I'm 100 minutes in and bored. Some parts just really, really drag.
All Quiet on the Western Front
16,627 Views |
95 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by Head Ninja In Charge
Then you'll LOVE the novel.
The principal German parts seemed to be played almost entirely by German-born actors.
Watched it tonight. Feels weird to say I "enjoyed" it given the subject matter, but I definitely recommend it. I've never read the book or seen previous versions of the movie, so I went in fairly blind.
Just finished it. Still trying to process it but I think overall I wasn't that impressed with it. I don't know exactly what I expected watching it, but I can't help but feel let down. I thought they showed the brutality of trench warfare pretty good but that's about all i enjoyed (if enjoyed is even the right word). Like someone else said, definitely felt too artsy. Very much a fan of the OG or even the 1979 version. I for sure need to reread AQOTWF though, it's been a while and also Storm of Steel
Just finished rewatch and much better the 2nd time. First time spent reading captions and trying to figure out who was who and waiting for Zemo to hit the club. Outstanding movie all the way.
Watched it last night. It was a hard watch. The battle scenes were so well done. The crater scene broke my heart. It left me feeling pretty hollow. Which of course is the point of the movie.
I have not seen the 79 version since my school days and don't remember any of it. But something about this one felt disjointed. I thought it was well done but something was off that I can't put a finger on. But I also do not watch many international films.
I have not seen the 79 version since my school days and don't remember any of it. But something about this one felt disjointed. I thought it was well done but something was off that I can't put a finger on. But I also do not watch many international films.
Watched it last night. It was ok. The original is better IMO. Its version of Paul's ending was more poignant.
Y'all should check out "Journeys End" on Prime for a gritty WWI film from the Brit perspective. My absolute favorite WWI film
Watched it last night. I thought it was fantastic. War is hell, but this one was especially so, it seems.
AgBQ-00 said:
Watched it last night. It was a hard watch. The battle scenes were so well done. The crater scene broke my heart. It left me feeling pretty hollow. Which of course is the point of the movie.
I have not seen the 79 version since my school days and don't remember any of it. But something about this one felt disjointed. I thought it was well done but something was off that I can't put a finger on. But I also do not watch many international films.
Agreed on the crater scene. Rough
Great War movie
Fantastic movie
Nobody cares. Work Harder
This is in the top 3 for my favorite novels of all time. I didn't understand the depiction of PTSD as a high schooler. Now, it hits way too close to home. I'm guessing I probably shouldn't watch this despite my desire to do so.
Saw it last night. there were parts i enjoyed but overall i found it lacking in a lot of ways. Dialogue wasn't good, acting, particularly by the side characters was extremely underwhelming, and overall the plot and scenes of the movie just meandered around. It just seemed so disjointed to me. If you remember "The thin red line" that's what i'd use as a comp. Unnecessarily artsy when brutal honesty and true depictions tell the best story of war
Battle scenes were very good but not great. Overall I'd give it a B-
This is easily my favorite book of all time and I Love WWI movies and have watched just about everything that's been put out there and wanted so much more.
Battle scenes were very good but not great. Overall I'd give it a B-
This is easily my favorite book of all time and I Love WWI movies and have watched just about everything that's been put out there and wanted so much more.
Curious, did you go with the English dubbed audio or German with subtitles?
I thought this movie was very well done. I would echo that "enjoy" isn't the right word based on the subject matter, but the book is one of my favorites and this adaptation captured a lot of what I visualized when reading the book.
The movie isn't battle after battle, but I didn't find the parts in-between as being disjointed or too artsy. The repeated focus on the different standard of living/view on the war between the leadership/commanders and the soldiers in the trenches seemed poignant to the message they were trying to convey. I think the treatment of the beginning and end of the war reminded me of two other WWI books, "The Guns of August" and "11th Month, 11th Day, 11th Hour".
The movie isn't battle after battle, but I didn't find the parts in-between as being disjointed or too artsy. The repeated focus on the different standard of living/view on the war between the leadership/commanders and the soldiers in the trenches seemed poignant to the message they were trying to convey. I think the treatment of the beginning and end of the war reminded me of two other WWI books, "The Guns of August" and "11th Month, 11th Day, 11th Hour".
English dubbed, which to be fair, would explain some of the clunkiness of the dialogue. to be honest i didn't notice i had a choice until i paused it about 2 hours in. at that point i figured i'd just ride it out.
still, i don't think that was a very big issue with me. for
some reason this just didn't click like i thought it would
still, i don't think that was a very big issue with me. for
some reason this just didn't click like i thought it would
Yeah that's why I asked. At the screenings of course it was Geman with English subtitles and I thought the dialogue was fine, similar to the novel in a lot of ways.
To each their own. I loved it. I also loved Dunkirk which I was surprised not many did. I also thought 1917 was a letdown...which I was surprised not many did.
To each their own. I loved it. I also loved Dunkirk which I was surprised not many did. I also thought 1917 was a letdown...which I was surprised not many did.
Just watched this evening. What a fantastic and just tragic movie. Good lord WWI was hell.
Watched it last night. Good movie. I'll probably read the book from the recommendations on here because it just felt that some of the emotion the movie was trying to make you feel came up a little short of the dread, hopelessness and loss of innocence due to not having the time to layout the story more.
have to watch foreign movies in their original language!Teacher_Ag said:
Curious, did you go with the English dubbed audio or German with subtitles?
that is what makes it an authentic war movie and not a bunch of British actors pretending to be in the SS!
Only one problem with the movie is that it's actually too short. The passage of time is too fast to care much about anyone but the main character, you also don't get a feel for the stifling boredom that life in the trench was like.
[img]http://readthetruth.com/images/dinosaur.gif[/img]
Agree, the movie moved at much too fast of a pace for what they were trying to convey in most aspects for the time allotted.GoAgs92 said:
Only one problem with the movie is that it's actually too short. The passage of time is too fast to care much about anyone but the main character, you also don't get a feel for the stifling boredom that life in the trench was like.
That's why Band of Brothers is so great. If they tried to make that into a movie that was two and a half hours long then it wouldn't be one of (if not the) best war shows ever made.
Yeah this could have really worked also as a 6-8 episode HBO miniseries of prestige TV. I rewatched 1917 this weekend and it's such a perfect movie to me with such an excellent narrow focus.
An AQOTWF mini series would have been cool
I watched it last night. I thought it was good and liked it better than 1917 (which I thought was ,more focused on being visually artistic than a good story).
One thing this show and many others dwell on is how the lines barely moved the whole war, claiming that that was what made it wasteful. While clearly it was a waste from a death perspective, they weren't fighting for territory most of the war, but for favorable treaty terms. Sure enough, Germany lost the war, and lost far more in the treaty of Versailles than the territory on the ground. Hitler didn't stop after he regained the Rhineland, because that wasn't what they were actually fighting for.
One thing this show and many others dwell on is how the lines barely moved the whole war, claiming that that was what made it wasteful. While clearly it was a waste from a death perspective, they weren't fighting for territory most of the war, but for favorable treaty terms. Sure enough, Germany lost the war, and lost far more in the treaty of Versailles than the territory on the ground. Hitler didn't stop after he regained the Rhineland, because that wasn't what they were actually fighting for.
They were fighting to break the lines and reach Paris. "Favorable treaty terms" meant holding the power in France to take territory, especially colonial territory.
That's not how those scenes came across to me.BQ78 said:
Also for it being billed as the German version of the film, the credits reveal more Czech names than German.
The most German aspect of it is almost the Nazi propaganda aspect that the Allies were jerks at Compigne, they were but the film emphasizes it.
They came across as furious at what had been done in their country. They didn't just want an armistice, they wanted complete capitulation.
They deserved it.
The crater scene was tough to watch.
Sapper Redux said:
They were fighting to break the lines and reach Paris. "Favorable treaty terms" meant holding the power in France to take territory, especially colonial territory.
Yeah, you can't get the other side to sue for peace until they've lost something valuable. And apparently lost manpower didn't move the needle much for the aristocracy at the time.
It didn't take long for that to be a pipe dream.Sapper Redux said:
They were fighting to break the lines and reach Paris. "Favorable treaty terms" meant holding the power in France to take territory, especially colonial territory.
I was speaking to the German POV not the allies.
Why was my post about the main musical sting in this movie sounding exactly like (to me at least) a comedic plot element in a Futurama episode removed? Does it violate some terms of service in the fine print? Did I spoil the plot of the Futurama episode for someone?
It also wasn't totally a joke, it is literally what I spent almost the whole movie thinking about.
It also wasn't totally a joke, it is literally what I spent almost the whole movie thinking about.
watched it last night.
mixed feelings about this.
it was definitely grittier and more realistic in the warfare part than the 1970s version
but they radically changed the story from the book and the original movie. the original was based more on Paul growing up, his school, the school teacher then becomes their ruthless drill instructor, and what results from their lifelong friendships.
this movie there was next to zero human connection, it was just "hey here they are on day one of their battle, and now we jump ahead 18 months to watch some buffoon generals eat croissants!"
that was not in the book or the original and detracted. this was more a political movie trying to show how the generals were to blame, when reality was it was the leaders of the Triple Entente and the Central Powers that were to blame.
Ludendorf and Hindenburg were not buffoons, they were brave battle hardened commanders who were awarded medals for bravery in battle.
mixed feelings about this.
it was definitely grittier and more realistic in the warfare part than the 1970s version
but they radically changed the story from the book and the original movie. the original was based more on Paul growing up, his school, the school teacher then becomes their ruthless drill instructor, and what results from their lifelong friendships.
this movie there was next to zero human connection, it was just "hey here they are on day one of their battle, and now we jump ahead 18 months to watch some buffoon generals eat croissants!"
that was not in the book or the original and detracted. this was more a political movie trying to show how the generals were to blame, when reality was it was the leaders of the Triple Entente and the Central Powers that were to blame.
Ludendorf and Hindenburg were not buffoons, they were brave battle hardened commanders who were awarded medals for bravery in battle.
I don't think the movie was blaming generals. I think it was showing how worthless human life was in this war.
Featured Stories
See All
Five in Five: Offseason intel as spring ball begins
by Billy Liucci
36:20
15h ago
3.9k
Expect dramatics: A&M hoops heads back to OKC in March
by Olin Buchanan
14:34
1h ago
1.1k
Michael Earley discusses A&M's 1-2 weekend in Norman
by David Nuño
LOYAL AG
Outsiders seem to have a different opinion on the baseball team
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
92
LeagueCityAg
Outsiders seem to have a different opinion on the baseball team
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
56
NukeAg10
Outsiders seem to have a different opinion on the baseball team
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
22
txaggie2012
Outsiders seem to have a different opinion on the baseball team
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
21
Desert Fox
Outsiders seem to have a different opinion on the baseball team
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
20
SVR44
Outsiders seem to have a different opinion on the baseball team
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
18