This American proverb cannot be more appropriate to describe war.
War and no war, justice and evil, only linger on the front line.
-------------------------------------------------- -------------------Those
who like war movies will not be purely bloodthirsty and warlike. Behind the scenes of flying flesh and blood, there is always deep compassion and torture. The war has condensed the tragic tone of life. In reality, the cruelty and harm of individuals can be worthy of the flurry of demons and collective destruction in the war.
In 1942, in the South Pacific battlefield during World War II, Japan and the United States were fighting. The Battle of Guadalcanal was a watershed in the Pacific War. Guadalcanal is part of the Solomon Islands and is the northeast gateway of Australia. It is essential for both sides of the war to control the dominance of the Pacific War. The battle described in the film is the key battle in the battle of Guadalcanal.
On the battlefield, there was neither "General Patton" slamming Fang Qiu, nor "Tiger Tiger Tiger" magnificent waves. Yes, it's just pure cramping and crazy. In order to seize the Japanese airfield on the island, the Charles Artillery Company (C Company) had to bring down the remaining Japanese troops occupying the top of the mountain. Because its terrain could not outflank the sea and the cliff, the C Company could only attack from the front. The bunker on the mountainside became the beginning of the struggle between the two sides.
Frontal assault means a lot of unnecessary death. Colonel Taer was not reconciled to the arrogance of his young boss, and he wanted to build military merits. He strongly demanded that Company C, Stallo, attack the Japanese at all costs. Stallo is gentle and soft, facing innocent comrades who died, Stallo is helpless and rebellious. Taer personally came to the position, organized a storming team, went round and deep, and took down the bunker. The confrontation between the two personalities in the war, warmth and violent, are they familiar with each other?
Werther and Wales are another kind of character dispute in meaning. From the beginning of the film, it was a large sketch of the deserter Werther. He has a fortitude and courage, and he firmly believes that there is a good side to life. Returning to the battlefield, he took the lead. Before the end of the film, Werther was in an action to clean up the remnants of the enemy. In order to protect his comrades from escape, he calmly died.
The deputy company commander Welsh and Witt cherish each other, but the worldview is very different. Wales, which accepts the fate of war, recognizes the insignificance of people when facing death. He is fearless and can risk his death to send morphine for his dying comrades; he has no fight, and despite the fate of the war, he is able to bury Werther and retreat. Welsh's heart had long since died in the battlefield, but he fled the war with almost cruel calmness.
This is how war makes different souls go to the same destination by different routes. It obliterates all the expansion and differences of individuality, only in exchange for the same numbness and depravity. There is a dialogue in the film that a comrade-in-arms told Wales. He said that in war, ability and attitude are not important. Even if you are brave and good at fighting, as long as luck is not on your side, everything is over. The cruelty of the war never started.
-------------------------------------------------- -------------------
War films are anti-war films. Some so-called war films with ideology in command are not counted, but they should actually be counted as propaganda films, such as some of our blockbuster films. But good war films have different perspectives on anti-war. They always return to the same anti-war aspiration after finding a unique and profound bond.
"Apocalypse Now" emphasizes the alienation of people from war. Colonel Kurz has turned from an officer to a bandit leader. His external violence and internal weakness are a powerful accusation against war that distorts humanity; "Field Platoon" tries to express the defeat of us. It’s not the enemy but ourselves. The irreconcilable opposition between Barnes and Ilias was the chief culprit in the US military’s defeat;
"Army Field Hospital" exposed the injustice and hypocrisy of the war in a joking manner. There is a deep indictment of the war in Si's rage; and in "Full Metal Shell", the war becomes inhumane. People are just killing machines. The shooting of Colonel by Fool Bill is a perfect irony.
What about this "Thin Red Line"? It seems that its full of affectionate music and more beautiful scenery of the South Pacific are nothing more than expressions of great sympathy for those who are trapped in war. This is one aspect of the film that cannot be ignored. Even in the performance of the Japanese prisoners of war, the film is extremely restrained, not to ugly (to please the local audience) and beautify (to please the Japanese market, think about the "elegance" of the Japanese in "Pearl Harbor"), but adopt an equal human perspective , The two opposing parties, the same young people, they have the same pain, and the same hatred.
Through this layer of sympathy, we can distinguish the film's reflection on war: different people, different beliefs, personalities, and attitudes, when facing war, the powerlessness and the inevitability of perseverance. This is the universal destruction of human nature, it goes beyond the individual to harm the whole-the contrasting setting and the convergent ending of the main characters in the film reveals the nature of war destroying everything-no one will be spared.
Speaking of this, I have to say "Saving Private Ryan". Undoubtedly, this is a good film, but the goodness of the word is questionable. Spielberg is a hopelessly sensational director. His secret to capture everyone's emotions is to simplify his thoughts and clarify the subject in order to resonate with everyone. In the film that brought him the Oscar for Best Director, the patriotism, the spirit of justice, and the moving theme of looking for soldiers are permeated in every frame of film, just like the United States where it opens. Although the national flag is uplifting, it can't help but sigh.
The reason for saying "Saving Private Ryan" is, of course, that in 1999, the Oscar, who had repeatedly fainted, completely forgot "The Thin Red Line", which also occupied multiple nominations. Although it has certain shortcomings, the slightly procrastinated plot and proliferation of narration will reduce its points a lot, but compared with the "Saving Private Ryan" of the same year, its theme is deeper, the reflection is deeper, and the emotions are more real. It is an indisputable fact. Fortunately, in Berlin that year, a distinguished golden bear proved its true value.
The great director Terrence Malik, who has only directed three plays, used his courage and enthusiasm to sharpen his sword for 20 years, summoning Sean Penn, James Caviezel, Ben Chaplin, and John Ku Sack, Adelyn Brody, John Travolta, George Clooney, Woody Harrison, and many other big stars at that time and in the future, seem to be able to play a role in excellent war films. It is the dream and glory of many Hollywood male stars (think about the pomp in "Field Platoon"), and they have perfectly completed their role modeling without exception.
-------------------------------------------------- -------------------
War is a condensed life, and its radical cruelty can alert us more than a long life.
So we love war films. Although life is equally cruel. Fortunately,
there is a thin red thread in everyone's heart.
View more about The Thin Red Line reviews
