Malick's self-absorbed, anti-war rhetoric sinks "The Thin Red Line"

Rating: 1/10 (2 July 2008)

If you march into director Terrence Malick's World War II epic "The Thin Red Line" expecting more of the same over-the-top, gung-ho heroics that made Steven Spielberg's predictable but entertaining "Saving Private Ryan" a multi-million dollar triumph, prepare to retreat! Loosely based on James Jones' mammoth World War II novel, Malick's account of the Guadalcanal campaign in 1943 is a dreary, drawn-out, message-laden maneuver. Despite its celebrity cast, its authentic settings (indeed, they filmed on the real Guadalcanal), and the artistic pretensions of its prodigal movie director who returned to Hollywood after a twenty year hiatus, "The Thin Red Line" hits the beach like a casualty. Clocking in at a lethargic two hours and fifty-five minutes, "The Thin Red Line" retreads in lush color what the more modest 1965 black & white predecessor covered in a trim 99 minutes.
Aside from their shared literary source, director Andrew Marton's 1965 version of Guadalcanal is more palatable than Malick's hopelessly platitudinous remake. For example, in Malick's version, more than a half-hour elapses before American troops start firing on the Japanese enemy! "The Thin Red Line" remake opens languidly, with a National Geographic prologue on a remote island with friendly natives where an insubordinate G.I. gone AWOL, Private Witt (Jim Caviezel of "Frequency") is hiding out with a buddy. The Navy nabs Witt about ten minutes into the action. Believe me, those first ten minutes crawl. You spend most of your time in "The Thin Red Line" waiting for something dramatic to occur. Meanwhile, the Army assembles off shore from the Japanese-held Guadalcanal, with pompous Brigadier General Quintard (John Travolta of "The Punisher") lectures Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Tall (rugged Nick Nolte of "48 Hrs"), a career soldier, about the importance of victory.
As the nominal stars of "The Thin Red Line," Jim Caviezel and Ben Chaplin are relatively unknown and difficult to tell apart on the screen. Caviezel's Private Witt explains to his sergeant that all he wants is "to make a difference in life." The seasoned sergeant grimaces, "a man alone is nothing," adding, "you've got to shut your eyes and look out for yourself. Meanwhile, Ben Chaplin's Private Bell obsesses over the girl that he left behind. He worships her like a saint until he receives a 'Dear John' letter. Yes, you guessed it, she got a fly-boy Caviezel's Witt makes a difference in the end, but Chaplin's Bell is let to ponder his break-up.
Some terrific actors get lost in the mix of Malick's self-absorbed, anti-war rhetoric. Nick Nolte chews the scenery as an ambitious colonel, while Sean Penn turns in a tight-lipped performance as a soft-hearted sergeant. John Cusack shows up long enough to lead a valiant attack on a Japanese machine gun nest. Other familiar faces such as Woody Harrelson, John C. Reilly, George Clooney, Elias Koteas, Jared Leto, and John Savage appear in brief roles that hearken back to cameo-laden classics like "The Longest Day" and "A Bridge Too Far." Nobody gets a chance to develop a memorable character with whom audiences can identify as well as sympathize with during the films marathon length.
Malick indulges in voice over narration which the actors deliver in the hushed tons of TV sportscasters at a golf tournament. "The Thin Red Line" depicts nothing that hundreds of other war movies haven't already shown. In his depiction of combat, Malick doesn't push the envelop the way that "Saving Private Ryan" did. Meanwhile, Malick departs from the rules of clear, concise storytelling. Plot lines that overlap with little clarity as well as sketchy characterization make "The Thin Red Line" difficult to follow. Nobody takes front and center presence like either Tom Hanks or Matt Damon in "Saving Private Ryan." Malick skips back and forth among too many characters for audiences to build a rapport with any single individual.
Snobbish cinemaphiles who prefer the avant-garde approach that ignores basic storytelling and shuns sensationalism have fallen into ranks behind "The Thin Red Line." Now, if you're a media theorist, a humanities scholar, or a deranged cult movie iconoclast, "The Thin Red Line" will absolutely enthrall you. You'll rave about the film's Rousseauistic virtues, and you'll point out how Malick turns Guadalcanal into a corrupted 20th century Eden. No doubt, you'll belabor the obvious significance of a crocodile swimming free and later seen trussed up in the bed or an Army truck.
"The Thin Red Line" qualifies as more of a metaphysical than a mainstream movie. If "The Thin Red Line" were half of the classic that its intellectual advocates argue, Terence Malick's emergence from cinematic obscurity would be noteworthy. Alas, "The Thin Red Line" fails to provide a catharsis and lacks the minimal quota of heroes, villains, and explosions. Do not cross "The Thin Red Line" if you thrive on genre war classics like "The Naked and the Dead," "The Dirty Dozen," "Platoon," and "Sands of Iwo Jima."