Incredible

Rating: 10/10 (25 June 1999)

"The Thin Red Line" contains some of the most dazzling cinematography that I have ever seen in a movie before. John Toll's camera seems to glide into the fighting and death with ease.
Malick doesn't seem too concerned with character development. One can, though, draw a rough outline of each character. Colonel Tall, brilliantly played by Nick Nolte, is a West Point graduate who is finally able to be in battle, and will do anything to win. Elias Koteas plays the defiant Captain Staros, who feels for his men and will not send them on a suicidal frontal assault as Colonel Tall orders. These are the two most rounded performances in the movie. Private Bell constantly dreams of his wife back home. (These scenes also contain some beautiful, dizzying photography). Private Witt is a more soulful man, the only one that never quite completely loses his sanity. Sean Penn as the tough and brave Sergeant Welsh. There are many more, but I could possibly not name them all.
The reason that there is not too much character development is because "The Thin Red Line" is simply not concerned with them. I was reminded of a couple of lines in "Patton": "An army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a lot of crap....." That is why "The Thin Red Line" does not care about character development. "The Thin Red Line" sees its army as a team, not individual people. Private Witt ponders: "Maybe everyone's got one big soul that everybody's a part of..."
The people who say that "The Thin Red Line" is boring, that it's a war film with no action, need to stick to "Armageddon". There's plenty of intense action in this movie, believe me. It may not shove it in your face the way that "Saving Private Ryan" did, but like I said, it's still intense. "Saving Private Ryan" is a great film, one of 1998's best. "The Thin Red Line", in my opinion is better. The battle scenes in "Saving Private Ryan" made my mouth hang open with horror. I never really knew that it was that bad at D-Day, until, of course, I saw the movie. "The Thin Red Line" contained supensful battles that caused me to hold on tight to my seat, not letting go. They are equally horrific, but in different ways.
There is a great beauty to the first 15 minutes that I think a lot of people missed. The section has some of the greatest images in cinema. The islanders, swimming in the blue, crystal waters of the Pacific is one of the most tranquil, serene shots ever filmed. The lush, green island trees as Private Witt walks through the native village. This is heaven, and Terrence Malick makes it feel that way.
Around 390 miles worth of film was shot during the making of "The Thin Red Line". The original director's cut was 6 hours. Malick had to chop it down to less than 3 hours, and he still made a great film. I didn't find the voice-overs annoying in the slightest bit.
"The Thin Red Line" never lost my attention. I didn't think it became boring after the battle. I became interested in the different characters' outcomes. (Despite the not-too-much character development). Private Bell's outcome hit me hard, I didn't even see it coming.
I did find the cameos by John Travolta and George Clooney a bit distracting, but since Malick had to edit it down, this suggests that both Clooney and Travolta were in it substantially longer. How I hope they let Malick come out with a director's cut!
What question does this film ask? The late Gene Siskel said it best. "What is the source of the underbelly of hate that fuels war. A question for the ages in a film for the ages".