It's the driest World War I movie since Gallipoli, the famous muck and rain and fog of the trenches replaced by a spring of wildflowers and chalk soil.
Construida sobre una premisa muy simple (que algo le debe a Gallipoli, 1981, de Peter Weir) –dos soldados ingleses son encomendados con la misión de alertar a un distante regimiento sobre un inminente ataque sorpresa de los alemanes–, la película es una aventura bélica que en mucho se parece a un videojuego, porque está filmada en lo que aparenta ser una sola toma continua.
While there are stylistic parallels to Christopher Nolan’s 2017 WWII drama, “Dunkirk,” there may be more similarities to director Peter Weir’s stirring 1981 Australian WWI film “Gallipoli,” starring Mel Gibson, which also hinged on the plot device of delivering a message to prevent a massacre of Allied troops.
(It would spoil the film to describe scenes that stretch time, but viewers may flash on the superior antiwar film, “Gallipoli,” in one instance).
Clearly much of 1917 is fictional, and the fact that one of the messengers has a brother in the first wave of the doomed attack is one of the notes that rings unnecessary and untrue here — it’s a bit like Gallipoli meets Saving Private Ryan, which detracts from the realism that is the film’s greatest strength.
There's an obvious parallel to 1917, and that's Gallipoli, Peter Weir's heartbreaking story of the doomed ANZAC campaign.