Just in from the first public screening (take
*that* Harry Knowles!) of the new (and presumably improved)
version of "The Thin Red Line."
And it's a bust.
Not only was its thunder stolen by the
infinitely superior "SPR," but Terence Malick appears
to have forgotten everything he knew about filmmaking. It's the
Pacific theater and war is hell -- except when it's boring. Jim
Caviezel is gorgeous, with especially beautiful eyes. Normally
that would be enough for me, but he's surrounded by acres and
acres of prettifly photographed shubbery and overpaid overactors.
Sean Penn is a joke. So is Woody Harrelson. Ben Chaplin is
annoyingly mannered. Blink and you'll miss Jared Leto. Nick Nolte
is *really bad* for the first time in years. Elias Koteas,
however, is excellent (I guess Malick wasn't paying attention.)
John Travolta drops in at the beginning of the film, and George
Clooney does likewise at the end -- to no effect it either case.
At two hours and forty-five minutes (Rivette length) it seems
longer than the *actually* longer "SPR."
More about "The Thin Red Line."
Malick can'tmake up his mind on how he wants to present gore. On
the one hand there are plenty of explosions and cries of pain.
There's a scene where the soldiers stumble over a blown-up body.
Acres of painful death moments. Yet Malick averts his camera's
eye when Woody Harrelson blows his foot off. And we don't see the
deahs of several important characters at all. This is especially
odd, as the main boine of centention in the dramatic dialogue
(which is minimal) has to do with how many men Elias koteas is
willing to send to their deaths, and Nick Nolte taunting him for
not being willing to let any of them die. (Not "man"
enough apparently, or something like that, but there was a lot of
din, and the dialogue was trite and boring in any event, so it
scarcely matters.)
