The Thin Red Line

Rating:
Summary: A Question of Human Nature
Review: This movie came out the same year that "Saving Private Ryan" hit the screen and suffered from expectations that it was going to be the same style of movie. Terrence Malick has shifted the WWII microscope away from the battles an into human nature and the epic question of violence as a part of human nature and the search for enlightenment in the face of tremendous carnage. The novelistic approach gives the film a loose structure that might turn off those who are expecting a "Battleground" or "The Dirty Dozen" type of storytelling. For me, this movie was a reminder that there are still artists in the film industry and that it isn't solely about the story being told but rather the willingness of an artist to challenge us to ask the hardest questions of ourselves.

Rating:
Summary: One of the finest films of the 1990s!
Review: Terrence Malick has a reputation as one of the more eccentric and iconoclastic directors alive today. He has been regarded at times with the same reverence as Stanley Kubrick, another iconoclastic director. However, Malick's reputation has been based on just three feature films: Badlands, Days of Heaven, and The Thin Red Line. All of these films show a very personal, unorthodox method of story-telling, and all of them are mesmerizing films. Unfortunately, none of these films were great box office successes. Malick's last film, The Thin Red Line, was sadly overlooked in the shadow of Saving Private Ryan, but in many ways it is the more spiritual and moving of the two films. I love both films, but The Thin Red Line is such a deep film that encourages so many different interpretations that I have re-watched this film much more often than Saving Private Ryan. The difference between the two war films is, to use an analogy, like the difference between 2001 and Star Wars (ie., they are both great films but in very different ways). I won't bother to go into the plot very much, as Malick's aspirations go beyond a straight-forward story. Besides, there is no central character to Thin Red Line. It is more the story of entire C Company during the Guadalcanal campaign. As such, some audiences have found it difficult to identify with any one character, but by broadening his focus, Malick is better able to narrate his cinematic lyrical poem. In fact, if you look at the film as a visual poem rather than a typical Hollywood narrative, you will probably be able to appreciate the film more. I have just a few words about the DVD, which I purchased. The picture and sound quality of the DVD are top-notch. Picture is sharp and clear, and the sound is spread out amongst all the speakers quite well. The sound quality isn't quite as room-shaking and awe-inspiring as in Saving Private Ryan (especially the DTS version, wow!) but it is nonetheless very good. There aren't any really significant extras. There is an unusual section with the Malayasian songs from the soundtrack. It's like getting a music CD with the DVD; quite an odd but interesting extra. That's about it, other than the usual subtitles. Bottom line: if you like films like Apocalypse Now and if you are willing to take the time to watch this almost-3 hour film, you will probably like this film. After all, Siskel (before he died) chose Thin Red Line as one of his favorite films of 1998, and Martin Scorcese also named this film as one of his picks for top ten films of the 1990s. So, I highly recommend this film!

Rating:
Summary: A truly atrocious Movie
Review: My grandfather was in WWII, stationed in Guadalcanal, and if his battalion ever had a CO like the one played by Nick Nolte, that CO would find himself as a KIA statistic pretty quickly. In addition, I don't believe I have seen anything quite as ridiculous as the opening sequence where some guy is swimming, and stares at some woman and her child; is this supposed to dramatic or something? The soundtrack is horrible, the plot is horrible, and the setting is horrible.

If a person hadn't watched this movie yet, they would say, "how can it be horrible?, it has Nick Nolte, Sean Penn, George Clooney, John Travolta, and Woody Harrelson in it". The fact of the matter is, the mediocrity of this movie is inexplicable, with a cast this excellent, it should have at least been remotely interesting.

While watching it in the theater, I honestly got sick of the experience, but I couldn't leave, I waited in line all day just to see it. Please, if you havn't watched this movie yet, don't repeat my mistake, for the love of God, don't watch this movie, you have an opportunity to save a few hours of your short lives by not watching this movie. If you must watch a movie about war, watch Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, Platoon, or Saving Private Ryan, because this movie has nothing to do with war. This movie is about some weirdo's bizarre and perverse view of the universe, it is almost certainly not about WWII (I thought it was set during Vietnam initially, the guy in the beginning looks like he's on some sort of hallucinogenic!). This movie is a disgrace to the legacy of millions of people who sacrificed their lives during WWII, under an intelligent form of government, this sort of cinematic garbage would have been banned (I wish the FCC would focus their repression on mediocre film making, instead of unnecessary violence or sexual content!).

Rating:
Summary: Horrible movie
Review: This movie is poorly made. In the beach landing scene there isa camera shot that starts out at the side of a landing craft andweaves in front of it. When the shot weaves in front of the landingcraft, you can see the wake of the boat that the camera is on...There is a lot of scenes that are long, boring, and unimportant to theplot( which gives the impression that there was no film editing). Itis not original. What was done here was done much better in FrancisFord Coppola's "Apocalypse Now"(although the scene whereColonel Kurtz is killed could have been shortened a lot.) The battleslook very unrealistic. Ben Hur and Spartacus showed the horrors ofwar better than this thing did. The only good scenes are the oneswith Nick Nolte. There is another movie about the Guadalcanal fightthat was made in the forties before World War 2 was over which mayseem boring these days but is not as boring as this...

Rating:
Summary: THE MADNESS OF MAN VERSUS MOTHER NATURE
Review: Terrence Malick's film THE THIN RED LINE is a beacon of both cimematic nobility and actual intellectual conscience in a director; as opposed to award hungry mad egotism and self-promotion. This exceptional film allows for what most films today seek to forbid. The emotional and intellectual freedom and space of the audience to think your own thoughts and feel your own feelings. A film that is the essence of what culture in a democracy should be. In contrast SAVING PRIVATE RYAN is totally oppressive allowing only to perceive the fraudulant viewpoint of its director (...apart from the fact that American soldiers are the only allied soldiers seen in RYAN...there are only it seemed two French families left in France as if the rest were apparently off on holiday till the coast was clear...and there is no mention of the colosus taking place on the Eastern front...) where in such a singular view is hammered into the viewer's mind one feels too put upon to form one's own individual comprehension. In contrast Terrence Malick's THE THIN RED LINE provides the audience with contemplation and meditation and the breathing space between the action to apply your own mind and interpret what you see through your own eyes bringing your own life baggage into the equation.

So allow me please to share my interpretation of this the single greatest war film ever made. For me there are two crucial dimensions to this film that I have yet read among any of the other customer reviews. One is that this is a conflict between Man and our planet's ecological mother and that it is a story that reveals the insanity of the industrialized world seeking not only to gain a victory of one nation over another but in which both the native aboriginals and the very ecology that envelopes the characters knows that no matter who is the victor they shall rape the land for profit and disregard all native wisdom in the process. The film is filled with atmospheric tention and the constant sense of nature's presence...these soldiers spend as much time fighting the ecology as a human enemy. The other extraodinary aspect of this film that goes unspoken about is the humanity and tragedy in the enlightened portrayal of the Japanese soldiers who in prior Hollywood films have been robotic lunatics. Through physical acting and a beautiful music score with very little dialogue we experience the pain, agony and humiliation of the Japanese and we feel just how

degraded they have become. In war one is reduced to murdering the enemy like they are mere insects...(20yrs later in Vietnam US General William C.Westmoreland would refer to the Vietnamese people as "termites"). This film has one of the greatest cast lists and gut-wrenching performances from Nick Notle to the scene stealing John Cusack. But for me it is Elias Koteas previously best known for his work with Atom Egoyan who is the eternal flame of ethical conscience and thoughtful wisdom. There is also a native culture in this film that of the Melanesian people and their beautiful vocal harmony music. Unlike RYAN in this film we gain a feeling and a recognition of the place we are in and that, that place has a people that is has a culture and they have a history and a future and that the world is not just composed of Americans.

The DVD of this film is perfect and it is the only credible way to experience this film in the home.

5 Stars all the way...(...you can forget about SHAVING RYAN'S

PRIVATES...it does not even come close!)

Rating:
Summary: i dont know what to say
Review: what is this .. i wonder how do you people give this film any stars .. the guy's who did this masterpice where drunk .. what is this .. a lot of you crazy people who think that are prety smart and see things in the movie there owen way and talk about this secret message in the movie or what ever i think your making this up coz there is nothing in this movie .. its about some guys who where stoned and wanted to make a movie so they did this movie .. they where stoned i swear .. or they are crazy or from another plant or some thing like that .. 3 hours of my life have been gone .. i dont want this to happen to any of you .. go do some thing else dont see this movie coz i know a lot of people who did and after that they started to be real wierd and say starnge things ,thanks god i am still alive ..

Rating:
Summary: As Good as the Book
Review: Several customers have complained that "the book was better than the film." I think that betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of cinema vs. book literature. A movie is, for the most part, a work in itself. TTRL in itself is a brilliant film--and one of the most beautifully cinematic I have ever seen. The acting is top notch (especially by Nolte and Cavaziel). The directing is superb. In short, it is a very well-made film, and comparing it with what the book is trying to do limits the film to having no interpretive quality. If the director wants to spin off the movie to accomplish his own ends, that's great as long as he does it well. I always get antzy when someone comes out with a new Shakespeare film. I, too, have the same inclination (which I fight) that the movie must be EXACTLY LIKE THE PLAY/BOOK/WHATEVER. That's an incredibly limiting view of the art of cinema. No one is bothered when Kissin plays Chopin's Piano Concerto no.1 differently than Argerich. And film should be even more free than something as meticulously transcribed as music.

Rating:
Summary: Doomed to fail
Review: Many people have already compared this to Saving Private Ryan, so I won't bother with that. What I think is a more interesting comparison is the film of TTRL vs. the novel. To put it succinctly, the novel is amazing. I think everyone should know by now that when you try to transform an amazing novel into a movie it will always be lacking. As others have stated, they should have given this movie a different title, because it is not, and could never hope to be, The Thin Red Line.

Rating:
Summary: A stunning clash of philosophies.
Review: It strikes me that profound notions about philosophy form the moral core of this impressive film. The two "main" characters, Pvt. Witt and Sgt. Welsh, have an uneasy relationship. But this is much more than a person-to-person conflict. Witt and Welsch embody the conflicting ideals of transcendentalism (Witt) and existentialism (Welsh). Welsh, the existentialist, doesn't believe one man can make any difference in the world. But Witt, the transcendentalist, feels a power within himself, a completely selfless desire to protect his fellow "Charlie" Company infantrymen. To Terance Malick's great credit, neither of these philosophies emerges as the correct one. Witt gets a chance to prove himself, but at what cost? Welsh may have underestimated the worth of a single man, but isn't he still standing at the end? If you hated this movie, or found it boring, I feel for you. Try to understand that it's perfectly acceptable to leave a film with more questions than answers. In fact, some of us wish it happened a good deal more often.

Rating:
Summary: The perfect war movie - so much better than SPR
Review: This movie was head and shoulders above Saving Private Ryan. Where SPR takes safe roads, The Thin Red Line shows art; where SPR resorts to an "A-Team" like ending, The Thin Red Line keeps you on your toes. I could go on and on about this movie, but let me tell you, even my 13 year old son thought this was far better than SPR.