All Quiet on the Western Front

In All Quiet on the Westen Front, there is only one shot - a long sequence with an imperceptible travelling forward - where the face of the actor Felix Kammerer (arguably the main character of the movie) appears in full screen, in its absolute and preserved peacefulness. The viewers understand he has just been passing, in the franco-german trenches, ironically by the exact time of enactment of the Armistice. Edward Berger seems to tell us: Death is beautiful. Yes it can be so after more than two hours of tragic absurd and dreadful description of events seen from the exclusive point of view of the (German) losers of the First World War, where no death is spared to the viewers. And where so many young men fell to their death or became orendously mutilated in the name and for the honour of their country and its political and military leaders. Such a unique waste may be alluded to by Edouard Berger in the first scene of the movie, filmed in a low angle, of a mother fox and her babies, warmly pressed against each other below earth in their burrow. Only human animals can find in themselves the will, strength and illusion of fighting till death for an abstract political concept such as that of territorial homeland. We are thus reminded of those so-called "primitive" societies that were shedding tears upon the birth of any new born child, in anticipation of the difficulties and challenges to come that she or he would have to face later on in life. And, as can be expected from said people, the members of these tribes were celebrating joyfully the passing of any of them, as a testimony of the end of earthly hardships for the deceased. And in between birth and death, according to what may be one of the meaning of this movie, there is only cynism. No place for any hope of redemption for any of its characters, all passively blown away by the craziness of war. At the end ,what remains is the impression of a too long and familiar scenario of the same senselessness . The quality of the photography by James Friend is to be highlighted. (11/09/2022)

Clear winner of this year's war films, and for me better than 1917 and Dunkirk (Hacksaw Ridge is a little higher in my heart though). I haven't read the book, nor have I seen the original, I just know that it's an adaptation of a literary classic by Remarque and I think the film stood up to it on all counts. From the very beginning the film thrusts us into the action of the war itself, which I very much appreciate – thankfully there is no hour-long introduction to the characters before the war, everything happens on the fly and thanks to that the film also has a decent pace and never gets boring. Edward Berger has his craft down pat, technically it's a decent work, with epic music that adds to the atmosphere and tension. The characters didn't really grow on me, except for the main one, so emotionally it didn't hit me that much, although it is sad in places. I found it interesting to watch a war film from the perspective of the Germans, usually it's the other way around, so the film is definitely unusual in that way too. I enjoyed the scenes with the General screaming for himself (the final speech was great) and the armistice negotiations on the train were also interesting. There's not a lot of action scenes, though, there are only three epic battles, but since the film is set in a battlefield most of the time, I didn't mind. The highlight is the sequence in the middle where the tanks and flamethrowers come on the scene – you can feel the true despair and horror of war, really uncomfortable. As for the gore, there's not much of it either, but there are a couple of brutal shots (the tank running over probably sticks in the mind the most), so for me really big satisfaction and I would say it’s the best WW1 war film. Definitely an Oscar snatcher here and kudos to Netflix. 8.5/10. (10/30/2022)

I’ve read the book once in high school and don't remember much of it, I'm not burdened by the demands of faithful adaptation. What I demand of a historical war film, however, is that it somehow expresses its thesis in a meaningful way, which All Quite on the Western Front (and Boredom and Ash) fails to do. There is no character development, no profiling in the opening and no emotion in the scenes where we are supposed to sympathise with the protagonists. The whole thing is mired in the bias of war scenes, of which only the transporter sequence leaves a bigger impression, otherwise every scene from the trenches has the same aesthetic: stick the camera on the protagonist and let it bang around. This is supposed to increase the suggestiveness and perhaps the subjectivity of the experience, but the film soon disproves this by layering melodramatic clichés and haphazardly involving "big stories" from the peace negotiations – by that point, it's already mixing together Come and See (in a weak concoction of the hero's suffering), 1917 (steadicam in the trenches), Paths of Glory (a moral about the futility of human sacrifice and the irrational thinking of generals), and Dunkirk (the role of condensed time during the negotiations, cutting to the impending battle). Together, of course, it's a mess, which mostly looks nice, but the sheer disjointedness of the journey leads to inevitable boredom and tedium. When I checked the progress bar and found that I still had over 40 minutes to go, I almost wanted to turn the film off. Of course, it only takes the basic ideas and motivations from Remarque, I know that, even with the rather clouded memories of the book (and unfortunately that's the least of the problems). (11/02/2022)

In the trailer, the All Quite on the Western Front teases us with visual exhibitionism, and you can't help but expect a proper war spectacle. Unfortunately, the opposite is true. For the entire 150 minutes or so, the filmmakers draw primarily on the formal identity of Saving Private Ryan, but miss the best moments entirely. Anyone who has seen Spielberg's opus remembers the names of the main characters: good guy Captain Miller, tough guy Captain Caparza, Ryan of course, not to mention iconic scenes like Normandy or the battle in the city; plus, with a hard-to-beat level of shocking authenticity and Kaminski's mastery of cinematography. Here, 10 minutes after the screening, you don't remember a single name and perhaps only one memorable scene – the one with the general in the puddle. Iconic, innovative and precisely crafted cult-classic vs. generic German filmmakers' wartime turmoil that is more akin to Hacksaw Ridge or We Were Soldiers. I deliberately mention Gibson’s films, because the level and depiction of violence is quite similar here. It might grab you by the balls for a second, but you’ll easily forget about it in a couple of minutes. It's still a solid film for Germans standards, with some spectacular and polished visuals in places, but it's not going to become a classic by any stretch of the imagination. For that, the story is blandly executed, the actors are lackluster and the action is too monotonous. (11/12/2022)

I haven’t read the novel, so I’m reviewing this strictly as a war movie. In technical terms, it’s fine. There is nothing to criticise when it comes to the sets, costumes, camerawork or the depiction of the battle and negotiation scenes. However, the detailed portrayal of the characters and, mainly, the dialogue come up short, feeling flat and failing to emotionally engage the viewer. The film lacks a strong screenwriting focus on the personal stories of the protagonist and several other characters. (11/13/2022)