Brilliant film not understood by many

Rating: Null/10 (11 June 1999)

Why does a war movie have to be blood, lost limbs and 'in your face' for the entire duration? Why can't a war movie make you think and make you try to understand something incomprehensible to someone who hasn't been there or, more fundamentally, something about human nature? Why can't there be both kinds, both appreciated for their equally brilliant but very different qualities? Yes, I saw both. I came out from both completely exhausted and think that although they are both extraordinary films, they are very different and can not and should not be compared.
I saw The Thin Red Line in April. Since then I've read many reviews but have waited to collect my thoughts before writing my own. I've realized that thoughts on this film are not easy to collect but that it's now or never, so please excuse me if much of this is a garbled mess. Maybe I'm completely out there and missed the whole point, but the fact that "there was no story", that "there was no protagonist", that "they didn't show enough blood", that "there wasn't enough fighting/action", and that it was only about a bunch of guys crawling around in the grass...that just helps convey what a war is all about.
It seems to me that The Thin Red Line wants us to understand that war IS confusing, that it's not "action packed" all the time, that there is a lot of planning/strategizing/waiting, that soldiers all deal with the horrors of battle but also that they're normal people and had at one time or another, normal lives that they will hopefully return to, that these things affect each person differently, that soldiers in combat bond with each other in a way that can only be understood by people who have been through some traumatic, intense and/or horrific ordeal together...to each other they are like family and more. But, in the whole scheme of things, they're a sea of faces all fighting for the same thing; something they may not even understand themselves. They are soldiers. Some of them will get killed. They will be replaced by others. It's an endless cycle until the war is over. I say this because in The Thin Red Line it was frequently unclear as to who was who...names were vary rarely used and when they were, they were often difficult to hear/pick out.
I feel I should address the all-star cast that so many people felt was useless. First, I think it's great that all of these actors wanted so badly to be part of this film and to work with Malick that they accepted a fraction (what fraction, I don't know) of their normal salaries. I don't think that the cameos took anything away from the film. Instead, I think that they helped illustrate the "sea of faces" idea I mentioned above. For example, for me George Clooney at the end is just another in a string of officers who will lead the soldiers in the war, not more and not less important than the guy before him or the guy who will come after him.
I've thought long and hard about the voiceovers and the "National Geographic" shots. What follows is only an attempt to put into words what I think...it will most likely sound like a bunch of mumbo jumbo, but at least I've tried. I do not think they are out of place in this film, a war film. The dialogue makes you think...humbly tries to give you some shred of an idea of what is going inside the heads of these men, of their inner turmoil. The visuals reference not only the physical world but also the emotional world, the emotional confusion of individual soldiers. While there IS a war going on...there is calm, tranquility and peace in many other places in the world. Even between the battles there is calm...the eye of the storm. The visuals are ironic, a sort of paradox, seemingly incongruous (but are they?) and many other things. Useless and out of place are not among those things.
Yes, The Thin Red Line is a film about war and all of its atrocities and I guess it's classified as a war film but is it really? The setting is on the battlefield but it's a film that forces us to think about the bigger issues: human nature, life, why we are here, what matters.... Issues on another level entirely that, on a day to day basis, one doesn't generally ponder and therefore are more difficult to grasp and comprehend.
As I said, maybe I didn't understand anything at all, but I think I did, and it makes me sad that so many people can't appreciate/understand what was so eloquently/beautifully expressed, and not trivialized, in The Thin Red Line. They just didn't get it.