Much has been made of 1917's cinematography which, through very skilful editing, makes it appear that the film is shot in one continuous track. It's done extremely well, although there is a very clear, deliberate and unambiguous break slightly over halfway through.

1917 is the latest film from director Sam Mendes, who co-wrote the script with Krysty Wilson-Cairns. Its story is of World War 1 lance corporals Schofield and Blake (George Mackay and Dean-Charles Chapman) who are commanded by General Erinmore (Colin Firth) to run a message to a battalion of 1,600 men to call off an attack the following morning which will result in their massacre.

The film takes on the character of a portmanteau piece as the two messengers run into each episodic scene before moving on to the next one. Some of these scenes work better than others. And it has the drawback of too many shallow cameos from actors unable to bring any depth to their part. The one exception to this is the excellent Mark Strong as a gruffly benevolent and politically-savvy captain who clearly knows the best way to keep his men alive is by being supremely efficient at his job.

The plot has soap opera elements to it - lance corporal Blake is told his brother's one of those about to be slaughtered. And there's plenty of contrived happenstance; suspension of disbelief is sorely tested more than once. The lingering doubt that the mode of delivering the message isn't perhaps the first option that would come to mind is never really dispelled. But perhaps the film's main failing is its emotional sterility, only at the end is it moving.

Sir Sam is a director of deserved renown whose two recent films for the Bond franchise, Skyfall and Spectre, are amongst the best of that canon. And his skill as a director is shown in 1917; despite the negatives it remains a film with some great merit. I feel Sir Sam has simply allowed technical wizardry and the bait of Oscars to take precedent over storytelling. He's a good filmmaker. He has more good work inside him.