood company.
Of course, in addition to the professionalism of the film-oriented, cooperative, and goal-oriented professionalism, the techniques and skills presented by each department of the crew in the film are enough to make people envious, including those realistic battlefield scenes,
Including the beautiful night scene firework design
And, of course, those ingenious, fanciful long-shot movements
Can you imagine that all these astonishing techniques and techniques are only serving the simplest (or even cliché) story.
Let's take a look at the story of "1917" and the way it tells it.
2. The clichéd narrative routines and themes of "1917"
Of course, narratives cannot be complicated for their own sake. On the contrary, I think a good director should have the ability to find a storytelling method that is most simple and easy for the audience to accept under the condition that the theme is determined, otherwise it will be unconventional.
And the complex story of a good movie is determined by the complexity of the theme. Let's take Francis Coppola's classic war movie "Apocalypse Now" in 1979 as an example:
The background of Coppola's film is the Vietnam War. The theme of the film itself is very complicated. The director Coppola aims to express the alienation of war on people and question the rationality of war. Therefore, even it is a story of adventure and road. Even in the adventure, a lot of fantastic things happened, but you will find that compared with "1917", most of the plots in the movie are very obscure, and even the characters' dialogues are absurd and hard to find.
Not to mention those complex characters... The complexity of this partial expression is directly related to the theme of the film.
Another example is Stanley Kubrick's "Full Metal Jacket" in 1987 (also a war theme) , in order to express the irrelevance and contradiction between the individual and the collective, the director simply interrupted the story line and let the story The two parts, the front and the back, are integrated into one, and at first glance the plots are incoherent, but this is the author's intention. Such an approach is carried out under a specific film philosophy.
After citing these two examples, let's look back at "1917": obviously it chooses the most complicated and microscopic parts of the war (such as social problems, psychological problems, and political problems), and returns to the more macroscopic love and salvation. , collective honor, come to peace .
This is the main factor that determines the way the film is told.
As for the narrative method of this film, it couldn't be simpler. Just think about any single-player adventure decryption game we play. We will organize it into a directory as follows-
1. Starting point: the protagonist receives an order from a superior;
2. Immediately after: the protagonist embarks on the journey of salvation under the power of family and friendship;
3. Next: In the adventure journey, there are a series of levels and the scene tones that change continuously after customs clearance. (Ah, talking about this, I think of the "Red Fortress" I played in my childhood);
4. At the same time: the protagonist will find the relevant decryption "key" every time he passes a level;
5. End point: The protagonist completes the final task through the transformation of personal love to collective love. (Reflected in the exchange of the two protagonists)
Note: There are also two "big trees" at the start and end points
This is the typical closed storytelling technique: opening and closing the door. (Remember the school bus that picked up my son in "Forrest Gump", it was also used to "open and close")
It seems that if this film can win the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay, then it is estimated that any game developer can win the award!
At this point, don't misunderstand that this chapter is discrediting the "1917" story, we just want to show that the skill of telling this kind of story is not complicated, it is just other aspects of it that are complicated.
Plus, despite the complexity and multifaceted nature of the war, the story itself is fascinating. What's more, a director's realm and artistic accomplishment are not only in a story narrative (screenwriter).
3. The director's artistic quality reflected in the film
A lot of people focus on the long takes of 1917. In fact, "one mirror to the end" is no longer a rare thing in the history of movies. Someone has been using it decades ago, and it is used to the extreme! (For related movies, please refer to "10 Movies That Make the Most of "Long Shots"" (click the blue word to enter the link). What's more, there is now the assistance of computer technology, "1917" is such a movie.
Compared with the shooting of long shots, I think the more difficult and challenging is the performance of the actors in the long shots and the scheduling of the director. You know, it's not all about filming routines, it also requires solid stage skills! Why do you say that, let's see-
Movies have one more thing than stage plays, and that is editing. Through editing, actors can break down a performance into several small segments and repeat the shooting without having to do it in one go. (I have stayed in many studios in China. Now, many actors of TV dramas and web dramas, not to mention that they can memorize a line of dozens of words in one go is not bad. It has to be in a still situation.)
And if there is no editing in the movie, and there is only one long shot left, it needs to be performed in one go and precise positioning. If the camera is always in motion, the actors also need to consider things like avoiding obstacles, grasping the rhythm, aiming at the light, etc. These are all basic skills required for stage play.
Precise performance and positioning require precise scheduling and movement trajectories, which is a detailed work that the director needs to discuss with various departments including lighting, art, and photography. According to director Sam Mendes, they did spend a lot more time rehearsing than filming.
From this, we can see that if it were not for the solid stage play skills and artistic accomplishment of the director and actors, there would never have been a one-shot movie like "1917".
Of course, the artistic quality of the creator is not only reflected in a long shot, we can see it in almost every shooting link of the film. I think what we need to learn from watching such films is the comprehensive artistic quality of the creator, and of course the problem-solving ability and professionalism of the crew.
At the time of writing, all the awards of the 2020 Oscars have been announced, and "1917" won the Best Cinematography Award without controversy (others include Best Visual Effects, Best Sound Effects). Of course I think this is true. But let's not forget the following points while acknowledging these honors:
First of all, the Best Photography Award does not prove that this is only the photographer's credit. It must be known that its "one shot to the end" is caused by many other elements. For example, if there is no death of one of the two characters, then The subjective perspective will become two people, then the operation of the long lens will be greatly increased; another example is the trade-off in lighting mentioned above (make way for the long lens).
Secondly, "one shot to the end" is not only a reflection of the photographer's personal skills and literacy. After all, this "long shot" is in quotation marks. It covers a large number of film technology applications, and the proportion of this application is at least 5%. more than ten.
Again, the success of "1917" at the Oscars is only relative to the Oscar system.
In other words, all the movies that have a big harvest at the Oscars more or less conform to certain rules, and this rule is not pure enough to just reflect the artistic value and social value.
▼▼▼ Previous related articles, you may like: 2019 Oscar Nominee Films Full Review and "Friday" Exclusive Prediction
"Jojo Rabbit" VS "Life is Beautiful": the gap is here
2020 Oscar review and award predictions
Two paragraphs of "love" read this great "English Patient"
10 Movies That Take 'Long Shots' To The Limit
Talk about the "long shot" in movies
These movies are not only good-looking, but also help you penetrate the history of modern warfare
View more about 1917 reviews
