USA
directed by: Terrence Malick
written by: Terrence Malick + James Jones (book)
starring: Sean Penn, Adrien Brody, James Caviezel, Ben Chaplin
seen: 23rd August, 2009 - comment: 8th April, 2017
I've seen three films by Terrence Malick so far and I have to say I don't think his distinct style always sets him apart in a good way. What puzzles me the most about The Thin Red Line is the discrepancy between the images and the voiceover. I consider Malick to be a master of characterising each soldier as an individual. He shows us a few intimate details from their lives and suddenly it's a film about soldiers and not about war and that is beautiful. (And Spielberg might as well suck it, that needs to be said.) But when they voice their thoughts out loud, they all seem to be thinking alike. It's the screenwriter talking rather than them, their personalities slowly fade away and that irritates me. And also confuses me and stops me from forming a connection with them and the film. Some of the soliders stand out with their narration (like Adrien Brody), but those are mostly minor characters and their monologues sadly come only after I've been worn out by Penn, Caviezel and Chaplin mumbling the same over and over for what seems like endless hours. The accompanying music doesn't help either - I was dying to hear any piercings sounds (other than gunshots) to break the monotonous sound atmosphere.
I understand that even the final three-hour lenght is a result of Malick extremely shortening his original vision. And I am known to point out the failure of giving proper attention to emotion procesing on screen in various other films. So how come I'm contemplating if cutting some scenes could make The Thin Red Line better in my eyes? Let's take a look on Ben Chaplin and his wife. In his major flashbacks we got to see at least 1. one amorous visit to a pier at sunset 2. the wife walking into the sea looking all enigmatic and him following her 3. them making love at home with blinds closed and 4. him watching her on a swing smiling joyfully. If one or more of those episodes didn't make it to the final cut, how much would the film be affected? Would it be a different film? Would it lose its uniqueness or gain momentum? I don't know. But I'm sure that in its current state it's too self-absorbed for my taste and the constant (aestethically pleasing, but story-wise redundant) digression makes me crazy. I admire the brain that leads the eye of the camera, but I'm not feeling the story in front of it.
These are the scenes that I found truly impressive: Jared Leto watching the light changing over the landscape. Matt Doran touching the mimosa plant. One little bird hatching on the battlefield. James Caviezel seeing the face of a man burried in the earth. What do the scenes have in common? There's no need for speech, they are articulate on their own. I'd like more of that, please.
