Did you watch the movie? Because the screen clearly goes black at one point. So no, it wasn't.
shareI think the decision to knock him unconscious for a while was unfortunate and ruined the effect they were going for.
shareHis unconsciousness is part of the real-time flow of the narrative, so while we know the filmmakers used that opportunity to cut, the unbroken nature of the story is not hindered. After all, there are ways to achieve total darkness that don't involve turning off the camera, so in theory at least that effect could be achieved without a cut.
Thank you! Who cares if it an authentic "single shot?" It's not called "1917, The Single Shot"
I thought it was very well done. And I hated Mendes' last few movies.
It's really well done. I think it's a great film and the single-shot approach works for the story.
If you ever want to see the film that really is a single, unbroken, non-simulated take though, go watch this one:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4226388
Will do!
Ever see Hitchcock's The Rope? It is like 1917 in that it pretends to be single shot. It is like 2 or 3 shots. Excellent film too.
Also the movie Timecode is authentic single shot. In fact, it is four single shots shown at once. The screen is split into four parts and we get increased volume on the one that is significant. Impressive job they did though the movie itself isn't anything special. Worth the watch for the unique experience.
I actually watched Rope about a week ago. I had heard that it was a simulated single take--everyone says this--but it is not. There are at least three hard, traditional, undisguised cuts. It is MOSTLY supposed to look like a one-take though. According to Wikipedia there are, I think, 10 actual cuts.
It was an interesting movie in any case. I liked it. Apparently Hitchcock called it "an experiment that didn't really work," but I would disagree with him.
I've heard of Timecode but not seen it. Sounds like I need to check it out. I'll have to put it on the list.
Another film that I've heard that is a real, true one-take is Russian Ark but I have not seen that one yet either.
To say it does not simulate a single shot is not to say the movie is bad. Nor that it is Mendes’s fault because as you say he did not advertise it as a single shot movie. The problem is all the people in the media who are claiming this. It’s just kind of annoying because it is inaccurate.
shareOMG NO WAY
shareI think the whole idea of the movie wasn't a one-trick single shot movie but a full immersion and experience from the eyes of the soldier almost minute by minute. Notice that the camera never goes far from the men themselves. The only moment I can recall that does is when he falls off the waterfall, and even then it comes down quick. When he is knocked unconscious so is the watcher. We wake up when he wakes up and time has run past yet it feels like seconds.
Frankly, I thought it was a genius idea for a movie and I would love to see more like this.
Birdman already did this.
shareYeah at best it looks like 2 continuous shots but yeah I noticed that.
shareThe screen can go black at any time for any reason. It was shot so that it would look like it was one shot regardless.
shareGranted, the camera continued from that same location, it's not like the next scene was from a completely different location.
shareThe camera moved position though. The camera was following behind him, then when he gets shot, the screen turns black. The very next thing we see is a close-up of his face. The camera doesn't stay in the same position.
share