The Thin Red Line

The film has been criticised for being a bit pretentious on Malicks part and this argument is not completely unfounded, but I tend to go for style in my films anyway (like Leon by Luke Besson for example) so I found the shots of the grass blowing and the sun shining through the trees quite enthralling.

A film which has a similar premise is probably Apocalypse Now by Francis Ford Coppola (did I spell that right?), except the thin red line has a better ending, so if you saw and liked this one I would recommend you see that.

Well I hope this review has helped you a bit. One thing I would definately recommend is that you see this film before you ever consider buying it.


Among the great films of the 90's   January 11, 2000
 10 out of 14 found this review helpful

I was first in line to see this film last year when it opened in theatres. I had loved the book, loved the director, and loved the cast. I didn't know what to make of the film. I originally found it slow, ponderous, and nothing at all like the book that had kept me riveted for 600 pages. I thought the cinematography was terrific and some of the performances (notably Elias Koteas and Ben Chaplin) were excellent. But on the whole I was disappointed.

Then about two weeks later I went to see the film again. On the second viewing, I was taken in. The battle scenes were exciting and the visuals struck me as absolutely beautiful. But still, I was hesitant to give the film a glowing recommendation.

I asked for the widescreen edition of the video for Christmas because the more I thought about the film, the better I liked it. Finally the other night I watched it for a third time...it's one of the greatest films I've ever seen and certainly one of the best films of the past decade. The cinematography, the battle scenes, the performances, the score, everything came together in a riveting three hours. I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. I found myself awestruck, wondering how Terrence Malick could have choreographed some of the battle scenes. The canvas he paints is so large and so vivid.

Some highlights: Elias Koteas as Staros, the captain with a conscience; Ben Chaplin, the young private who daydreams of his wife back home; the assault on the Japanese hilltop bunker; Woody Harrelson's "big" scene; the attack in the fog; the shot of the soldier crying in hysterics in the rain...I could on.

I do think Nick Nolte is a little over the top and I have a difficult time understanding everything he says, and George Clooney's cameo appearance seems a little unnecessary though I understand Malick originally shot about six hours of film and a lot of performances ended on the cutting room floor.

If you have the time and the interest, give this film a shot. It make take you a while, but if given the chance this hauntingly powerful film with stay with you for a much longer time than most standard Hollywood films.


Thin Red Lies   January 11, 2000
 1 out of 6 found this review helpful

I saw this movie and thought it wasn't well done. The movie is hard to follow. One major note to people whole love Gory movies, this one is not for you. No gory scenes at all. The sound track is alright and some of the special effects, but other then that its long and drawn out. if you're interested in a good gory movie look at HAMBURGER HILL or FULL METAL JACKET or SAVING PRIVATE RYAN.


Self-indulgent garbage   January 10, 2000
 16 out of 34 found this review helpful

Ick. Yuck. Blah. Such dreck, so boring, so many awful performances, so cliche-ridden, so poorly written and conceived, so loooooooooong. Really, the worst movie I've seen since Showgirls, and in fact worse, because Malick is supposed to know better. Clearly Badlands was a fluke. *Three hours* of my life stolen for lines like "Nature can be so cruel" and "What difference can one man make in such a terrible cataclysm?" and John Travolta's hilariously awful cameo (and John Cusak's awful cameo, and George Clooney's awful cameo, and Nick Nolte's more lengthy awfulness, and the voiceovers, my God the voiceovers, has there ever been anything worse? Maybe -- the endless shots of billowing curtains, birds, snakes, bugs, weeds, etc., meant to show us nature's something-or-other; or maybe the whining, crying, self-pitying, self-absorbed, humorless characters -- all of them -- or the cartoonish Japanese -- faceless automaton killers or snivelling cowards; or the happy care-free natives straight out of Rousseau by way of Carnival Cruise Lines). Alternate titles: The Thin Blue Lagoon, Lady Chatterly's Rifle.

Avoid this movie at all costs, as if your life depends on it.


Awful - save your time and money (1 star is kind)   January 10, 2000
 3 out of 10 found this review helpful

Don't waste you time on this film - it blows. Even big names like Travolta, Nolte, and Penn generate little interest. You'll fall asleep before you even catch a glimpse of Clooney. The script and the characters generate nothing to make you care if they live or die, you just want it to end. The flashback scenes to other times and places add nothing. This film should be banned for being torture to watch.