recommended

Let's be realistic.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

It seems folly when a television company remakes a well regarded film but ITC Films have made a considerable achievement with their remake of ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT . I saw the original many years ago and the scenes that stuck out in my mind most are recreated here . Where as in my memory the scenes of a wounded comrade missing a limb not realising his friend wants his boots and where Paul lies in a shell hole with a dying enemy seem clichéd due to similar scenes being reused down the decades the same scenes here stand up very well on their hind legs Delbert Mann directs in a flat manner and the performances are also somewhat flat but not a moment are these criticisms . Sharp editing and fast , fluent camera work would have actually spoil the film since it would distract from the characters and the situation they find themselves in . It's a hell but not the biblical hell they've been brought up in ( Interstingly their fighting for God as well as nation and monarchy ) but a hell composed of mud , rats , rain as well as the man made hell that weapons such as shells , gas , bullets and bayonets bring There are a couple of flaws to the film . Ian Holm plays Himmelstoss , a bullying corporal who was the protagonists drill instructor before the platoon was sent to the front line . It's a good part but after finding himself sent to the front Himmelstoss shows cowardice but then effectively disappears from the story . He made an interesting character and I would have liked to see the charchter explored more . There's also the myth that " All the young men being brainwashed to fight for God and their country " which does marr most stories set during the first world war though the myth was probably started by none other than Erich Maria Remarque himself All in all this is a very impressive TVM , more so since Lewis Milestone original film is considered to be an all time classic . Despite the flaws I've outlined it held my attention and felt a great empathy for the young men involved . They might be Germans but they're not " the enemy " because Remarque is making the point that it's the war itself that is the real enemy

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.

It is strange that a made-for-TV-remake (and yes, this is definitely a remake) of the Best Picture winner from 1930 should be so easily as good, and probably better, than the original. This is a special situation because most of what needed improvement in the original was not things that required special effects or much movie magic (the battle scenes, for example, are outstanding in both films), but the realism of it all, specifically things like life on the battlefield, realistic dialogue, and clumsy thematic delivery.FIrst of all, the movie starts right out on the battlefield and is pretty impressive right away. Donald Pleasance is wonderful as the German propaganda teacher buttering the young men up for enlistment, and very soon you'll notice that a lot of the scenes are taken directly out of the original except, as I mentioned, now the realism is updated, which is extremely important.All Quiet on the Western Front, love it or hate it, is one of the most famous anti-war films/books of all time, and because of that, most of the more memorable scenes in the film are meant to deliver this message, but some work and some don't work so well. There is a scene, for example, where the new recruits line up in front of the train and see the wounded being brought back before their very eyes. It's a moving scene, to be sure, but I imagine removing the badly wounded soldiers right in front of the new soldiers heading to the front lines would have been considered bad taste even during World War I. Especially in propaganda-heavy Germany.Speaking of which, the fact that the movie is told from the German perspective is a bit of a difficult area for the film, since it stars almost entirely American and British actors, and we only know they're German, other than from a background knowledge of the story, because it's mentioned a few times through dialogue.The point of the story is to illustrate the difference between gloriously fighting for your country and the reality of trench-warfare. As soon as the new recruits arrive at the front, Ernest Borgnine, in an exceptional performance as Kat, the most experienced private on the front lines, quickly lets them know that even after all of their training, they don't know a single thing about war ("In training camp they fill you full of fancy information on how to be a soldier. We're going to work hard to forget all that."). While most of the more clunky scenes are smoothed out in this remake, some of them are still pretty obvious. I was happy to see that the scene where Paul Baumer, one of the main characters, kills a Frenchman in hand-to-hand combat and then bitterly remorses the act afterwards is changed, but it's not changed much. He mortally injures the man and is then stuck in a hole with him until morning, when he finally dies. He does give a bit of a ham-handed speech, but at least it's more realistic than the original. More importantly, this time it takes the focus away from the pointlessness of war deaths and turns it to the politicians, who come across as warmongers ("We could be brothers. But they never want us to know that. They never want us to know..."). Makes you shudder to think of them generating hatred among young men like puppet-masters so they can send them over to further their agendas. The end of the film faithfully re-creates the end of the original, with Baumer taking a trip home due to an injury, only to be confronted with the reality that his country is completely removed from what is really happening on the western front. It's strange though, that when he embarks on his 16 days of convalescent leave, he does so in full battle gear - helmet, grenades, rifle and everything. Seems like that might be a little unnerving to the public.Nevertheless, the movie certainly gets its point across, but it still leaves me with the feeling that it can still be so much more. It is a very effective piece of anti-war cinema, but even with all of the improvements since the 1930 version, it is still not authentic.

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.