UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Drama >

All Quiet on the Western Front

All Quiet on the Western Front (1930)

April. 29,1930
|
8.1
|
NR
| Drama War

When a group of idealistic young men join the German Army during World War I, they are assigned to the Western Front, where their patriotism is destroyed by the harsh realities of combat.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

nickboldrini
1930/04/29

Although remade, the original packs a punch the remake doesn't, mainly because it being made in black and white and when it was made giving it an authenticity that is hard to replicate. The characters are well sculpted and acted, and he message resonate down the ages, with the failure to heed it in WWII adding to its strength

More
talula1060
1930/04/30

I absolutely love this book and have read many times, so was expecting to feel a similar love for the film. Although there were parts that were gut wrenching (the guy who discovers his leg has been amputated, the madness that ensues after repeated shelling), I had a major problem with the acting. Because sound was so new in film, many of the actors were doing a lot of exaggerated movements and making faces after every line. Lew Ayres was the biggest culprit. He yelled many of his lines, constantly posed for the camera, and in several instances, he started to say the wrong lines and came off sounding like he was reading it. He's not very good at sound movies and it's really a plum role for an actor. He only redeemed himself when he came back home and gave his little monologue in the classroom. He spoke with passion and resolve and was believable for the first time in the film. I was very disheartened to see how badly acted most of this film was because the story is a heartbreaking statement on the horrors of war and the pointlessness of it all. Another pet peeve is the way so many of the actors smile throughout the film as though they were on a Broadway stage. It wasn't written that way in the book and there are certainly other ways to show satisfaction with comfortable boots than having the actors grinning as they march into certain death. It's ridiculous. Someone else mentioned that if this film had been shot a couple years later, it would have been better and I agree completely. Sound was so new that the early years were filled with silent actors who brought that same dramatic, expressive sensibility to the screen. I know there's also a silent version of this film which might work better with the way it's acted. I can't express enough what a complete shame it is that Milestone couldn't have directed these guys better or else cast others in the role who understood the importance of the subtleties in each character and the changes wrought by the war. He had a very large budget for the time and was able to reshoot all of the mother's scenes so why not have the actors do more than one take? Why not notice that the dead French soldier has a different expression every time the camera is on his face? If Paul is dreaming of home, you don't need Ayres to have a dreamy look on his face. Also, bread submerged in water would fall apart. There are so many little things that should have been be caught. I know there's a remake of the film from the 70s, but this movie really only works in black and white. This was shot 11 years after the war's end which is only fitting. I would have loved to see a German version of this movie as it would be interesting to see how they approached it. Great story, but film rendition is ruined by shoddy acting and sloppy blocking.

More
arfdawg-1
1930/05/01

Proof that Hollywood was making left wing anti war propaganda since it's birth.The movie has gotten stellar reviews but rankly, it's dated. The exposition is overly dramatic and heavy handed as is the direction.Plus the young soldiers all have freaking Brooklyn accents! They are supposed to be German! A movie like this would never make money today and it would get summarily panned.If you want to see a great war film, try Hacksaw Ridge or Saving Private Ryan.

More
Ross622
1930/05/02

Lewis Milestone's adaptation of Erich Maria Remarque's " All Quiet on the Western Front" was definitely a better film on his military resume than the flawed but still good Pork Chop Hill (1959). The movie is a character study of a young man named Paul Baumer (played by Lew Ayres in an Oscar snubbed performance) who is in college during the start of the film with some classmates of his and a teacher who convinces them to serve in World War I and that "It is a wonderful thing to die for your country, which is the heroic thing to do". Then as soon as Paul persuades his friends to enlist and go off to war they begin to realize that killing people isn't as fun as they previously thought to which they go from a pro-war to an anti-war stance. Although I disagree with the film's point of view I think that is a great thing for people to serve their own country, and the great thing about movies is that people can tell a story from a certain perspective. The movie compares to some of the greatest war films of all time for example Platoon (1986), Saving Private Ryan (1998), Patton (1970), The Deer Hunter (1978), and The Hurt Locker (2009). Even though the war films that I just listed take place in different wars that we have been involved in, the thing that made me love the movie a whole lot more was reading the novel because it gave me a better understanding of what the film was about and the emotions of the characters, which is why in the film's case it is great on so many levels even the storytelling, acting, photography, and writing, etc. Also these are reasons why I personally think that the movie should received more Oscars and nominations that it ended up receiving at the 3rd Oscars ceremony.

More