Rating: 
Summary: A deep philosophical study on war and it's impact on people
Review: Not many war movies like The Thin Red Line have been released over the past decade . Saving Private Ryan shocked us all with it's brutal fight sequences yet it somehow hesitated to get involved too much with the soldier's soul and feelings . More recently , Pearl Harbor tried to give us a clearer view of what war is like but it was simply too polished and left you with the impression that the U.S army preferred to send first-class fashion models at it's front line. The Thin Red Line is a whole different story . It includes some stunning battles scenes too but mainly , it sticks to the thoughts that went through the minds of the people who where there. It trashes the act of war and judges it constantly by showing images of the piecefull nature and daily life of the native people of the islands right after the moments of chaos that took place during the battles . Although the cast includes some really popular stars like John Cusack , John Travolta and George Clooney ,the director chooses two less-known yet highly gifted and talented actors to carry the film : Jim Caviezel who , right from the start chooses to be alieneted in his own , dreamy world rejecting the people who conduct the war and their fake ideals and Ben Chaplin who searches for a goal in his life after breaking up with his wife. Movies like that can change a man's prespective about life and that is something that only few film makers have achieved yet.
Rating: 
Summary: Painful
Review: Perhaps I would have liked this movie more if I had either read the novel on which it is based or had seen the previous adaptation. As it was, I based my expectations on the trailer, and that proved to be a major mistake. The action sequences were good, but gory, and the gore didn't seem to have a point, such as was the case for the opening of "Saving Private Ryan." Some have described the movie as "ethereal" and "moodily philosophical." I found it to be overlong, disjointed, and unintelligible.To make matters worse, the DVD lacks worthwhile special features. Given the number of folks who seemed to have liked this movie, maybe it's a real hit-or-miss film. If so, I recommend you rent it first.
Rating: 
Summary: A study in pretension
Review: A study in pretension, The Thin Red Line marks the infamously reclusive director Terrence Malick's anticlimactic return to the cinema. On the surface, the film is a war movie, based on the James Jones novel of the same name. But, this film has no real interest in telling a war story at all. Instead, the film embarks on an artsy philosophical journey to discover the soul, a journey so long and painful that one might prefer the war itself. The closest thing the film has to a central character is one Private Witt (Jim Caviezel). At the opening of the film, he and another soldier have gone AWOL to live in a virtual Eden with some islanders. However, Witt is soon captured and sent into the Battle of Guadalcanal. A few other stories intertwine throughout the film's wanderings. Private Bell (Ben Chaplin) pines for his wife back home. Lt. Colonel Tall (Nick Nolte) is eager for a battle. Captain Staros (Elias Koteas) doesn't share his commanding officer's bloodlust, and searches for a better way to use his men. But, intermingled with the war (and sometimes overlaid on top of it), the soldiers (turned poet-philosophers) contemplate eternal questions of life. Is mankind apart from nature or a part of it? Where does evil come from? Is war a natural phenomenon? What is the nature of the soul? And other, similarly pretentious, unanswerable questions are posed with regularity throughout the film. Malick expects to grasp absolute attention from the viewer. To an extent with the battle scenes, he succeeds, but coming around to the characters, the script does not let them develop individually. As a whole, they are obviously an important asset in battle, but in single form, what we get it a few minutes alone with them to explore their personalities, and then they are thrown to the enemy before we get a chance to appreciate them. There are several walk-ons and voice-overs within the content, but much of it is brief and underlying to the scripts grasp on reality. Only a selected few characters can be seen throughout the entire 170 minutes of the film, and even they have development problems. That is, of course, with the exception of Sean Penn's role as Sergeant Edward Welsh. The Thin Red Line is actually composed of two separate films that try, but are never able, to merge into a complete whole. There's the traditional war story on one hand, delivering the overly familiar scenes of nervous soldiers heading to battle and plunged into the hellish thicket of combat. The other film is a puffed-up philosophical National Geographic piece. Lingering shots of wildlife, the local flora and fauna, and the idyllic lives of the Melanesian islanders intertwine with portentous philosophical ramblings. Though the two films are thoroughly intercut and overlaid, there's never a sense that one relates to the other. Would these soldiers be thinking these thoughts? No...it sounds much more like the self-important words a liberal screenwriter might dream up than an epiphany discovered on the field of battle. The main problem with producing films about historical events, particularly something as over-filmed as World War II, is simply bringing something new to the table. With Full Metal Jacket, Kubrick depected a harsh view of boot camp and previously unfilmed urban combat. What's Malick vision? He tried to make a WWII 'art' film split between an experimental and traditional narrative. It sometimes works, but Malick adds the philosophical ramblings of Private Witt to pound the point in. The whole picture copiously employs voice-overs to tell us what we could figure out from the images, mostly about the insanity of war. In the end, because history is written by the victors, the films about WWII I find to be the most insightful are from those that lost this war. The (very) few films from the Germans. And where are the Japanese WWII films? They are certainly better than Nick Nolte receiving a lecture from General Vinny Barbarino.
Rating:
Summary: The best motion picture film of all time.
Review: Never before in all my movie experiences have a witnessed such a fascinating picture of beauty, violence, and compassion thrown together in such a wide array of colors. Not enough can be said about this 3 hour epic war film masterpiece to do it justice. In my opinion it is clearly the best war picture of all time because it captures the thoughts and feelings soldiers had during the war. This film allows them to share their thoughts with us and understand the horrors of war and the destructiveness of human nature. The story takes place during WWII were the soldiers of C-company are getting ready to face a brutal uphill onslaught against the Japanese in Guato Canal that the American forces feel will be a major turning point in the war. What truly works in this film are the many questions the soldiers ask throughout the film during their confrontations on and off of the battlefield. Each soldier is scarred and distressed in some personal and emotional way. There are numerous ideologies and questions the soldiers ask about their mortality, the cruelty of nature, and the absence of a caring god. Through individual narration the viewer is allowed to feel a deep sense of empathy, sadness, and understanding for that character. All the actors give outstannding performances, especially Nick Nolte, James Cavaziel, Ben Chaplin, and Sean Penn. Director Terrence Malick outdid himself by outdoing the cinematic beauty he previoulsy accomplished in Days of Heaven by hiring Cinematographer John Toll (Braveheart). The filming of the mountains, the animals, and the tall grass plains are visually stunning. The DVD version of this film is great. What works here is the picture quality because it really brings out the visual beauty of the cinematography in the film. The DTS soundtrack also enhances Hanz Zimmer's timely epic score and the numerous amounts of bomb explosions and machine gun fire. I believe everyone should view this film because I feel it is timeless classic that few film filmakers will be able to surpass.
Rating: 
Summary: A very moving war film!
Review: "The Thin Red Line" had the severe bad luck of being released in the shadow of one of the most favored modern war films of all time, "Saving Private Ryan." Oscar buzz was all the rage for that film, which focused on the war in Europe as well as patriotism and courage. "The Thin Red Line" chooses to focus more on the human beings at war than the country or mission for which they are fighting. It dives deep into the subconscious of its characters, exposing their feelings in the face of battle and carnage. Though heavily stylized, director Terrence Malick knows where the movie is going, and takes it there in stride. Spanning a running time of just short of three hours, we're taken on a journey to Guadalcanal, where American troops are landing on the sandy beaches only to encounter a foe that, for a while, seems unbeatable. Their mission: to take over an airstrip and give America an advantage in the Pacific War. It is here that the characters are established: First Sergeant Welsh (Sean Penn), whose only wish is to lose all feeling for the events he experiences; Lt. Colonel Tall (Nick Nolte), obsessed more with his image than with actual victory; Private Witt (Jim Caviezel), a quiet, almost spiritual soldier with a soft yet firm heart; and Private Bell (Ben Chaplin), whose memories of his wife are what fuel his drive to fulfill his mission so he may return home. Like "Ryan," this film has intense images of graphic violence associated with war and battle. While Malick does not use the same technique as Speilberg, whose film is gritty and never without unsteady camera shots, his slow-motion captures, cut to the powerful score of Hans Zimmer, are just as moving and powerful. Scenes that stick out in the mind are the Americans' capture of a Japanese bunker on a hill, while their raiding of an enemy camp is one of the most moving pieces of cinematic masterpiece I've ever seen in any film. The second half of the film takes us to where the real focus of the movie has been all along. After their mission is accomplished, the regiment is given a week of rest, during which time each of the characters is given a chance to reflect on the experiences of the previous day. Some of them question their own existence in the face of such brutality, while others try to cope with the fact that they have committed murder. The movie is brilliant for its ability to separate one's feeling of victory with their latter realizations of the acts they have taken part in. One right after another, the movie brings out unheard of emotions that will stir even the hardest of cynics and critics. The images of war, people crying out for help, breathing their last, and just the frenzied, frantic bravura of it all is deeply moving, one of the best war portrayals to date. The psychological examinations are also very heartfelt, establishing the soldiers as characters, and more than mere pawns in a game of war. Each of them has a monologue that plays during the movie, their thoughts and feelings put into poetry for the screen. While the movie is particularly preferential in its choice of which characters deserve more screen time, the performances turned in by each actor are masterpieces in themselves. Penn is forceful as the hard yet movable Welsh, while Nolte is believably stern and unrelenting as Col. Tall. Ben Chaplin is perhaps the most emotional character, Private Bell, who is haunted by thoughts of his wife back home. And Caviezel is an incredible addition to the cast as Witt, whose simplistic view of the world sets the mood for some of the movie's most powerful scenes and monologues. Even those not partial to war films may favor the grandeur and spectacle of "The Thin Red Line." A stirring war epic and an intense journey into the mind are swirled into an engrossing movie that tugs at the heartstrings with such a grip you have no choice but to go along with it.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Movie. If you haven't read the book
Review: After watching 'Saving Private Ryan' and hearing all the hype about 'The Thin Red Line,' my interest was peaked. The sheer brutality portrayed in the beginning sequence of 'Saving Private Ryan' put me in complete shock. Up until the end of the first 30 minutes of 'Saving Private Ryan,' war movies never really gave us an accurate depiction of what it's like to go into battle. What could possibly be going through one's mind as you step off a boat knowing the enemy is pointing a machine gun in your direction, just waiting for the moment when the ramp is dropped. Up until that point, when watching a war movie, those thoughts never crossed my mind. With my interest peaked, and another movie about the same war to be seen, I decided I wanted to learn a little more about war in general, and the pain and anguish young men between the ages of 18 - 27 went through. Me falling in that age group had something to do with it as well. So, instead of paying $7 to go and watch another war movie, I decided to spend an extra $7 to buy the book. I wanted to read the book first, and then watch the movie and see how well it followed along. This was either the worst mistake I could've made, or the best choice I have ever made. Now that I have confused you, I'll attempt to explain what this means below. The Worst Mistake: I have seen the movie, only after reading the book, and have heard/read a lot of great reviews, including the ones on this site. After hearing/reading all of these reviews, I can definitely see how this movie can be seen as 'philosophical', 'beautiful', 'poetic', etc. However, the movie, even though it is rather long, seems to only skim through the entire book, hopefully capturing the main scenes and give them a short, 2-minute sequence in which to grab your attention and make you realize what these young men had to endure. For example a man is lying defenseless in the middle of the battlefield screaming in anguish, while being shot at, desperately asking for help. No one can help him, for fear of being killed in the process. The screams become so unbearable, that finally Sgt. Welsh (Sean Penn) risks his life just to provide comfort to the dying man by giving him enough morphine to keep him quite until he dies. My explanation is basically how the movie interprets this moment, and many other moments: quick and not too powerful. And after watching parts like this, having already read the book, I knew I wasn¡¦t going to be satisfied with the rest of the movie. In short, had I not read the book, I may have enjoyed the movie. The Best Thing: Had I watched the movie first, I may not have even thought to read an excellent book. It's hard for me to say how I liked this movie. To be perfectly honest, I didn't like it very much at all. But, as the old saying goes: "the book is always better than the movie." And in this case there is no doubt about it. So, here are my recommendations: - If you have already read the book, and have not yet seen the movie, don't see the movie. - If you are planning on reading the book, don¡¦t see the movie - If you're not planning on reading the book, see the movie - If you have seen the movie, read the book (even though already seeing the movie will have clouded your own opinions, and killed your imagination) - If you have already read the book, and have seen the movie, tell me I'm wrong.
Rating:
Summary: One Line That Seperates All
Review: There is a very thin line between sanity and insanity in a human being. War is an event that makes the line only thinner. If the man is simple, there is only one question in his mind: Life or death? The hopeless battles, the hours of solitude, facing a menacing silence that is ready to erupt. A man with a more philosophical approach on life can lose it all. But that's Apocalypse Now. The Thin Red Line, adapted by James Jones' beautiful novel, is about the simple man. Which is possibly why most people like it more than Apocalypse Now. A mistake. Not to say this movie is bad, it is spectacular, but not as good as Coppola's Epic. But together they form a haunting duo about the insanity that is brought out in war. There are differences of course. While Apocalypse Now was just pure hell, Malick shows that we have made our beautiful earth an ugly combat arena. We see exotic landscapes, donated with tropical colored birds. Little beams of light pass through the green forest. Mind-blowing. A battle erupts. A baby bird, one that would perhaps grow to become as wonderful as the others described, is swinging one wing alone. Its body is covered with mud. The other wing is seriously wounded. Its fate, obviously, is sealed. It lies there because of the recent chaos of the humans. A terrifying image. Just like Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket, the war itself is unimportant. It could have been Vietnam, Somalia or Iraq. It is just the arena. God has given us life. But has he committed the greatest mistake by making us too smart? We destroy God's creations for petty purposes. I am a patriot. A passionate one. I reply those who insult my country with knuckles. But I am aware that it is one of the greatest reasons for war. And I loathe myself and society for making me like this. You might not believe in God. Neither did I, until very recently (no, it wasn't the movie that changed me- come on, I ain't that naive). But by destroying the earth with stupid wars, we betray ourselves, we destroy our home. God- I sound like some Green Peace guy. The questions in the minds of the simple man (I don't say the "stupid man"- there is a huge difference), our unimportant conflicts that devastate our world- Terrence Malick's great movie, The Thin Red Line. Spielberg directed an ok movie with Saving Private Ryan. His D-Day is possibly the best directed scene in film history. Yet it was Malick who deserved the bald golden one. But it is Hollywood after all- Nobody should expect something different.
Rating:
Summary: A long, deep snooze
Review: I wanted to walk out on this movie in the theatre - gave it another chance on DVD and returned it. The action sequences are few and dripping with "artistic flair" that seems completely out of place in a WWII film. Too many long faces and vasaline-lense shots. If you are a WWII film buff, this film should never be considered part of the genere. It is a sappy modern emotion film with guys dressed as dogfaces running through it. The acting lacks energy, the cinemetography is good, the story drags. Don't waste an evening on this one.
Rating:
Summary: A shocking movie that depics war to the lengths of truth.
Review: The Thin Red Line is an example of a very proffesional filmaker. The camerawork is fantastic. Most people expect just see soldiers fighting eachother and running around. This movie depicts war as it is, from being scared to getting killed. There is suspence throughout the picture. The story is a little incomplete, including an unclosed ending. Nevertheless, it is a spectacular peice of work.
Rating:
Summary: Great movie about a pointless war(s)
Review: What was World War II really fought over? Oil, land, political boundaries drawn on a map? I guess it all equals profit for the oil tycoons and other slave masters running this country, or the world for that matter. At least Hitler had some kind of motive or "vision" behind his 3rd Reich, albeit a bad one for some people. Thus, couldn't it be fair to say that we were as brainwashed as the Germans, but just for different reasons? Like Sean Penn's character contemplates throughout the movie, "where does this great evil come from?" Well, I'm guessing technology. Ever since the invention of the wood club people have had to come up with better ways of killing each other, and since our economy is based on technology (a.k.a. clever ways of killing other people) we've had to constantly develop better technology to keep up with our enemies-- more money equals better technology and weapons, thus the vicious cycle repeats itself over and over. As Jim Morrison aptly put it, "you're all a bunch of slaves!" Anyway what does all of this matter? Isn't it our nature to consume? Just like the vines devouring the trees in the jungle? Overall The Thin Red Line is an awesome war movie.
|
