All Quiet on the Western Front (1979)

Patchy remake of the classic Academy Award winning film of the 30's. Delbert Mann's feature fades in and out from the inspired to the flat, and back again. Mostly though, it is the latter of these two levels that it sticks to.Mann, along with screenwriter Paul Monash, was unable to recreate the simple, understated force of Lewis Milestone's anti-war picture. The first movie was years, perhaps fifty years, ahead of its time. The second is merely a reminder of how good the first one was.As the easy going, compassionate Paul Baumer, Richard Thomas does a good job. Cleverly cast in the Louis Wolheim role, and even more eye-catching, is Ernest Borgnine as war-weary veteran Katchinsky. Hopelessly miscast though, is the immensely talented Ian Holm as the heartless Corporal Himmelstoss. Donald Pleasance and Patricia Neal also star.A shame that this, a reasonably good film, had to be overshadowed by its predecessor. John Coquillan photographs Czechoslovakia and some convincing sets very well.Friday, January 29, 1999 - Video

Granted I've never seen the original - I do have that unfortunate problem of being unable to relate to films made in a very young time.Nevertheless, I did grow up during the "Golden Age Of TV Movies" and I never saw this on television. There was a teacher that kept airing it when I was working in the A/V Lab. I didn't care about that.Well I was old enough to take note. Now I think this is probably the Best Made For Television Movie of all time.The Great War (or World War I) is a war that I believe is immensely ignored in the scheme of the 20th Century. I was one of those people that heard pretty much everything about WWII and I can recite it backwards and inside-out.But the thing about the situation in Europe needs to be looked at more seriously and in a long amount of time. WWII didn't just pop out of nowhere.I'm going to tell you to know the 20th Century you need to research "The Great War" and "The Franco-Prussian War".But if you want to only find out how the Industrial Revolution turned war into a total, complete killing factory World War I is where it all started.And if you research further, most people didn't really know what they were fighting for and/or who.Young men were asked to go fight to keep up the status quo. That's basically about all you can say about ANY war.That's what this movie is about; young me going to war and dying and the tragic circumstances. It's an endless theme.

I saw this film at school, and was very impressed. I don't think it is quite as good as Regeneration, one of the few movies when it was better than the book, or as powerful in emotion as the 1930s film. I haven't read the book by Remarque, but my best friend has, and tells me it is very good. Anyway the film is beautifully shot, and truly does have a powerful conveyance of the first world war, with the personification of the guns, and the memorable dialogue. The acting was what made the film. Ernest Borgnine was the star of the film, with a firm but rather fatherly portrayal of the superior, very reminiscent of Osborne in the play "Journey's End". I liked Ian Holm too. But for me, the biggest surprise was Richard Thomas in the lead. His performance was more than decent, though I confess I actually don't like Thomas that much!(I hate the character of John Boy Walton) All Quiet on the Western Front not only shows the physical conditions of WW1 but also the psychological and emotional aspects, that some WW1 literature forget to convey. In conclusion, a thoughtful and harrowing film, though not quite as good as the 1930s classic. 9/10 Bethany Cox.

I didn't think "All Quiet on the Western Front" was a good movie at all. It was very boring to me. Parts that were supposed to be exciting from what we read in the book in class were a serious letdown when I saw the movie. Especially the fighting scenes. Another thing that I didn't like about the movie is that parts that were made out to be key, vital points in the story in the book were not made very important in the movie. For example, when Paul and his friends meet the French girls, it was a key point in the book about Paul maybe finding love in his life for the first time ever and him ending up disappointed and right back to where he started. It was very detailed in the book. However, in the movie it was rushed by like it didn't even matter. Another part that I thought would be interesting in the movie is when Paul goes on leave. I thought it would be a good part in the movie because it took up a big part of the book and a lot of things happened- Paul finding out about his mother, visiting Kemmerich's mother, etc.- but it was just another boring part in the movie. Also, when Paul returns to the front to battle, it was way more intriguing in the book because it actually explained how Paul was feeling, but it didn't seem that way at all in the film. I also noticed that events were in a different order from how they were in the book, which I didn't like. All of this is why I think this film should be remade. I don't think these actors played their roles very well. There are talented actors around now that could do a really good job to do it better. There are also wonderful directors who can make scenes more interesting for the viewers.