The Thin Red Line review

 Number 694 on the top 1000 films of all time is Terrence Malik's 1998 epic-war film 'The Thin Red Line.'

During the World War Two battle of Mount Austen, a group of US Army infantry soldiers are tasked with taking a key position of the Guadalcanal campaign which could be the turning point of the war in the Pacific.

I've watched a lot of war films and I don't think I've seen one as slow, badly-paced and boring as the Thin Red Line. It was a blocked, drawn-out affair with an overly-large cast.

I would say it takes a while to get going, but it never truly does. For the first ten minutes, we are introduced to Private Witt (Jim Cavizel) who is frolicking with the Melanesian locals, but we don't have any reason to care about them at this point. It is only after the ten minute mark do we see any whisper of conflict where Sergeant Welsh (Sean Penn) tells off Witt for going AWOL.

Thirty minutes later, the soldiers go to the war. Seriously. It's a war film and we don't see any war until well over the forty-minute mark. It's a far-cry from the storming of the beaches in Normandy depicted at the start of Saving Private Ryan.

The Thin Red Line also suffered from a severe lack of main characters or any characters to root for. Sean Penn received star-billing as Sergeant Welsh, so you would think he's the protagonist, but the he only appears in a handful of scenes. But Private Witt is the first character we're introduced to, so you might be forgiven for thinking he's the main character, but then he goes AWOL for much of the film.  

Private Fife (Adrian Brody) was originally scripted as a key-player, but much of his dialogue was edited out. He only had two or three lines. And while the cast was dominated by high-profile names like George Clooney, John C. Reilly, John Travolta and Woody Harrelson, their roles were little more than cameos. It was all very distracting and it certainly didn't make me care for their characters, which was problematic when they were in battle. I didn't care if they lived or died. If anything I cared more about the poor Japanese soldiers they were killing.

The two most memorable and best performances came from Nick Nolte as Lt. Colonel Gordon Tall and Elias Koteas as Captain James Staros. Having been passed over for promotion multiple times, Colonel Tall sees one last chance for glory by telling Staros to capture a bunker by full-front al assault. However Staros realises the position is heavily guarded and he refuses to send his men to die, leading to a huge confrontation between him and Tall. Although their conflict only lasts for a few scenes, it was one of the most interesting and dramatic.

Much of the rest was spent hearing random voiceovers of random characters all philosophising about the meaning of war. It all became very pretentious especially since there's no rhyme or reason as to why these characters are giving voiceovers at that particular time.

Terrence Malik was ruthless with his editing, not only vastly reducing Adrian Brody's role, but also cutting out other roles completely - Mickey Rourke was supposed to appear, but only does so in deleted scenes. I do think the film was overly-edited; it is an incohesive mess of random scenes and characters thrown together without any clear storyline.

Big surprise. I did not care for the Thin Red Line. Not only was it pretentious and bloated, but it was also something a film should never be and that's boring.

Three Colours: Red review

 Number 222 on the top 1000 films of all time is the French final part of the 'Three Colours trilogy: Red.'

Valentine Dussaut (Irene Jacob) is an aspiring model who accidentally runs over Rita - a German Alsatian belonging to an old, bitter ex-judge Joseph Kern (Jean-Louis Trintignant.) When Valentine tries explaining, Joseph couldn't care less, but it is revealed that he whiles away his time eavesdropping on people's phone conversations. One of these people is Valentine's neighbour Auguste (Jena-Pierre Lorit,) a trainee lawyer.

This is another film trilogy that I'm writing out of order, as is often the nature of this list. I enjoyed Three Colours: Red much more than I thought I would. I thought it would be a pseudo-intellectual arthouse film, but it was actually very interesting and thought-provoking.

Joseph Kern was an instantly engrossing character. Misanthropes are not the most original of characters, but they are engaging. He posed lots of interesting questions that I wanted answering. Why was he so callous? So lonely? Why was he listening into these conversation? And what can these conversations tell us about the human condition? That behind closed doors, the facade drops and we're not as nice as we like to think we are? Jean-Louis brought this man to life and stopped him from being a cliche.

Irene Jacob was also very good as Valentine Dussaut. In many ways, she is the audience proxy. As she is simultaneously intrigued and repulsed by Joseph's actions, so are the audience. The only character I was unsure about was Auguste whose storyline wasn't really given a chance to shine. He felt like he should have been a main character, but he was portrayed as a subplot.

Nonetheless, this was still a very interesting film. Now, I just have to go back and watch the first two parts of this trilogy.

Paris, Texas review

 Number 240 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1984 road film 'Paris, Texas.'

After spending four years roaming the Mojave desert, aimless drifter Travis Henderson (Harry Dean Stanton) is found in Texas. His brother Walt (Dean Stockwell) takes him home to Los Angeles where he and his French wife Anne (Aurore Clement) have been raising Travis' son Hunter (Hunter Carson.) Travis and Hunter then set out on a road trip to find Jane (Nastassja Kinski,) Travis' wife and Hunter's mother.

I have to admit that this film surprised me. I initially thought it would be pretentious and overly-intellectual a la Ingmar Bergman. But despite its arthouse nature, it was very engaging. It was so bright and vibrant with some gorgeous cinematography. I loved all the sweeping shots of the great American landscape. All the colours popped off of the screen. Speaking of colour, red featured very prominently. Why? I'll leave that to the film majors to answer.

True, at two and a half hours, the film is probably longer than it needs to be. There are a lot of silences and forlorn gazing into the desert. Not all of this held my interest. Yet it was always steered back by Harry Dean Stanton's excellent performance. Travis, being initially mute, would not have been an easy character to play. He is a man rendered virtually catatonic by some unexplained trauma. But Stanton slowly transforms him from a vague, lifeless sketch into a living breathing person.

I also very much enjoyed the score. It was sparing and economical with every piece of music playing at the right moment. Perhaps if there had been more music instead of silences, especially with the pivotal conversations toward the end, I may have been more engaged throughout.

I talked about Stanton earlier, but I don't think there was a weak link among the cast. Dean Stockwell plays Travis' sympathetic, but increasingly frustrated brother. And Aurore Clement was equally good as his wife Anne. It's difficult not to feel sorry for the two as Travis and Hunter without telling them. And, finally, Nastassja Kinski was great as Jane. The final reunion between her and Travis was touching and poignant to watch.

Generally, I'm not a fan of arthouse films. They're the territory of cinophiles and film majors, but Paris, Texas surprised me. It's not a very loud film, but it made a hell of a lot of noise.

The Killing Fields review

 Number 382 on the top 1000 films of all time is a biographical drama 'The Killing Fields.'

Set during the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia, the Killing Fields details the relationship of two journalists during the Cambodian genocide. One journalist is the American 'Sydney Schanberg' (Sam Waterston) and the other is Sydney's Cambodian interpreter Dith Pran (Haing S. Ngor.) John Malkovich co-stars as Sydney's photographer Al Rockoff.

Whenever I watch films about subjects like war or genocide. I am always of the mantra or go hard or go home. The Holocaust film 'The Pianist' goes hard and it's all the better for it. However, I cam coming to believe that this doesn't always need to be the way. the Killing Fields is subtle and understated. This isn't to say it shies away from the horrors of the genocide, but it far more selective in what it chooses to show.

We see the build-up of prisoners being executed, but we never see these executions first hand. So when we do see scenes like Pran escaping his internment camp to find himself tumbling into a pit of skeletons, the impact is all the stronger. The fact these skeletons are the remains of the executed prisoners makes the image even scarier.

A recurring issue I find with films about world historical events told from a Western lens is that there is the tendency to wrongly focus on the Western character. I wouldn't go far to say there was a white saviour narrative. Sydney is no hero and definitely no saviour. When he and the other Western journalists are being evacuated home, they do all they can to take Pran with them - even going so far to making him a fake passport. When this fails, they have no choice, but to leave them behind.

Sydney later acknowledges had a chance to leave long ago, but Sydney convinced him to stay. Back in the US, Sydney uses every contact he has to find Pran, but it is Pran who escapes and find a Red Cross refugee camp near the border with Thailand. Obviously growing up in the Western world, I view things through a Western lens. And so narratives like Sydney's are very familiar to me. Overly-familiar I would say. It wasn't until halfway when the film switched to Pran in the internment camp did I start taking serious interest. Pran was an infinitely more interesting character and I was rooting for him to escape. He was also a very clever man, playing dumb when interred, as he knows he'll be killed otherwise. If he is even suspected of being a working professional then the regime would kill him.

And all due credit to Haing Ngor. Having survived three stints in Cambodian prison camps, he went onto win an acting Oscar for this role, despite having no previous acting experience. He is the only Asian actor to win an Oscar and he very much deserved it. It is so sad his life was cut short when he was killed in a 1996 robbery.

Please give this film a watch. Albeit, it is very traumatic, but it makes for absolutely essential viewing.