… the dumbest movie review you’ll read all day.

“1917” has one major flaw – it’s irresponsibly nationalistic

The film has amazing acting and technical achievements, but its simplistic storytelling falls in line with Trumpism

I watched “1917” today. It was a fine war movie… perhaps even a great one. Technically it is an amazing achievement… the whole two hour run is made to look like one (well, two) continuous shot. Every frame is filled with beauty and/or horror. The acting and visuals are impeccable. The plot is simple and straightforward and, in its way, tells a small story: two soldiers have to go from A to B to deliver a message.

But that’s not enough for the scold who wrote the “review” for Salon linked above, who demands that every movie tell not just a story, but an ideological one. And, of course, that better ideology had damn well better be the *right* ideology. Woe betide the film that skimps on cramming Present Day into stories set a century ago.

I’m sure there are people who will defend “1917” by saying that it’s the story of individual soldiers in a greater conflict, not a political manifesto. There are three problems with that argument. First, as mentioned earlier, it is immoral to tell a story about a war without analyzing the reasons behind that war.

Cripes, it’s like saying that every Batman movie *has* to include a scene of Thomas and Martha Wayne getting plugged by a low-rent Single Source Socialist. Every movie about spaceflight has to include a discussion of whether Tsiolkovsky, Goddard or Oberth is the true founder of modern rocketry. Every Terminator movie has to have a discussion about the politics of yellowcake uranium trafficking.

So, do yourself a favor *and* cheese off some single-minded SJW fanatics and go see “1917.” It’s a good movie well told… and, to be honest, it could *easily* be re-written to make the nationalities whatever you like.