Rating: 
Summary: Philosophizing about war?
Review: When I walked out of the theater, I was very disappointed with The Thin Red Line. I could not believe that such a great cast with such resources could be wasted on a film like this. The day this movie came out on video, I rented it. I so much wanted to like this film that I watched it twice. After watching this movie a total of three times I still had the same opinion about it. It has no real direction, which is all right, because war can be ambiguous with a lack of direction; but what really bothered me was the lack of realism in the soldier's actions and dialogue. A lot of the reviews of this movie talk about how beautiful and poetic and philosophical it was, which is all true about this film. It was very poetic and beautiful. But this not a true portrayal of what war was and is like. Terrence Malick tried to make a war movie that was poetic and philosophical and he succeeded. The only problem with this is that in reality soldiers don't go around philosophizing about the war they're in and about life. Everything they do is about surviving. They talk about survival, and about their family and about getting the hell out of there and going home. This film was supposed to be about the soldiers, but I never felt like I understood or got to know the soldiers in this movie. Terrence Malick jumped around from one character to the next so much, trying to give the audience a sense of each individual soldier that you end up never really feeling any kind of connection with any of the soldiers in the film, and the film ends up being very sporadic and uneven. Saving Private Ryan did a much better job of connecting the audience with the soldiers in the film. When one of the American soldiers in SPR got shot, it had an impact on me. It made me feel sorrow for the soldier.... it made me feel the reality of the price that was paid for us in WWII over 55 years ago. It gave me a feeling of indebtedness to a whole generation who gave up over 500,000 lives so that I could have freedom.. In The Thin Red Line, I did not get this type of emotion. It felt like I was watching a movie and it did not make WWII seem real to me. All in all there was a lot of potential for a very good, if not one the best war movies ever. The only thing missing, was a director who truly understands what war is like. Terrence Malick spends so much time jumping from character to character and making sure he gets breathtakingly beautiful shots of the environment, that he loses all sight of what he is doing. MAKING A WAR FILM. It has been twenty years since we have gotten a Terrence Malick film, and hopefully it will be twenty years before we get another one. If you want to see a movie about war that is truly a masterpiece, watch Saving Private Ryan. It will make appreciate the freedom that you enjoy. One last thing, I would like to say to all veterans of World War Two, THANK YOU FOR MY FREEDOM.
Rating:
Summary: Pretenious, boring, basically Full of itself
Review: This is one of those movies that people are afraid to just admit that it isn't good because it was directed by a world famous director, has plenty of stars, and tried to portray itself as art instead of a story. This is a poorly made film. There is no story movement (pretty much no story), and the characters have almost no depth, (being on the screen for only a few minutes), and it's just plain slow. In a word very pretenious.
Rating: 
Summary: Visually and intectually stunning
Review: I found this movie to be better than Saving Private Ryan although I suppose it is unfair to compare the too as they are both different looks at WWII. Why I found this movie better than Saving Private Ryan was the lack of cheesiness which was evident throughout Saving Private Ryan and especially prevalent at the end of the movie. I also enjoyed the fact that Terence Malick did not choose to pack the movie full of action sequences and choose to show more character development. I would also like to point out to the reviewer that said this movie should have portrayed more courageous soldiers and better commanding officers as tribute to those who fought in the war but that was not the point of this movie at all. This movie is not meant to be a tribute, it is simply a story of the horror and futility of war. Lastly James Caviezel as Pvt. Witt deserved the Oscar nod not Sean Penn.
Rating:
Summary: Weak and Inaccurate
Review: This movie is slow, boring, and if our soldiers truly behaved as portrayed, the end should involve Hitler and Japan winning WWII.Hey, all you coffee house liberals that love this movie, pretending that our fathers who fought in WWII act like you do when you fight with your 90's girlfriends...it's called PROJECTION. If it weren't for them, you wouldn't have anywhere to whine....
Rating:
Summary: A unique war movie masterpiece
Review: This unconventional film about the multiple facets of war strikes gold. Based on the novel by J. Jones (from here to eternity) the film actually surpasses the book version in its almost poetic vision through the addition of a philosophical antiwar character. The acting is superb with an impressive performance by Nolte. The cinematography is excelent as well. In short this is a movie not to be missed.
Rating:
Summary: A cinematic Requiem
Review: After so many war films concentrating on action and battle sequences it is refreshing to see one which allows a deeper reflection on the futility of war and each soldier's role in it. A long film, but it is impossible to think of any one moment which could be taken out without subtracting from the entire experience. I came out of the cinema from my first viewing emotionally drained and exhausted, and the second time I saw it repeated the process at a new level. Completed with a brilliant score and wonderful native chants, you'll excuse my getting carried away if I say that it almost took on the feel of a Requiem! The cinematography is right up there with 'Lawrence of Arabia' and 'The Man Who Would Be King', so this one is definitely widescreen or not at all.
Rating:
Summary: Not one redeeming characteristic to be found... pathetic!
Review: I felt like I had been mugged after watching this film. My money was gone, and I got nothing but irritation and angst in return. It was far too long, the editing was awful, and it was like watching a bad PBS documentary with foul language thrown in. The attempts at artistic expression were laughable. This movie was just not entertaining at all. Save your money.
Rating: 
Summary: One of the first times I had nothing to say afterwards....
Review: Usually after leaving the theatre, I've got something to say about a movie. This time, I had no idea what to say or think. It was great, it was deep, it was strange, it was compelling, magical, and very very long. Yet I wasn't bored. Or entertained. I've got no idea what I was, but I liked it. And no, I wasn't stoned....
Rating: 
Summary: A less than shining portrayal of American soldiers.
Review: First let me state that even though I really didn't care for this film, I have to say that some of the visuals in this film are quite stunning and will stick in your head for days. My main problem with the film is its protrayal of the American soldiers on the island of Guadalcanal: if this is your introduction to WWII, you would think that every soldier was a sniveling coward who would wet his pants at the first sight of the enemy, and that every officer was totally confused with no concern for their men. The soldiers who fought and died in WWII should have a more fitting tribute given to them than this film.---- PS: The person from California below me who said that the opening scene from Saving Private Ryan was so "overly sentimental" that it nearly made him sick, maybe he should go to Normandy and watch real men in their 70's and 80's break down in front of the graves over and over again and maybe he wouldn't think it so "overly sentimental".
Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece...
Review: A truly breathtaking movie. What a great miracle that this movie came out in the same year as SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. Both were excellent movies, but, to paraphrase William Faulkner, if THE THIN RED LINE was a movie of the heart, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN was a movie of the glands. Clearly, the poetic THIN RED LINE won't win any popularity contests, but there's a reason John Grisham sells more books in this country than Robert Browning. It's easier to enjoy a movie that attacks physically and gruesomely with a simple plot than it is to enjoy a movie that asks the viewer to examine critical judgments and empathize with conflicted characters. Enjoy the complexity, enjoy the almost serrated rawness, and enjoy a movie that you can truly love.
|
