1917 film due for release soon
- Thread starter britinbc
- Start date
I saw the 1917 film today and will offer my impressions. Firstly, I read an article about the film - they did the whole thing with only 9 cut scenes which is frankly incredible. As a viewer, you only see ONE cut scene. The others are hidden skillfully as the camera pans over dark objects.Considering the scale of this film, it's a cinematography triumph. It also allows for some criticisms from a careful eye - which 99.9% of people won't pick up on, perhaps not even the film makers.
In the first 5 minutes of the movie, there is a scene where the 2 main characters are suiting up to go on a mission. They load their rifles, but only with a single charger of ammo. It should have been 2. One of the characters fires his rifle at least 12 times by my count from the original 5 rounds he loaded. When you see the film, you will note how he could not have reloaded off camera.
There's a bandage on one guys hand that features prominently in the film. Keep an eye on it throughout the film, in some scenes how dirty it is, how it's tied, etc. changes. So do some minor details of the accoutrements of the main characters. All very minor stuff though.
There is only one scene where we see a closeup of a German rifle - it's clearly a South American Mauser of some type as it does not have a Lange-Vizier sight. Also, the scenes of German artillery show a model of gun that can only be the 15cm Kanone K16 towed heavy field gun. They did a good job on the guns, but showed the incorrect carriages and wheels for them, and given the premise of a coordinated german withdrawal from a prepared position, what happened to the guns would not have happened on the Wester Front.
Overall, the Germans were supposedly back 9km in a planned re-trenchment, so their presence in force in a wrecked town in no man's land also seemed very out of place.
Now for the hardware...
Lots and lots of SMLE MkIII and MkIII* rifles in the film. I was surprised they had as many as they did and none of the ones I saw looked like replicas, resin, etc. Most of them I saw were clearly inter-war reworks with post-1920 straight-belly forestocks, but that can be forgiven. They literally would have had to source around 1000 SMLEs to make this film (you'll see what I mean when you go see it) - and to have found over 1000 SMLEs in one place with correct WW1 era stocks isn't realistic.
I didn't see a single MkIII with volley sights in the film. The film has to take place in 1917, from February to April when the Germans withdrew to the Hindenburg line, based on the locations in the film, and the premise of the movie, though they don't come out and say so. From a history perspective it can't be anything else and the film does take place in spring when apple trees are blossoming all over France. At this point in 1917, I'd have expected over half the rifles on the Western Front to still have Volley Sights.
Kudos to the film makers though - the two main characters are carrying different SMLE variants from one another. One guy has a 1916+ MkIII with magazine cutoff and what looks like adjustable sight, but it had no volleys and no pot-belly forestock as would be appropriate for a 1916-1917 BSA or RSAF Enfield. A LSA of that era would have still had volleys. The fact it had a cutoff, and you prominently see he has it open during combat to access his magazine is a huge plus in my eyes though - well done to the props department.
The other main Character has a MkIII* which would have been showing up in France in increasing numbers around when the film takes place. Sadly, it also had a post-war forestock fitted. It did look the part though.
When the film shows lots of troops on screen, I was looking for Ishapore Screws, Ishapre forestock tie straps, or Lithgow wood with brass reinforcing pins or ventilated front sight guards. I did see a few obvious Lithgow rifles with 1950's FTR features - but none shown prominently on the camera, so I think the props people knew to try and position WW1-correct (ish) rifles close the camera. I saw not a single Ishy screw or tie plate, and not a drop of suncorite. Some props department in Europe must have a lot of SMLEs stashed away for productions like this one.
Overall, I was very impressed by the props and costume people - for most viewers, you will feel immersed.
For milsurp lovers - you do need to go see it. Worth the price of admission to see it on the big screen.
In the first 5 minutes of the movie, there is a scene where the 2 main characters are suiting up to go on a mission. They load their rifles, but only with a single charger of ammo. It should have been 2. One of the characters fires his rifle at least 12 times by my count from the original 5 rounds he loaded. When you see the film, you will note how he could not have reloaded off camera.
There's a bandage on one guys hand that features prominently in the film. Keep an eye on it throughout the film, in some scenes how dirty it is, how it's tied, etc. changes. So do some minor details of the accoutrements of the main characters. All very minor stuff though.
There is only one scene where we see a closeup of a German rifle - it's clearly a South American Mauser of some type as it does not have a Lange-Vizier sight. Also, the scenes of German artillery show a model of gun that can only be the 15cm Kanone K16 towed heavy field gun. They did a good job on the guns, but showed the incorrect carriages and wheels for them, and given the premise of a coordinated german withdrawal from a prepared position, what happened to the guns would not have happened on the Wester Front.
Overall, the Germans were supposedly back 9km in a planned re-trenchment, so their presence in force in a wrecked town in no man's land also seemed very out of place.
Now for the hardware...
Lots and lots of SMLE MkIII and MkIII* rifles in the film. I was surprised they had as many as they did and none of the ones I saw looked like replicas, resin, etc. Most of them I saw were clearly inter-war reworks with post-1920 straight-belly forestocks, but that can be forgiven. They literally would have had to source around 1000 SMLEs to make this film (you'll see what I mean when you go see it) - and to have found over 1000 SMLEs in one place with correct WW1 era stocks isn't realistic.
I didn't see a single MkIII with volley sights in the film. The film has to take place in 1917, from February to April when the Germans withdrew to the Hindenburg line, based on the locations in the film, and the premise of the movie, though they don't come out and say so. From a history perspective it can't be anything else and the film does take place in spring when apple trees are blossoming all over France. At this point in 1917, I'd have expected over half the rifles on the Western Front to still have Volley Sights.
Kudos to the film makers though - the two main characters are carrying different SMLE variants from one another. One guy has a 1916+ MkIII with magazine cutoff and what looks like adjustable sight, but it had no volleys and no pot-belly forestock as would be appropriate for a 1916-1917 BSA or RSAF Enfield. A LSA of that era would have still had volleys. The fact it had a cutoff, and you prominently see he has it open during combat to access his magazine is a huge plus in my eyes though - well done to the props department.
The other main Character has a MkIII* which would have been showing up in France in increasing numbers around when the film takes place. Sadly, it also had a post-war forestock fitted. It did look the part though.
When the film shows lots of troops on screen, I was looking for Ishapore Screws, Ishapre forestock tie straps, or Lithgow wood with brass reinforcing pins or ventilated front sight guards. I did see a few obvious Lithgow rifles with 1950's FTR features - but none shown prominently on the camera, so I think the props people knew to try and position WW1-correct (ish) rifles close the camera. I saw not a single Ishy screw or tie plate, and not a drop of suncorite. Some props department in Europe must have a lot of SMLEs stashed away for productions like this one.
Overall, I was very impressed by the props and costume people - for most viewers, you will feel immersed.
For milsurp lovers - you do need to go see it. Worth the price of admission to see it on the big screen.
Last edited:
In the farm scene, a close up shows Lance Corporal Tom Blake carrying a No 1 Mk3 with volley sights. I also noticed how "new" the SMLEs used were. No mud or dent. They either took good care of them or they just came back from leave.
On a different note, I loved how the film featured mud. When the characters were walking, they were actually slipping. Very good attention to detail.
It'a tough life being a film critic.
Grizz
Ya, and it must suck.
It'a tough life being a film critic.
Grizz
I was trying to avoid being that kind of pedant, but will be anyway:
- In the scene with the general toward the beginning, he has a big rack of medal ribbons. Is that credible for an officer of 1917? Where would be have been awarded them? It's a brief shot, but I'm pretty sure I recognized the 1918 Victory Medal
- Is is plausible for two lance-corporals to have had wris####ches?
- The trees in the scene where the Germans have cut trees down across the road look a lot like they've been cut down with a chainsaw, which is anachronistic.
As for the plausibility of the plot: no, not really (couldn't the message have been delivered by aircraft?) but I kind of enjoyed it for what it was, which is a quest narrative that needs a bit of suspension of disbelief.
FWIW Wikipedia thinks so:
h ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_watches#Wris####ch
Yes, entirely credible for officers during the War having a medal or two - the British Army and her Empire forces were rather active back in the days before the Great War. Consider all the colonial actions fought, not to mention the Boar War being not all that many years prior. I doubt the General had the Victory Medal though, but rather something somewhat similar in colours.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_campaign_medals
Saw it today and thought that it was very well done, all things Hollywood considered! The cinematography was simply amazing and well worth the price of admission alone. Much better than Dunkirk in most every regard. Check it out!
I don't know if this one is Hollywood, strictly speaking. It was shot in the UK and largely done with UK-based backing. Hollywood production companies are distributing it in northa america, so I dunno - maybe that does make it Hollywood?
Aircraft have to land somewhere - fragile planes need an airfield. Pigeons would be more realistic assuming the receiving unit has a pigeon coop.
Just seen it last evening. Visually great... I kept telling myself 'watch the damn movie, not the props' .... Someone above said the rifles were in too good of condition. Maybe? , but I was thinking the other way. I seen rifles covered in mud, busted ones in the mud, Thought I seen a scene with a chunk out of the side of one? The nose caps with definite wear from the bayonet on and off. Even my wife mentioned the details she seen.....
