Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Steineded How sad is this?

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

rixrex 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.

Agent10 This happens to be one of those cases where the original film is not the superior product. While this version of the film sought to follow the story much closer, it proves to be too short and plot driven. Maybe it was because I watched the 1998 version first, or maybe this was too hastily made in order to provide a visual adaptation of the book (James Jones wrote the book in 1962). While people will always put down the 1998 version, this version isn't a definitive piece of work either. A good story, but so inferior to the 1998 version.

fjarlett Those who don't see the realism in this film are probably either from Generation X, or they never were in the military. Today's audiences are inured to violence captured in contemporary films, and aren't willing to watch films made on a small budget from independent filmmakers, such as those responsible for this 1964 foray into the futility of war. There are certainly a number of points to this version that stand out, never mind the one or two actions sequences that aren't technically up to the flashiness of today's films. The relationships among ranks, from officers to enlisted men, captures the flavor of the military hierarchy existing since time immemorial. Soldiers are asked to face the withering machine gun fire, artillery, and booby traps, not to mention climatic privations, without wincing. It goes without saying that the acting of the principals in such circumstances is expert, with paranoia balancing precariously between heroism and the will to live. Men who have been in the military will no doubt identify with the characters, from the C.O. played with hardened determination by James Philbrook, to Jack Warden's combat wise sergeant, and down to Keir Dullea's survivalist mentality in the face of an enemy that takes no prisoners. The viewer is given a look at the motivations behind Dullea's seeming obsession to be "prepared" for combat with as much in his bag of combat tricks as possible. When Dullea steals a .45 automatic, his prophetic line of dialogue to his buddy, "It just might give me the edge I need", rings ironically true several times over the course of the picture. In fact, irony is the film's strongest point, evidenced in several scenes in which Dullea is saved from death by his purloined sidearm, and which ultimately is responsible for his survival by film's end. Opposing Dullea's character, Warden is a career NCO who plays by the rules of war, but who in the end loses his life after shielding Dullea from a Japanese soldier unleashing lead. The viewer realizes that Warden's death results from heroism, while Dullea's survival from the madness of a trapped rat. Screenwriter Philip Yordan's dialogue is at once sensitive and insightful, lending credence to his reputation in Hollywood as a no-nonsense, rough-hewn, but literate genius.

bob.lindell The trend today is to add realism into war movies in order to make them moving. Explosions with limbs flying, bloody bullet wounds, last gasps for breath and such can certainly add to the shock factor in modern movies as our progressive desensitization continues as we participate in the 120 minutes hate at the cinema. But in the process, we've fallen away from what makes great movies. Now we come out of the movie house with a tingling in our gut and a head full of imagery and dialogue and get fooled into thinking we just saw something of value, when in fact, we're queasy from the blood and our ears are ringing from the THX surround sound at freight train levels.The Thin Red Line moves you and sticks in your mind without using the smoke and CPU cycles that are the main tools of filmmakers today. Private Doll comes into the army as innocent as his name. He quickly realizes that he's just a pawn in someone else's war, and to keep from being fed into the machine he's got to think for himself. He even says "if they say 'go left', I'm going right" After being attacked by an enemy while out on his own he comes face to face with the reason he's out there in the first place, to kill. Shaken badly, he adopts the mindset that he wont die until his number is up and nobody, not the enemy, himself or his Sergeant can dictate when that is. He and his war hardened Sergeant are thrown together time after time and both effect each other.In the end, Doll reaches a place that his Sergeant has just come from. Doll becomes a solider to whom a human life means nothing, while his Sergeant jumps in front of a rifle to save Doll. They have a few words as Sergeant Walsh takes his last breaths, and the humanity inside Doll dies as he drags Walsh's dead body away as the credits roll.The most memorable line in the entire movie is when Doll's commander instructs him to take some men to capture a strategic point. Doll's commander specifically tells him "Try to loose as few men as possible" The men stare back blankly, realizing just how unimportant they are to the fat old men who the war belongs to.