Two trenches crouched down in the dank and the mud,
Lest either lose more of their denizens’ blood.
The atmosphere over the land in between
Was thick with a rot that could not be washed clean.

And on either side, in the dirt corridors,
The weary ones wondered what worst case of wars
Their countries had sent them to, no thought at all
Of whether the winnings were worth their downfall.

They’d wait in their crack, being battered and mortared;
They’d shoot and attack as their higher-ups ordered;
They’d march into hell, knowing where but not why,
And let God decide who should live or else die.
_______________________

MPA rating:  R (for violence and profanity)

It’s funny that I’ve been watching the Best Picture nominees during the lead-up to the Oscars, yet I don’t seem to have much time to actually review them. But eventually, I’ll get to them all, starting with Sam Mendes’ World War I epic 1917. The last time I did this Best Picture Film Festival with Regal Cinemas was in 2016, and the last nominee I saw in the theater was my favorite, La La Land. This time, my favorite may well be the first I’ve seen because I’ll be very pleasantly surprised if anything manages to surpass Mendes’ cinematic achievement.

I’m always astounded by the skill on display whenever a film or TV show tackles an extended tracking shot. I get this weird giddy thrill at watching the camera seamlessly dance around the action and wondering how long the filmmakers will be able to keep it up. While not the first to attempt it (I really ought to check out Birdman some time), 1917 boasts some of the most ambitious tracking shots of all time, allowing the audience to run and trudge and float across the battlefields of France, following two British soldiers (George MacKay, Dean-Charles Chapman) on an urgent mission. They must deliver a message across enemy territory to stop another battalion from advancing into a German trap, a unit that includes the brother of one of the young men.

Playing out in real time but for a single time skip, the story is simple but oh so effective. What Saving Private Ryan did for World War II, 1917 does for World War I, making it feel immediate and in-the-moment rather than some distant conflict in the annals of history. It also manages to be surprisingly comprehensive in its depiction, despite the apparent time limitation. We, the audience, accompany Lance Corporals Blake and Schofield every step of the way, from the teeming trenches to the body-strewn No Man’s Land to the ravaged countryside to the explosive danger of going “over the top” into battle. It’s an awesome journey, and, for me at least, the two friends’ quest seemed to echo that of Frodo and Sam in The Lord of the Rings – No Man’s Land certainly brought to mind their trek through Mordor or the Dead Marshes – which is something Tolkien tried to explicitly evoke in its World War I flashbacks with less success.

Some have complained that the continuous Steadicam choreography becomes too much of a distracting gimmick, but that’s a matter of opinion. It’s so seamless that I began to not notice it at all, every so often realizing, “Hey, there’s still been no cuts,” at which point my admiration for the film only increased. The presence of some celebrated actors in small roles was a treat too, including Colin Firth, Mark Strong, and Benedict Cumberbatch. Despite the R rating, it’s also not as violent as I had feared; it does have its brutal moments, focusing more on the aftermath of war rather than the mid-battle carnage of Saving Private Ryan or Hacksaw Ridge, but it was an easier watch for me.

1917 is more than just a movie; it’s an experience, one worth taking on the big screen, where the tension and explosions and logistical wizardry and Roger Deakins’ poetic cinematography and Thomas Newman’s glorious score can best be appreciated. I still have three more nominees to see, but 1917 is my preference to win Best Picture. It’s a shoo-in for the technical awards, and I rather wish George MacKay could have gotten an acting nomination too. It deserves its place in cinema history.

Best line: (General Erinmore, quoting Rudyard Kipling’s “The Winners”) “Down to Gehenna or up to the Throne, he travels the fastest who travels alone.”

Rank:  List-Worthy

© 2020 S.G. Liput
659 Followers and Counting

Another morn, another day,
Another chance I’ll pass away
With sudden boom or bullet swift.
Another day, another shift.
I should be scared; indeed I am,
But danger doesn’t give a damn.
I still have work for others’ sake
That fools and heroes undertake,
And if I die before it’s done,
I pray the Lord will say we won.
___________________

MPAA rating: R (for much language and violence)

The Best Picture race for 2009 had some stiff competition, especially since it was the first year the Academy switched from having 5 nominees to 10. Granted, I haven’t seen most of them yet – it was only ten years ago; give me more time! – but I was still curious to see the ultimate winner, Kathryn Bigelow’s The Hurt Locker. Sure, it was satisfying when she beat her own husband James Cameron’s juggernaut Avatar, becoming the first female director to win Best Picture, but as it turns out, The Hurt Locker is a solid war film that thrives on tension and committed performances from Jeremy Renner and Anthony Mackie.

Most of the war films I’ve seen have been set during World War II or the Civil War, so, for me, this was a new foray into modern cinematic warfare, specifically the high-tension job of an American bomb squad in the Iraq War. After a nerve-racking opening scene that demonstrates how dangerous the job can be, we’re introduced to Sergeant First Class William James (Renner), who is placed in charge of an Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) unit. It doesn’t take long, though, for his fellow soldiers (Mackie and Brian Geraghty) to realize that their new team leader is on the unconventional side, disregarding safety precautions and sometimes acting like he has a death wish.

The plot is rather episodic, as captions count down the number of days left in their tour of duty. Each instance of tense bomb hunting or sudden combat adds to the tone of danger, while having more impact on the characters than the storyline as a whole. The three men bond as soldiers do, while James’ recklessness strains that very bond as the days of constant life-and-death strain take their toll. One detour of James hunting for the truth behind someone he believes to have been killed ends with an odd lack of resolution, though, and ultimately the film’s greatest strength is the individual scenes of unbridled tension as bombs are being discovered and defused.

It did seem to me that James’ cavalier attitude seemed like the kind of behavior that would get reported and disciplined, so it made sense when I read afterward about the many veterans who complained about the film’s unrealistic portrayal of EOD soldiers, among other inaccuracies. Plus, it would have been helpful if they explained the title: “the hurt locker” refers to a soldier being injured, but I don’t recall anyone actually saying that.

The Hurt Locker presents the stresses of the war in Iraq with a visceral candor that helped me as a viewer feel close to the action while not relying on in-your-face gore. It was also nice to see not one, not two, but four members of the MCU in one movie several years before their franchise days (Renner and Mackie, as well as Evangeline Lilly and Guy Pearce). I can’t really compare it to other Iraq War films, since this is the only one I’ve seen, but this certainly sets a high bar to which any others may aspire. Deserving of its six Oscars, it’s equal parts war movie and thriller and does both parts well.

Best line: (opening quote) “The rush of battle is often a potent and lethal addiction, for war is a drug.”

Rank: List Runner-Up

© 2019 S.G. Liput
656 Followers and Counting