It’s not. It doesn’t try to be saving private Ryan. It’s not that it tries to do something different. And it does a great job.
[Reply]

I'm not comparing it to a SPR . Just expecting some reality about war.
The promos make it sound so desperate and frightening. I would expect depiction of that.

Like..I saw some stupid movie last night about a Christian soldier who wouldn't use a gun but he saved a bunch of soldiers over a ridge /mountain. Totally stupid movie. Like Disney war movie stupid lol.. .oh, yeah, it was called Hacksaw Ridge, I think
[Reply]

The tension is far more than SPR. SPR has scenes with tension intermixed between scenes of character building.

1917 is almost all tension with very few scenes of character building.

But in terms of stacking up bodies, it isn’t close. But this focuses on 2 dudes on a communication mission rather than a DDay assault.

1917 needs watched. Watch it now.
[Reply]

If I had to choose, I would rather live in a world where 1917 existed instead of SPR.
[Reply]

I like period pieces and old uniforms/ wardrobe
[Reply]

Watch 1917. It’s worth it
[Reply]

Unfortunately. Either one is really unreasonable historically.
[Reply]

Outside of the awesome opening scene, I'm not that crazy about Saving Private Ryan.
[Reply]

I think it succeeds on describing the horrors of trench warfare without having to go "see, trench warfare is bad because". It really is a masterclass movie of audio-visual storytelling with gobs of tension throughout.
[Reply]

Yeah, the opening scene was great and the ending was great. The middle was fairly pedestrian.

1917 is a much better movie.
[Reply]

I would like to see a modern version of All Quiet on the Western Front.
[Reply]

The opening scene of "SPR" was shocking in its brutal portrayal of D-Day. I don't think most people had a true grasp of how bad that was. (But, yeah, the rest of "SPR" wasn't that great.) Likewise, I don't think most people have a true grasp of how bad WW1 was. "1917" shows it the same way as "SPR", with the only difference being that "1917" simply shows you the aftermath of trench warfare. This choice was probably made because a) "SPR" had already done the "horribly violent opening", and b) it's a lot cheaper SFX to show a bunch of corpses than a battle. But it works for "1917" because it shows you absolutely chewed up and large the battle lines were.
[Reply]

Yall are tripping lol SPR was epic and i loved Tom in it. I still haven't seen 1917 to be fair.
[Reply]

I'm up to 1917 in that doc I've been watching. The Allied powers finally decided to start wearing metal helmets after two years of having their troops sitting in trenches under artillery fire. The French have decided to go back to their Leeeroy Jenkins strategy of 1914 and have lost a shitload more soldiers because of it. And now some of the survivors have started to mutiny. The Russians are having a civil war. And the British are sinking in the mud at Passchendaele:




^
What's the point of colonizing Africa if you can't recruit some giraffes for the war effort?
[Reply]

I never understood that.
how godam dumb do you have to be ,to not understand what war is?
[Reply]