The Thin Red Line

Like some other commenters, I saw the 1998 version before seeing this version. I had expected a somewhat jingoistic war film, but was surprised that this turned out to be superior to the 1998 remake in every way but one. Of course the one aspect that was lesser was the depiction of graphic violence, and that was only due to the changing times and audience, and modern film effects that can show things more realistically in graphic fashion. However, I do not consider this a positive, but only stating that the technical ability to show graphic violence has improved. I would say that the story in this one is more engaging, more concise and without losing the effect of alienation that both try to convey, and in fact that effect is much more visible here in this depiction. I found the acting to be solid and less melodramatic than the 1998 version, and the soldiers actions all ring true to what would have been going on in WW II at Guadacanal, without hystrionics. It's quite interesting that this version, coming right before the Vietnam era would be cynical about war but also considerably mindful of the necessity of the particular war it depicts and of the need for the soldiers to do as they did. Whereas the post-Vietnam 1998 version is also cynical, yet much more so, showing the military as a bumbling bureaucracy of sorts and attempting to depict the battle as pointless, extending that depiction to the war in general, and it actually is an unstated allegory about Vietnam. I would say that the 1998 film boasts a production group fairly unaware of the overall reality of WW II, and still stuck in the miasma of Vietnam.

This version of James Jones' book follows the plot of the novel closely and actually received very high praise from the author himself. Jones wrote a letter to the director saying "Very rarely does an author get to write a letter to a filmmaker to say that he has captured the author's intention to the highest level possible." Jones was very pleased with the outcome of this movie, while the 1998 version heavily strays from his book. For example, Witt and Walsh in the 1998 version both quote a lot from another Jones novel, called "From Here To Eternity", and not from "A Thin Red Line". The main storyline, namely the clash between the Private and his Captain, is almost completely left out of the Malick film. In making the book into a movie, the 1964 film succeeds. Which is not to say Malick didn't create a riveting film in 1998, he just didn't really turn the book into a movie.

Oops, I got this film by accident, I thought it was the 1998 version. After almost taking it back, I decided to watch it and was glad I did. This is really a very good film working on the characters and situations without having to rely on the star appeal or visual effects as modern films. Do yourselves a favour and repeat my mistake.

First adaptation of the James Jones novel about the battle for Guadalcanal on the famous Pacific toll in which a typical crew of Marines fighting the ¨Yellow Menace¨ and it results to be one of the best American films about the Pacific conflict during WWII . Soldier Doll (Keir Dullea)separated from his recent spouse (Yordan) after only few days of marriage, spontaneously decides that he'll no longer obey the orders of his First Sergeant , following his own will instead . What follows are a series of bloody attacks, on the river , lake , mountains in which the rifle company fighting Japanese who hold killers gun-machines . As battle experience hardens soldiers and Colonel (James Philbrook) orders captain Stone (Daley) leading to the taking of the Elephant hill in the battle of Guadalcanal . Sgt. Welsh, (Jack Warden) Doll's superior immediate grows the mutual hatred but at the ending the two contenders change to affinity , and getting reciprocal respect .

Based on James Jones 's first hand account of the notorious battle is well adapted to screen by Bernard Gordon . This dark story produced by prestigious Philip Yordan is immensely exciting , firmly characterized on its two main roles and in places very moving too . Visually stunning and focused on the battle of wits of a Private and a Sergeant and on men's determination to survive his tour of duty . The film brings home the true horror of battle and the meaninglessness of it all and effectively portrays the deshumanizing effects of war . The troublesome relationship between Keir Dullea and Jack Warden makes the biggest impression and delivers the interesting main plot . Combat images are naturally , well filmed and effective , getting spectacular scenes. Atmospheric cinematography in black and white by the Spanish Manuel Berenguer . The motion picture is professionally directed by Andrew Marton.

Another tale based on the 1962 novel by James Jones was directed by Terence Malick with star-laden cast as Jim Cazievel as Private protagonist , Sean Penn as the Sergeant , and many others as George Clooney, Nick Nolte and Woody Harrelson . Furthermore , another important film about Guadalcanal battle turns out to be ¨Guadalcanal diary¨ by Lewis Seiler with Anthony Quinn, Preston Foster, Lloyd Nolan and Richard Conte .

The last line in the novel reads as follows:"One day one of their number would write a book about it all, but none of them would believe it, because none of them would remember it that way."

Jones was saying that their is a tendency to (for lack of a better term) gloss over what happened in war, and the way people write about war, and the way people film war, is not at all how veterans remember it.

This film is not really at all what Jones was writing about. The film fails to find any horror in the war-- it fails to show the war as written by James Jones.

It is rather interesting to watch, because it shares many scenes with the Terrence Malick film (which is the far superior work), and it is fun to compare the scenes.

That said, the two actors who play Col. Tall and Stone (Stein in the book, Staros in the Malick film) are both laugh out loud bad, and seem to be completely ignorant of how to effectively portray their characters (Nolte and Koteas, on the other hand, aren't).

But to give the film some credit, it features a great performance by Kier Dullea or 2001: A Space Oddyssey fame, and an interesting one from Jack Warden as Welsh.

I think that the film tries to show the horror, but the production code, the script, or director didn't want to or couldn't figure out how to. I appreciated this film more for what it tried to say than what it actually said or HOW it said it. I would marginally reccommend it, mainly to those unfamiliar with the superior Malick film.