Better than I originally thought, but I still don't see it as a masterpiece

Rating: 8/10 (26 June 2011)

This was the first Malick film I ever saw, back in the theater in early 1999. I didn't think much of it, but I liked it enough to check out his other two films, and liked them both a lot. And his subsequent two films have been fantastic. So I assumed I was probably wrong about this one. Well, I did like it more the second time around. Unfortunately, I still don't think it's a great film, and I probably agree with my assessment that this is his least good work. It is a very beautiful film, but, really, what exactly is it saying that is that much different from what any other WWII movie was saying, including its chief rival, Saving Private Ryan (which I also reassessed as a little better than I had originally thought about seven or eight months ago)? It's pretty much comprised of scenes of soldiers ducking in the grass, quivering, throwing a grenade, getting picked off, yada yada yada. In the end, I don't find it especially profound, as gripping as it no doubt is at times (almost the entire first hour of the film depicts the taking of one hill, and it's every bit as nerve-wracking as the D-Day sequence of Saving Private Ryan). Acting honors belong to Nick Nolte, Elias Koteas, Woody Harrelson and Sean Penn. Acting dishonors belong solely to Jim Caviezel, whom I still hate. What a damn bore that guy is, and his subsequent role as Jesus makes several of his scenes unintentionally humorous. The appearances of John Cusack, John Travolta and George Clooney are distracting, even if none of them are particularly bad in their roles. So, the big question: SPR or TRL? I'd actually go with SPR. Sure, the bookend sequences are absolutely awful and insulting, but Spielberg does construct a handful of sequences which are the very definition of taut, gripping cinema (obviously the D-Day sequence, but also the sniper sequence where Vin Diesel bites it and Jeremy Davies' big sequence at the end, among a few others). As for the Academy Awards, I think, despite the fact that they were bought off, Shakespeare in Love deserved the big award. Although, who knows, perhaps that would suck on re-watch (haven't seen it for over a decade, either, though I've seen it at least once since I saw it in the theater). Perhaps I should give it another go.