I finished it a couple of days ago. Honestly think it was outstanding overall but it's a one and done for me in the same way that say Cold Mountain or Road to Perdition was. I can appreciate the quality of it but doubt I'd ever watch it again.

I can only describe the combat scenes as a war movie that felt like a horror film, at times. Can't say I've seen anything like it. I remember reactions to SPR in 1998 there was some level of criticism of how gory, graphic, and disturbing certain scenes were, especially for 24+ years ago. But the difference was, at the beginning and the end there was patriotic imagery, trumpet filled somber but reflective music, and whether it was Omaha Beach or Ramelle, there was a very specific, justified, and worthy reason for those men to trade their lives. Defeat Hitler, liberate Europe, end the Third Reich.

By contrast this film did exactly what I am sure they intended to do. Illustrate how utterly pointless that brutality of WWI was, how little was accomplished, and the shear magnitude of the losses on both sides. The whole movie is pure dread with absolutely no outcome of worth other than the war ending. Even that score played multiple times before battle scenes just made you feel some horrific was going to happen. The scene with the French tanks and flamethrowers was particularly disturbing.

Great film. Drug a bit at times. Probably won't ever watch again.

I agree with the above. It was a good movie, but something I'll likely never watch again. WW1 movies always tend to be a little slow, which I guess is the nature of the war itself where so much of it was just leaving a trench and running towards another trench filled with dudes shooting at you.

JABQ04 said:

---

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

---

I wrote my review before reading yours, but seems we are of like minds on the subject!

aTmAg said:

---

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.

---

I gave you a star

but your history is incorrect. the front lines DID move hundreds of miles in 1914 and in 1918. From the Belgian frontier all the way to Paris, from near Switzerland to Verdun.

the most deadly part of WWI was actually the first 5 months BEFORE trench warfare began!

This movie is propaganda against the "corrupt" Generals with a German viewpoint, when in fact the military officers tried all they could to avoid casualties and find some way to win the war (submarines, airplanes, tanks, flamethrowers, poison gas, amphibious landings were all created in this war)

JJxvi said:

---

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.

---

yeah it was distracting, reminded me of this Neal Diamond dub remix my kids have been playing

Stupe said:

---

The crater scene was tough to watch.

---

Just saw it. Brutal to watch.

Yes, the point of it being from the German's side is that regardless if it's the enemy, the hellacious treatment all suffered becomes even more impactful.

Finally saw it and liked it. Definitely a one and done as mentioned elsewhere though.

If you know history and the book, you will like appreciate this so much more. It truly is a treatise to the futility, frustration, and even madness of that war.

And if you do not know that this is SUPPOSED to be the point of this whole story, it can very easily be lost I think and the casual watcher just treating it as a weird but intense war movie.

If this was an actual triple A production I would judge as pretty meh but for a straight to streaming service, I thought they did ok. Could have been better, could have been a lot worse too.

LMCane said:

---

TresPuertas said:

---

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.

---

great analysis

Thin Red Line had to be one of the worst war movies ever filmed. it literally made no sense and was a waste of time to watch.

---

I think that was the point of Thin Red Line. War makes no sense and is a waste of time. It also came out around the same time as Saving Private Ryan.

I went to see Thin red line when it opened. High expectations. Looked good, but it just tried too hard and took itself too seriously to be enjoyable. Some scenes were great but as a movie, it fell flat for me.

Yeah and i think they were happy to let people think that

Oh, definitely. The marketing was extremely misleading iirc.

How about some spoiler tags for those who haven't seen it.

Finally got to watch and finish this over the last couple of days.

Very well done. The scene with the French killing the surrendering Germans was absolutely brutal. So was the crater scene. The music was minimal, but very impactful. The shots of the trees and landscapes well done and beautiful. I may not watch it again, but it is definitely something that should be watched at least once.

My one grievance is that Paul should have died with a satisfied smile on his face like in the books, in the end he just wanted out of the hell that was the Western Front. It drives home the meaninglessness of it all even moreso. Like others have said, it's worth the watch, but probably not worth multiple viewings.

Absolutely brutal movie. Just torturous through out.

Since it has no redeeming mission, like Saving Private Ryan, it really serves to emphasis the brutality of war. There is no higher call, no greater cause these guys are fighting for, there are plainly and simply just trying to survive. As such you don't really root for anyone, you are just aghast at it all. Part of me felt like the lack of a true "mission" or goal made me feel less involved in the movie, but ultimately it served to drive home the message of the movie. War is dumb. Millions dead for a couple hundred yards.

Beautifully shot. My one small gripe might be the score. It felt too Christopher Nolanish and they used it sometimes to give scenes more gravitas than it called for.

I don't think that movie will be a rewatch for me.

Just saw it yesterday. Great movie. Looks like it get nominated for every Oscar besides the one that I thought it deserved a nom for the most and that was for the guy who played Paul. Movie doesn't go without him.