In Reply to: Re: Thin red line posted by Justin on July 28, 2000 at 13:49:35:
I completely disagree with you. Basically, what you see below are the thoughts my friend Josh had when we discussed the movie:This is a vast over simplification of what is going on. It is not
mankind's intrusion into the the 'natural' environment that is the focus of what is going on here. The U-boat is, of course, the rude interruption into the "idyllic" lifestyle that Wit is experiencing, but the driving theme of the world is not technology's intrusion into nature, but rather the way that beauty exists alongside death within nature. To reduce the introduction (which does establish a vision of an eden like environment interrupted by the iron reality of a u-boat) to a simple nature vs. machine theme is to ignore what happens later, when Wit revisits the former Eden and finds it changed because he has changed.
< expressing thoughts he couldn't possibly form, let alone Who is being pretentious now? Why, oh why, do you assume that
Wit has a 3rd grade education? Is it because of his accent?
If so I take offense to that since I am from West Virginia. First off to assume that someone needs to have a university education in order to articulate profound thoughts is arrogant in the extreme, but further, there is no background given on Wit's education so all we know is what the film tells us... and that is that he is in a constant state of emotional and intellectual engagement. This in intself makes him an intelligent person.>The cinematography, although pretty, was self-
>conscious.Yes it was self-conscious in the sense that it was constantly seeking to develop and enrich the intellectual themes of the film, I don't see this as a negative but rather a postivie. Given that you claimed that the theme was "man invading nature" however I can see why the apparent self-awareness of the "pretty" cinemetography disturbed you. There were many, many themes being developed (want me to rattle off a few? OK: What happens to the Homeric model of war in a, you'll forgive the term, post-modern world. Does experience destroy innocence (love, beauty). Many, many more)
> The acting was good, but that can't save what is a
>fundamentally poor piece of cinema. SPR may be a "Hollywood" war >film, but
>it's far better than The Thin Red Line. At least Spielberg didn't have to
>say "Look how smart I'm trying to be." throughout his film. The Thin Red
>Line is a film for pseudo-intellectuals.Right, instead Spielburg got to do the "I don't have to think so I am going to rattle off a bunch of cliches" film. SPR does an excellent job in the first half-hour of demonstrating the utter horror of war. Granted, but what happens then? A series of overused images being enacted by one-dimensional characters ... if a point is to be made it will be driven in with jack-hammer subtlety.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- *RE: Thin red line* - Emit 05:21:59 08/01/00 (2)
- Re: *RE: Thin red line* - Justin 17:57:14 08/01/00 (1)
- Re: *RE: Thin red line* - Chris C 10:47:37 08/02/00 (0)