Skip to main content

How Sam Mendes’ WWI Film 1917 Was Made to Look Like One Long, Harrowing Shot

Film editing goes back to the late 1890s. The decades upon decades of technological improvement and artistic refinement of the craft since then have tempted certain filmmakers to see if they can do without it entirely, or at least to look as if they can. Alfred Hitchcock gave it a try in 1948 with Rope, a film typical of his work in that it fit into the genre of the psychological thriller, but quite atypical in that its main action played out as a single long shot. But as we've previously featured here on Open CultureRope actually contained ten artfully hidden cuts. Last year saw the release of Sam Mendes' 1917, which did more or less the same thing, but at a much greater length — and across the battlefields and through the trenches of World War I.

As portrayed in the Insider video above, the shooting of 1917 must rank among the most formidable logistical achievements in film history. It also had the good fortune to be overseen by Roger Deakins, one of the most formidable cinematographers in film history. But even before capturing the first frame, Mendes, Deakins, and their many collaborators had to plan every detail of the harrowing journey taken by the picture's protagonists, two British soldiers sent across the Western Front to deliver a message to another battalion.

This entailed first building and lighting models of every single set, and when constructing the real thing making sure to include paths (and strategically removable obstacles) for the constantly forward-moving camera and its crew as well as for the characters.

The war movie is among the oldest of film genres, but a "one-shot" war movie like 1917 entered the realm of possibility thanks to recent technological advances. These include cameras light enough to be detached from one crane, run across a field, and attached to another all while shooting; drones to capture moving aerial shots impossible by more traditional cinematographic means; and advanced digital effects to smooth — and indeed conceal — the transitions between one shot and the next. The Insider video shows an actor taking a running leap off a bridge and onto a mat below, followed by the seamless-looking final sequence in which he plunges into a river instead, and the camera unhesitatingly follows him right into the water. This sort of visual wizardry reminds even the most jaded viewer that movie magic is alive and well, but also makes one wonder: what could Hitchcock have done with it?

Related Content:

Hear the Sounds of World War I: A Gas Attack Recorded on the Front Line, and the Moment the Armistice Ended the War

Peter Jackson’s New Film on World War I Features Incredible Digitally-Restored Footage From the Front Lines: Get a Glimpse

Watch World War I Unfold in a 6 Minute Time-Lapse Film: Every Day From 1914 to 1918

The Great War: Video Series Will Document How WWI Unfolded, Week-by-Week, for the Next 4 Years

The First Color Photos From World War I: The German Front

The 10 Hidden Cuts in Rope (1948), Alfred Hitchcock’s Famous “One-Shot” Feature Film

Based in Seoul, Colin Marshall writes and broadcasts on cities, language, and culture. His projects include the book The Stateless City: a Walk through 21st-Century Los Angeles and the video series The City in Cinema. Follow him on Twitter at @colinmarshall or on Facebook.

How Sam Mendes’ WWI Film 1917 Was Made to Look Like One Long, Harrowing Shot is a post from: Open Culture. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Plus, or get our Daily Email. And don't miss our big collections of Free Online Courses, Free Online Movies, Free eBooksFree Audio Books, Free Foreign Language Lessons, and MOOCs.



from Open Culture https://ift.tt/360DQ6Z
via Ilumina

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Board Game Ideology — Pretty Much Pop: A Culture Podcast #108

https://podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/secure/partiallyexaminedlife/PMP_108_10-7-21.mp3 As board games are becoming increasingly popular with adults, we ask: What’s the relationship between a board game’s mechanics and its narrative? Does the “message” of a board game matter? Your host Mark Linsenmayer is joined by game designer Tommy Maranges , educator Michelle Parrinello-Cason , and ex-philosopher Al Baker to talk about re-skinning games, designing player experiences, play styles, game complexity, and more. Some of the games we mention include Puerto Rico, Monopoly, Settlers of Catan, Sorry, Munchkin, Sushi Go, Welcome To…, Codenames, Pandemic, Occam Horror, Terra Mystica, chess, Ticket to Ride, Splendor, Photosynthesis, Spirit Island, Escape from the Dark Castle, and Wingspan. Some articles that fed our discussion included: “ The Board Games That Ask You to Reenact Colonialism ” by Luke Winkie “ Board Games Are Getting Really, Really Popular ” by Darron Cu

How Led Zeppelin Stole Their Way to Fame and Fortune

When Bob Dylan released his 2001 album  Love and Theft , he lifted the title from a  book of the same name by Eric Lott , who studied 19th century American popular music’s musical thefts and contemptuous impersonations. The ambivalence in the title was there, too: musicians of all colors routinely and lovingly stole from each other while developing the jazz and blues traditions that grew into rock and roll. When British invasion bands introduced their version of the blues, it only seemed natural that they would continue the tradition, picking up riffs, licks, and lyrics where they found them, and getting a little slippery about the origins of songs. This was, after all, the music’s history. In truth, most UK blues rockers who picked up other people’s songs changed them completely or credited their authors when it came time to make records. This may not have been tradition but it was ethical business practice. Fans of Led Zeppelin, on the other hand, now listen to their music wi

Moral Philosophy on TV? Pretty Much Pop #32 Judges The Good Place

http://podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/partiallyexaminedlife/PMP_032_2-3-20.mp3 Mark Linsenmayer, Erica Spyres, and Brian Hirt discuss Michael Schur's NBC TV show . Is it good? (Yes, or we wouldn't be covering it?) Is it actually a sit-com? Does it effectively teach philosophy? What did having actual philosophers on the staff (after season one) contribute, and was that enough? We talk TV finales, the dramatic impact of the show's convoluted structure, the puzzle of heaven being death, and more. Here are a few articles to get you warmed up: "The Good Place’s Final Twist" by Karthryn VanArendonk "The Good Place Was a Metaphor All Along" by Sophie Gilbert "The Two Philosophers Who Cameoed in the Good Place Finale on What They Made of Its Ending" by Sam Adams "5 Moral Philosophy Concepts Featured on The Good Place" by Ellen Gutoskey If you like the show, you should also check out The Official Good Place Podca